From Conception...To Election

"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..." Pen Johannson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

50 REASONS AMERICA SHOULD REEXAMINE OBAMA’S PAST


by Penbrook Johannson
Editor, The Daily Pen

If the American people are ever blessed to have Obama's secret biography deliberated by an unbiased authority, with higher intelligence, the following will have to be addressed on the merits of legitimacy.

1. The 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 support Obama take a minimalist view of the term. They desire to assume jurisdiction over its definition in the minds of as many as possible contending that "natural born citizenship" means the fewest, most remedial natal circumstances possible which will allow Obama just enough legitimacy to be eligible. Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued characteristics of Obama's citizenry, in this case, his birth place.

However, 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. 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 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 and 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.) because his alleged biological father, Barack Obama Sr., was not a U.S. Citizen and 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 and, therefore, required that the National Party office take responsibility for declaring the eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted. 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!

6. State Ballot Fail! It is the responsibility of each states' party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve. 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.

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. LTC 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 http://www.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 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 became 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 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 a copy of an original vital record assumed to still be filed with the office of Vital Statistics in Hawaii. Why does Obama not still possess this copy and where is the original used to produce it?

24. Obama Loses Natural-Born U.S. Citizenship. 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. 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.

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 in 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.”

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 his friend, 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. 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 20000 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 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.

This story is never going to go away until Obama simply stops the deception and comes clean with the American people about his secret past.


31 comments:

  1. Tim Adams is a liar, like the guy who claimed to have gone to Kenya and came back with a "Kenyan birth certificate" and it was proven to be a forgery in about 33 minutes.

    The facts on Obama's official birth certificate were confirmed repeatedly by the officials in Hawaii, and there is a witness who recalls being told of his birth in 1961 and writing home about the unusual event of a birth to a woman named Stanley to her husband, also named Stanley (http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece). Adams had no access to Hawaii's birth certificate files http://kaystreet.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/honolulu-city-clerk-debunks-new-birther-theory/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who told you that a Natural Born Citizen requires two citizen parents? It is WRONG. ALL US citizens at birth, mainly those of us who were born in the USA, are natural born citizens. The only kind of a US citizen who is not a natural born citizen is a naturalized citizen.

    The Wall Street Journal put it this way:

    "Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning."

    And that concurs with the overwhelming majority of legal scholars. For example:

    "Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."---William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)--Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).

    That is why the US Congress confirmed Obama's election UNANIMOUSLY, because not one single member in the 535 believed that Obama was born outside the USA or that the citizenship of Obama's father affects Obama's Natural Born citizen status.

    Oh, and by the way, Obama never lost his citizenship--which can only be done in writing and not by a child--and he never became a citizen of Indonesia (nor was he adopted while in Indonesia), as a telephone call to the Indonesian embassy in Washington will confirm.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Re: "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."

    Actually, the 1961 birth certificate is NO LONGER the official birth certificate. The official birth certificate is the one that Hawaii has been sending out since 2001. That is the official birth certificate, and it is used every year by thousands of people to get their passports.

    You do not mention that Obama has not sent out his original birth certificate because Hawaii did not send it to him. Hawaii has not sent out the original birth certificate--even to people born before 2001--ever since the short-form birth certificate became the official birth certificate in 2001.

    And, of course, it does not show the name of the doctor or the name of the hospital because it is not supposed to. It is a short-form birth certificate. Most states have now adopted short-form birth certificates.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Re: "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."

    He still hasn't. The HDOH seal on the COLB is pure fraud. It is an "incised" seal, NOT "embossed" as HDOH's official seal is prescribed by law. The COLB contains a seal that has two dots dividing the upper and lower letter fields. HDOH Official seal has two stars.
    Barack is not eligible to be POTUS. He and others have committed fraud, and IMHO, treason against America. Get over it, smrstrauss, your guy is a usurper, and the Truth will out!
    See fraud of COLB seal and Kapiolani "White House" seal here:

    http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/

    I just recently needed a copy of my Birth Certificate. It is STILL the long form with all information regarding my parents, the hospital, the delivering doctor and nurse, so NO! The States have NOT adopted shortened forms. I am required to use and present the long form, and I do. To my knowledge, an "abbreviated version" is not not even available. In the times I have made requests for my Certificate, an abbreviated form has never even been offered.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Re: "Actually, the 1961 birth certificate is NO LONGER the official birth certificate. The official birth certificate is the one that Hawaii has been sending out since 2001."

