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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

Thursday, July 28, 2011

OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE INTENTIONALLY FORGED WITH CRYPTIC SYMBOLS


BUTTERFLY EFFECT OR RADICAL LEGACY?: The official document's image posted on the internet by the White House on April 27th, 2011 was personally endorsed by Barack Obama and propped by his fawning media as authentic. However, artifacts discovered in the document image suggest it was intentionally constructed and altered by counterfeiters with definitive, but cryptic, symbology holding simultaneous significance to Obama's identity...ideologically, politically and, perhaps, biologically.

by Dan Crosby
with commentary by Penbrook Johannson
of the The Daily Pen


New York, NY - After Barack Obama posted to the internet a digital image of a document alleged by him, his administration and the American media complex, to be his original, 1961 Standard U.S. "Certificate of Live Birth" on April 27th, 2011, experts soon demonstrated the image to be a forgery. Their conclusions are based on evidence found in both the digital structure and visual appearance of the document image which irrefutably proves the image was assembled using multiple document sources and digital manipulations.

Professional analysis has also proven the document image was produced with a premeditated "multi-level" digital graphic assembly method, often used in engineering drawings and computer aided drafting, in which image remnants and different components of digital graphics were stored as separate sets of data prior to inclusion in the assembly and posting of the image.