    Prior to the problems with the COLB, Hawaii would not accept a COLB as a legit B/C. I believe they did not begin issuing these as "SOP" until AFTER all of the controversy over Barack. It appears, in an attempt to honor the 11th Commandment, "Covereth thine own", they then decided to issue COLB's unless the long form was specifically requested. However, you may still request the long form and receive it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The State of Hawaii has lied, numerous time concerning the records they maintain on Barak Hussein Obama

    The authorities in Hawaii have stated that they provided an electronic record of Obama's birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state's archives...Also, to this day, Hawaii DOH officials refuse to verify any of the 3 different Obama COLB's posted online by Obama's campaign.

    Only to back track, when it was proven that HAWAII does not issue any documents electonically. Therefore if they never issued the digital image first posted on the DailyKOS, who created it?

    As for the fire, this has also been proven to be a lie. So if there was no fire, and Hawaii does not issue documents electronically, then where is the original?

    However Hawaiian officials stated in a press conference they have personally seen Obama's original vital recordS. ...plural. Obama has more than one vital record on file. That can happen when you amend your BC, get adopted or even apply for the Hawaii Act-96 program.

    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. All a person had to do was file a false statement and Hawaii took them at their word.

    Hawaiian officials have not validated 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 nor have they said what kind of birth certificate is on file; a conventional birth certificate issued by a hospital with a doctor's signature or the kind of birth certificate issued by Hawaii on the basis of an affidavit? The Hawaiian officials are not part of a cover-up. They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from "our" Chicago con-man. Recently a Hawaiian government official stepped over the legal line and overtly stated that Obama's "vital records" showed that he was born in Hawaii. It is entirely possible for the "vital records" of Hawaii to show than a person was born in Hawaii when in fact that person could have been born elsewhere.

    One high profile example of the Hawaiian birth certificate policy was the president of the first Chinese republic. Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866 to a peasant family in the village of Cuiheng, China, but by 1904 he had a Hawaiian birth certificate and was officially a citizen of the United States. The wording on Sun Yat-sen's Hawaiian birth certificate reveals that at age 18 he "made application for a Certificate of Birth. And that it appears from his affidavit and the evidence submitted by witnesses that he was born in the Hawaiian Islands." Appears? It also appears that AKA Obama was born in Hawaii. Does the AKA Obama birth certificate on file with the State of Hawaii have language similar to the birth certificate of SunYat-sen?

    The only way to know where OBAMA was actually born is to view OBAMA's original birth certificate on file in Hawaii to see what kind of birth certificate it is, and to examine what corroborating evidence supports what it says about 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 who delivered him.

    ReplyDelete
  7. What a great post! Somewhat lengthy, but nonetheless very informative. I see you get people like smrstrauss commenting that refuse to see the facts, they seem to be everywhere.
    With your permission, I'd like to feature some of your points here on my blog, as I know Obama is a fraud and without funding, help from the courts, the U.S. intelligence agencies, members of the Congress, and military elite, he wouldn't be squatting in the White House right now. All credits and links will be given to your site here.
    http://stevex09.wordpress.com

    ReplyDelete
  8. Re: "The State of Hawaii has lied, numerous time concerning the records they maintain on Barak Hussein Obama.."

    Answer: Your claim is totally baloney. The official birth certificate of Hawaii was issued to Obama in 2007 by a clerk, and subsequent to that two officials and the Republican governor of Hawaii have confirmed the facts on the birth certificate--that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.

    I am told that the former attorney general of Hawaii for the last four years was a conservative Republican. If he thought that there was anything wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, he could have subpoenaed the original and taken action. But he didn’t.

    Re: "The authorities in Hawaii have stated that they provided an electronic record of Obama's birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state's archives..."

    Answer: You are making this up. They never said any such thing. The Certification of Live Birth, which is what they provided to Obama, is what they provide to EVERYBODY. It is the only birth certificate that Hawaii has issued to anyone since 2001--even to people born before 2001.

    Re: "Also, to this day, Hawaii DOH officials refuse to verify any of the 3 different Obama COLB's posted online by Obama's campaign."

    Answer. They have verified the FACTS on the birth certificate, and it is the facts that count.

    Re: "HAWAII does not issue any documents electonically. Therefore if they never issued the digital image first posted on the DailyKOS, who created it?"

    You are right, they send out the physical copy of the Certification of Live Birth. The copy on DailyKOS is a scanned copy of the physical copy and the excellent image on the FactCheck site is a photographic copy of the physical copy.

    Re: "As for the fire, this has also been proven to be a lie."

    Answer: Since the officials have never said that their was a fire, it is not their lie. The only one whom I have seen claiming that there was a report of a fire is YOU.

    Re: "then where is the original?"

    Answer: The original is in the birth certificate files in Hawaii. Hawaii simply does not send out the original any more. It only sends out the new, short-form Certification of Live Birth to EVERYBODY.

    Re: "personally seen Obama's original vital recordS. ...plural."

    Answer. In the first verification they said that the original birth certificate was in the file. In the second verification they said that the records in the file VERIFY that Obama was born in Hawaii. In addition to the original birth certificate (which is the document that Hawaii issues), the file may also contain the records from the hospital. The key point is that the statement says that they (plural) both VERIFY that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Re: "That can happen when you amend your BC, get adopted or even apply for the Hawaii Act-96 program."

    Answer: Amended birth certificates have to state on them that they were amended. That applies to the Certification of Live Birth as well as to the original birth certificate. Obama's does not say that it was amended.

    Re: "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. :"

    Answer: IF there was a claim that a child was born outside of a hospital, the state of Hawaii demanded witnesses to the birth, such as a signed notarized statement by a midwife. Both the former governor of Hawaii (a Republican) and this witness
    http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece have indicated that Obama was born in Kapiolani Hospital.

    Re: "The person could have sworn under oath and presented witnesses and other evidence. If the authorities accepted it, that was the end of it. All a person had to do was file a false statement and Hawaii took them at their word."

    Answer: Who told you this? It is wrong. The PUMA Lori did an investigation, and she reported:

    “At the time, if a child was born outside a hospital, the family would have 30 days to apply for a birth certificate and Vital Records would expect to see prenatal care records, or pediatrician records of the first check up, etc. They’d also want the notarized statement from the mid-wife.”

    ReplyDelete
  10. Re: "Hawaiian officials have not validated OBAMA's place of birth. What they have said is that they "have the original document" on file."

    Answer: That was only the first of the two verifications. The second said that the documents in the file VERIFY that Obama was born in Hawaii. The third statement, by the governor, also said born in Hawaii and that it was in Kapiolani Hospital.

    Re: "nor have they said what kind of birth certificate is on file; a conventional birth certificate issued by a hospital with a doctor's signature or the kind of birth certificate issued by Hawaii on the basis of an affidavit?"

    Answer: It could not have been a foreign birth certificate, even from out of state. The officials in Hawaii have said that the document or documents VERIFY that Obama was born in Hawaii, and both the witness and the former governor have said that the birth was in a hospital

    Re: "The Hawaiian officials are not part of a cover-up."

    Answer: We agree. They told the truth in their repeated confirmations that the document or documents in the file VERIFY that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Re: "They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from "our" Chicago con-man."

    Answer: Who told you that, or are you making it up? In fact they have VERIFIED.

    Are you claiming that doing that was illegal? If so, you are claiming to know more about Hawaii law than the former attorney general of Hawaii, a conservative Republican, who could have prosecuted the officials if they broke the law--but he didn't.

    Re: "It is entirely possible for the "vital records" of Hawaii to show than a person was born in Hawaii when in fact that person could have been born elsewhere."

    Answer: NO IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Hawaii does not allow its birth certificates, either the original or the new official birth certificate, to lie about the place of birth. Thus, if the birth certificate actually says on it that the person was born in Honolulu, there must have been evidence that the child was born in Honolulu. The change in the law that allows persons born outside of Hawaii to get Hawaii birth certificates does not allow the birth certificate to lie about the place of birth.

    Thus, if the child were born in New Jersey, she or he would receive a Hawaiian birth certificate listing the place of birth as New Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Re: "One high profile example of the Hawaiian birth certificate policy was the president of the first Chinese republic. Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866 to a peasant family in the village of Cuiheng, China, but by 1904 he had a Hawaiian birth certificate and was officially a citizen of the United States."

    Answer: That was nearly sixty years before Obama was born. Things can change in 60 years. Did you know that New York's Manhattan Island once cost $24 (a lot more than 60 years ago, to be sure, but the point is that things do change.)

    Re: "Does the AKA Obama birth certificate on file with the State of Hawaii have language similar to the birth certificate of SunYat-sen?"

    Answer: Since both the witness and the former governor of Hawaii have said that he was born in Kapiolani Hospital, it does not have similar wording.

    Re: "The only way to know where OBAMA was actually born is to view OBAMA's original birth certificate on file in Hawaii to see what kind of birth certificate it is, and to examine what corroborating evidence supports what it says about OBAMA's alleged place of birth. "

    Answer: The new governor of Hawaii says that he will change the regulations or if necessary will change the law in order to send out the original again. It will show, as he has said and the former governor and the witness all have said, that Obama was born in Kapiolani Hospital. Until it is released, the facts remain that Obama has shown the official and only birth certificate that Hawaii issues, and that the facts on it were verified by the officials in Hawaii. A total of four officials would have to be lying (including the original clerk) for the original birth certificate to say that Obama was not born in Hawaii.

    For Obama to have been born in any other country than the USA requires the combination of:

    (1) Travel by his mother during late pregnancy (highly unlikely because of the high expense and high risk of such a trip in 1961. A round trip to Kenya, for example, would have cost around $20,000 in today’s dollars);

    (2) Birth outside of Hawaii (also unlikely);

    (3) Birth abroad despite the absence of any foreign documents or photographs showing either that Obama was born in a foreign country or that his mother was in the country at the time (highly unlikely);

    (4) The willingness of the parents to lie about his place of birth (unlikely since it would be a crime to file a false government document, and the lie would also be unnecessary since for most purposes naturalizing a foreign-born child would be just as good as his being born in the country);

    (5) Successfully smuggling the child into the USA without a US travel document (extremely unlikely), and;

    (6) Convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii (also extremely unlikely).

    ALL of these six things would be required for there to be a reasonable case that he was born in any other country than the USA. What are the odds of all six of them happening?

    The willingness to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA despite the overwhelming odds against it and despite all the evidence that he was born in Hawaii is why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly all call birthers crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anyone should 'google' smrstrauss and see that this poster has been debunked by everyone.

    But just to prove what a liar smrstrauss is.

    google the following 'hawaii archive fire Obama'

    news.sky.com

    Quote "The White House has consistently dismissed the issue. Authorities in Hawaii have provided an electronic record of Obama's birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state's archives."

    I could go one and do a point by point, but I have already proven him to be liar and fraud, just like Obama

    ReplyDelete
  13. I notice that you do not discuss this:

    For Obama to have been born in any other country than the USA requires the combination of:

    (1) Travel by his mother during late pregnancy (highly unlikely because of the high expense and high risk of such a trip in 1961);

    (2) Birth outside of Hawaii (also unlikely);

    (3) Birth abroad despite the absence of any foreign documents or photographs showing either that Obama was born in a foreign country or that his mother was in the country at the time (highly unlikely);

    (4) The willingness of the parents to lie about his place of birth (unlikely since it would be a crime to file a false government document, and the lie would be unnecessary since for most purposes naturalizing a foreign-born child would be just as good as his being born in the country);

    (5) Successfully smuggling the child into the USA without a US travel document (extremely unlikely), and;

    (6) Convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii (also extremely unlikely).

    ALL of these six things would be required for there to be a reasonable case that he was born in any other country than the USA. What are the odds of all six of them happening?

    The willingness to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA despite the overwhelming odds against it and despite all the evidence that he was born in Hawaii is why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly all call birthers crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If Obama had a valid Hawaiian BIRTH CERTIFICATE he'd have paraded it long ago, but it doesn't exist. WHY?

    Because Obama was born in Kenya, as per the Kenyan Government.

    James Orengo, the country’s minister of lands and a member of parliament for the Ugenya constituency, cited America’s election of a Kenyan-born president as an example of what can be accomplished when diverse peoples unite:

    The Kenyan lawmaker told the nation’s parliament last month that Barack Obama was born in Africa and is therefore “not even a native American.”

    The full quote; “If America was living in a situation where they feared ethnicity and did not see itself as a multiparty state or nation, how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the President of America?

    Kenyan Parliament notes dated 11/11/2008

    There is big talk about Obama and Kogelo, and the increased tourist attraction in that area. However, the road in that area cannot allow people to reach Kogelo. Of course, I am glad the Government is in the process of expanding the airport. But one would need to take a drive to appreciate the situation.

    What would be the tourist attraction – the birth place of Barack Obama. Not Mombassa but Kogelo?

    Or from the 12/11/2008

    Mr. Mututho: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, most of these refugees left because of fighting for multi-party democracy. Now that we have a Grand Coalition Government and even better still and more enticing that we are the first country that President-elect Obama has decided to call and to acknowledge the good relationship with this country, could the Assistant Minister issue a circular through the media or any other means asking Kenyans who are abroad that Mwakenya does not exist any more and they should all come back now and help us to develop this country?

    Or this one

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 25th March, 2008

    Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, let me remind you of what hon. Reverend Jesse Jackson said. When he was running for the [The Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs] presidency of the United States of America (USA), just like Barrack Obama who is of Kenyan origin and is almost making it. The Reverend Jesse Jackson said of Michael Dukakis who was of Greek origin that their forefathers came to the United States in immigrant ships and Jesse Jackson and his forefathers came to the USA in slave ships. He studied divinity and Michael Dukakis studied law, but he said: “Whatever the original ship or boat, we are in the same boat this particular night” because they were all trying like Hilary Clinton and Barrack Obama, to run for nomination of their party.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Obamaism. Mr. Obama is a cross breed of the very best from Africa. That is hybrid and it is a fact. It is S1 cross and a superior person. That is technology.

    Is Obama a freak?

    OFFICIAL REPORT Thursday, 13th August, 2009 The House met at 2.30 p.m.

    Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, people have talked about Kogelo. Recently, I heard that they are going to make a film on Obama and that it will be done in South Africa. So, there will be a Kogelo in South Africa and not Kenya. Look at those things. Why would film-makers want to go to South Africa and not Kenya? Those are the big
    questions that you want to be asking yourself. You will find that you are either charging very high fees or there is something wrong in licensing film-makers to come to this country.
    Our founding President, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta– In the United States of America (USA), all presidents have developed libraries. Kenyatta is legendary! Why do we not encourage the creation of Kenyatta Memorial Library in Gatundu so that people can actually visit? Instead of his body lying here in Nairobi protected, it should be moved to a place where tourists can visit and be able to see this legendary figure; how he lived, what he had and so on. There are plenty of cultures.
    Thursday, 13th August, 2009 CON’T

    We have a problem with Customs and we have a problem with everything else. If we were just to go out of our way and have tax exemptions for people in the film industry, they would not have gone to shoot an Obama film in South Africa. They could have done it in Kogelo itself!

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 20th January, 2009

    Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, the President of the world is the son of Mr. Hussein 42
    Obama who was the son of Obama Opiyo. Mr. Obama Opiyo was the son of Jotham Ndalo Obama who was buried in Karachuonyo. Actually, the entire family lived in Karachuonyo which is my constituency. That is the very reason that today we are celebrating the inauguration of the President of the world, Obama. What we have in place are prayers, songs, dances and jubilations. People are so happy in Karachuonyo. I am therefore, very happy that Parliament has allocated these few minutes to discuss this issue and send greetings to the people of United States of America (USA) and congratulate the President of the world

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 20th January, 2009 CON’T

    Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I was imagining when the earlier contributors were talking about where the leadership is; whether it is in America or it is here. I was just imagining those who are now talking like the Member of Parliament for Alego Usonga— If they had allocated the land that Obama was supposed to have been allocated by his father traditionally in Alego Usonga and Obama decided to settle there, definitely, he would be running America from this country! So, it is a great achievement.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Re: "If Obama had a valid Hawaiian BIRTH CERTIFICATE he'd have paraded it long ago, but it doesn't exist. WHY? "

    Answer: Obama has shown the OFFICIAL birth certificate of Hawaii, the certification of live birth. It is the official birth certificate; thousands of people use it every year to get their US passports, and it is the only birth certificate that Hawaii has sent out to anyone since 2001--even to people who were born before 2001.

    By itself it is legally sufficient. In addition, two officials in Hawaii (members of a Republican governor's administration) and the Republican governor herself have repeatedly confirmed that the facts on Obama's published official birth certificate are the same as the documents in the files. A total of four Hawaii officials including the governor would have to be lying if Obama were born anywhere else than Hawaii.

    THIS is in addition to the ENORMOUS improbability of birth in any other country and the lack of proof that he was born in any other country and the virtual impossibility of a child being born in Kenya (or some other country) and transported to the USA without there being some form of proof of that fact in the form of a US government travel document, such as a US visa.

    For Obama to have been born in any other country than the USA requires the combination of:

    (1) Travel by his mother during late pregnancy (highly unlikely because of the high expense and high risk of such a trip in 1961);

    (2) Birth outside of Hawaii (also unlikely);

    (3) Birth abroad despite the absence of any foreign documents or photographs showing either that Obama was born in a foreign country or that his mother was in the country at the time (highly unlikely);

    (4) The willingness of the parents to lie about his place of birth (unlikely since it would be a crime to file a false government document, and the lie would be unnecessary since for most purposes naturalizing a foreign-born child would be just as good as his being born in the country);

    (5) Successfully smuggling the child into the USA without a US travel document (extremely unlikely), and;

    (6) Convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii (also extremely unlikely).

    ALL of these six things would be required for there to be a reasonable case that he was born in any other country than the USA. What are the odds of all six of them happening?

    The willingness to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA despite the overwhelming odds against it and despite all the evidence that he was born in Hawaii is why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly all call birthers crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Re: "James Orengo."

    So, by now there are people in Kenya who believe the birther myth. Orengo is simply as wrong as US birthers, and you notice that he does not cite any document.

    The idea that Obama's student parents had enough money to go to Kenya in 1961--which would have cost around $20,000 in 2010 terms--and that they would have wanted to go despite the enormous risk of such a trip, and that they traveled to Kenya and lied about doing so, and that they successfully got their child into the USA without showing a visa or a passport (IF either existed, they would have been found by now), and that they managed to convince the officials in Hawaii that the child was born in Hawaii--ALL OF THOSE, is absurdly unlikely.

    ReplyDelete
  18. smrstrauss is again lying out his piehole.

    The evidence even in Obama's State Senate race reported him as Kenyan-Born.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Yes, there was a Kenyan newspaper that inserted the words "Kenyan-born into an article by the AP." The AP has denied writing it, and the Kenyan newspaper is hardly reliable. It did not cite any documents. It probably inserted the words Kenyan-born to indicate that his father was a Kenyan (which is true).

    Here is a reliable newspaper, the Wall Street Journal:

    "Obama has already provided a legal birth certificate demonstrating that he was born in Hawaii. No one has produced any serious evidence to the contrary. Absent such evidence, it is unreasonable to deny that Obama has met the burden of proof. We know that he was born in Honolulu as surely as we know that Bill Clinton was born in Hope, Ark., or George W. Bush in New Haven, Conn."

    And here is the CONSERVATIVE National Review:

    "“The theory that Obama was born in Kenya, that he was smuggled into the U.S., and that his parents somehow hoodwinked Hawaiian authorities into falsely certifying his birth in Oahu, is crazy stuff.”

    The reason that the National Review uses the word "smuggled" is because IF Obama were born in Kenya he would have to get through US immigration to enter the USA. And, to do that, a US travel document such as a visa or Obama being entered on his mother's passport would be required. And, if such a document had existed, it would be easy to find (there wouldn't be all that many applications for visas or for US passport changes in Kenya in 1961) and NO SUCH DOCUMENT HAS BEEN FOUND.

    IN fact, for Obama to have been born in any other country than the USA requires the combination of six highly unlikely events SIX:

    (1) Travel by his mother during late pregnancy (highly unlikely because of the high expense (around $20,000 for two round trip in 2010 terms) and the high risk of such a trip in 1961. (High risk because of the high number of still births and the fact that Yellow Fever was endemic to Kenya);

    (2) Birth outside of Hawaii (also unlikely);

    (3) Birth abroad despite the absence of any foreign documents or photographs showing either that Obama was born in a foreign country or that his mother was in the country at the time (highly unlikely);

    (4) The willingness of the parents to lie about his place of birth (unlikely since it would be a crime to file a false government document, and the lie would be unnecessary since for most purposes naturalizing a foreign-born child would be just as good as his being born in the country);

    (5) Successfully smuggling the child into the USA without a US travel document (extremely unlikely), and;

    (6) Convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii (also extremely unlikely).

    ALL of these six things would be required for there to be a reasonable case that he was born in any other country than the USA. What are the odds of all six of them happening?

    The willingness to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA despite the overwhelming odds against it and despite all the evidence that he was born in Hawaii is why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly all call birthers crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  20. That should read ...inserted the words "Kenyan-born" into an article by the AP.(Quotes around Kenyan-born)

    ReplyDelete
  21. smrstrauss has been inhaling low emission unicorn exhaust and swilling the kool-aide far too long.

    Not only are you wrong, but Obama backs up your fallicy by failing to produce a long form Birth certificate substantiating his claim of being born in the United States. His failure speaks actions over your rhetoric.
    Because that is all you have to offer rhetoric! Nothing more.

    So no matter how hard to try and convice people that Obama is legitimate, Obama's own action out weight any words that you maybe able to ponder.

    It is not up to you to prove that Obama is legitmate. It is Obama's obligation per the United States Constitution, 20th Amendment to qualify, which he has not.

    Obama has not met the 'Standard of Proof', of establishing the true facts concerning his background. Nothing has been proven or to quote others 'passed the smell test'.

    "All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. -Circuit Justice Swayne, in United States vs Rhodes (1866)" in

    Barack Hussein Obama was born a British subject, allegiance to the King, as such governed by British Law.

    Citizens born under the allegiance of the United states are citizens.

    “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was 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 children.

    Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

    Quote; "As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was 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 children."

    Barack Hussein Obama, a British subject, not a United States Citizen, per common law, 'NOT' British Common Law but the common law between nations, The LAW of NATIONS.
    Bk 1 § 212. Citizens and natives

    children naturally follow the condition of their fathers,

    That is the admission by the Obama campaign, that Barack Hussein Obama like his father is a British subject, not a citizen.

    Born a BRIT, never legit.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Re: "Children naturally follow the condition of their fathers."

    Who told you that? In Jewish law, they follow the condition of their mothers. In US law, they become citizens when they are born in the USA, and in fact that was the original meaning of Natural Born, the one used at the time of the writing of the Constitution--citizenship due to the PLACE of birth. That referred to the meaning under the common law, and not to Vattel (who is not even mentioned once in the Federalist Papers, while the common law is mentioned about twenty times).

    Re: ""All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. -Circuit Justice Swayne, in United States vs Rhodes (1866)"

    That meant that if you were born IN the USA you have the allegiance of the USA, and you have only the allegiance of the USA. Our system holds that IF you were born in US territory, you MUST hold allegiance to the USA (unless you are a foreign diplomat). The fact that a foreign country considers that you also have allegiance to it due to the citizenship of a parents is irrelevant in US law.

    If you were born in the USA and commit an act against the USA, that is considered treason, regardless of whether you had dual nationality or not.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case, which was after the case that you cite, stated very clearly that EVERY child born in the USA (except for the children of foreign diplomats and those spawned by members of invading armies) is NATURAL BORN.

    A citizen who is Natural Born is, of course, a Natural Born Citizen, just as a citizen who is left-handed is a left-handed citizen.

    Neither the citizenship of Obama's father nor dual nationality has any effect on his natural born status. A person who is Ohio-born, born in Ohio, cannot be made to be not Ohio-born by the fact that his father was not a citizen, or that he was a dual national. Being Ohio-born is a simple historical fact determined by the PLACE of birth, and the original meaning of Natural Born was the same thing, determined entirely by geography, by the place of birth.

    "Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."---William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)

    “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:

    “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)

    Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)

    As for the birth certificate. Obama has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii, the only one that Hawaii has sent out to anyone since the time that it became the official birth certificate in 2001. The facts on the official birth certificate were confirmed twice by the officials of the department of health and the department of vital records of Hawaii, and most recently by the former governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, a Republican. And, there is this witness:

    http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece

    In addition to the overwhelming official and confirmed evidence of birth in Hawaii, there is the absence of proof that Obama was born anywhere else than Hawaii. Obama's Kenyan grandmother said repeatedly that he was born in Hawaii, where his father was studying, and she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama's birth was in a letter from Hawaii.

    ReplyDelete
  24. From reading all the material on the subject of natural born citizens I can’t help but conclude the following:

    1) Citizens of united states was never properly defined by the framers mainly because only state law could define whom were born a citizen of the state which in return automatically made them a citizen of the united states under article 4.

    2) Congress in 1866 recognized not all states recognized people of color as citizens and set out to define who were citizens of the united states through statute and amendment to the constitution.

    3) Congress decided to recognize all persons born or naturalized as citizens of the united states as long as they could not be claimed as subjects of another country.

    4) The 14th amendment was clearly designed to recognized only those politically attached to the nation (citizens) and no other.

    5) Just as a naturalized citizen cannot be claimed by any other foreign power as their citizens, neither can anyone born.

    Obama cannot be a citizen of the united states under the true meaning behind born or naturalized subject to the jurisdiction of the united states. Justice Gray himself confirmed this in Elk v Wilkins writing for the majority in defining subject to the jurisdiction as political attachment and not mere place of birth. This was in perfect agreement with acts of congress of 1866, 1868 and 1874.

    “If it was intended that anybody who was a citizen by birth should be eligible, it would only have been necessary to say, “no person, except a native-born citizen”; but the framers thought it wise, in view of the probable influx of European immigration, to provide that the president should at least be the child of citizens owing allegiance to the United States at the time of his birth.

    It may be observed in passing that the current phrase “native-born citizen” is well understood; but it is pleonasm and should be discarded; and the correct designation, “native citizen” should be substituted in all constitutional and statutory enactments, in judicial decisions and in legal discussions where accuracy and precise language are essential to intelligent discussion.”

    It’s a rather clear testimony to the fact that simply being “native born” does not mean that one is “natural born” but “accuracy and intelligent discussion” are not the goals of propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank you to everyone for your excellent input. We appreciate it.

    In seeking a legal mooring upon which we might agree on the metrics of natural born citizenship, we should all be mindful to two primary truths. The President of the United States bears the responsibility of leadership of a. our military, first and foremost and b. executive rights to enter agreements and treaties with foreign powers.

    Therefore, it now becomes a question of "to what degree shall we seek to uphold the highest level of qualification possible for our President". Of course, we can always debate level of education, years of executive experience, social and political skill etc. However, the circumstances of one's citizenship at conception are not open to debate.

    If we are to defend the redemption of the blood ransom paid by those more worthy throughout our history and, if we seek to endow the great power of leadership upon the individuals with the most provable integrity, loyalty and honor we cannot dismiss the necessity of defining the level of citizenry required by this level of responsibility.

    Therefore, I submit that, since our founders called upon a president to be a natural born citizen, we must conclude they intended this level of citizenry to be our highest attainable under all circumstance.

    To us, here at the Daily Pen, for what it is worth, we seek to uphold the right to confidence of our soldiers in harms way, that they may always know their Commander In Chief possesses the highest qualifications given to man or woman. We also desire that all Americans have no doubt in their confidence that their president will never compromise their security or sovereignty by entering into agreements or treaties which injure, damage or fail to defend our borders, our culture and our sovereign rule of Constitutional law.

    Therefore, we define Natural Born Citizen as follows:

    One conceived, born and residing under natural circumstances which make it impossible for the individual to be anything other than a natural born citizen of the U.S. This means they are 1.)born in a region under the protections of the U.S. Constitution 2.) Conceived by two married parents who are U.S. Citizens 3.)Born to those same two parents and 4.) Bearing uninterupted residence without altered citizenry from birth until the time of their election as president. This means they have never renounced, lost or otherwise become a plural citizen of any other government or country from birth to election which would interupt the citizenship status endowed by the first three circumstances. Some have actually argued that, in order to be President, this fourth condition must begin at conception, not birth.

    We are confident this is the highest form of natural born citizenship imagined, and, therefore, should be upheld among the highest form of our leadership...

    Thanks again.

    Penbrook

    ReplyDelete
  26. Obviously if you read Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution, you might learn something.

    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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

    Did you know that none of the Founders were Natural Born Citizens even though they were born in the United States. Thus the reason for the clause, "or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution". You see, all of the founders had been citizens of Great Brittain, first. You might want to read about the Law of Nations which was the common law at the time of our founding: http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm

    You might learn something.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This article is a very good accounting of the issues.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The following item is suggested for inclusion in a future, updated list of why America should reexamine Obama’s past --

    Lucas Daniel Smith claims he obtained, on February 19, 2009 directly from the birth hospital, a certified copy of Barack Hussein Obama’s August 4, 1961 birth certificate from the Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. A high resolution copy of this birth certificate is available for free download at WasObamaBornInKenya.com

    The story of how Mr. Smith obtained the document is included as part of his 'July 4, 2010 Letter to Congress', which is also available for free download at the same website.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Re: "Lucas Daniel Smith claims he obtained, on February 19, 2009 directly from the birth hospital, a certified copy of Barack Hussein Obama’s August 4, 1961 birth certificate from the Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. "

    Lucas Daniel Smith is a convicted felon, one of whose felonies was forgery. He never even showed a Kenyan entry stamp on his passport.

    And the alleged Kenyan birth certificate that he "obtained" was proven to be a forgery in about 33 minutes.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=108773

    ReplyDelete
  30. Re: "“If it was intended that anybody who was a citizen by birth should be eligible, it would only have been necessary to say, “no person, except a native-born citizen”; but the framers thought it wise, in view of the probable influx of European immigration, to provide that the president should at least be the child of citizens owing allegiance to the United States at the time of his birth.

    It may be observed in passing that the current phrase “native-born citizen” is well understood; but it is pleonasm and should be discarded; and the correct designation, “native citizen” should be substituted in all constitutional and statutory enactments, in judicial decisions and in legal discussions where accuracy and precise language are essential to intelligent discussion.”

    Answer. That is not from the Constitution or from the Supreme Court or from Justice Gray.

    It is simply a law school article, one of hundreds, and virtually all the others hold exactly the opposite view. The comment on it would have been easy to have said "native born" is particularly wrong because the expression native born was not a popular phrase at the time. It was very seldom used at the time.

    Natural Born was used all the time, and it was always used by AMERICANS (not Swiss) to refer to citizenship due to the place of birth. It was never used by Americans to refer to citizenship due to the parents being citizens (much less both parents and place of birth).

    That is why Edwin Meese, Ronald Reawgan's attorney general, is right in his book that says:

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    ReplyDelete
  31. In a sense, the snow cover the mountain,rift gold, this year's work will be a paragraph out. Luo Fei faint heart kind of relaxed and sense of relief.rift gold,This feeling was that he did not show up in the face. In fact, when flying in Romania to think when someone is very difficult to try to speculate on

    his face out of his inner thoughts.rift gold, Some of his natural relaxation of facial skin, rift

    gold
    ,which makes his eyes he always looks down, worried look.silkroad gold, Even though he was very pleased with the performance of that smile

    on the face in the mouth is only apparent at two months there hook. silkroad gold,Luo do not understand people will fly and that he cold,

    unapproachable, runes of magic gold,in fact, Luo Fei is a typical Raisin in the Scorpio man.vindictus gold, When dealing with others, usually happens: the other effort may still pondering Luo Fei's attitude,dofus kamas, and Luo Fei

    may already be full to the other side as their friends. Of course,dofus kamas, this person should first character on the fly to get some recognition of

    Romania.

    ReplyDelete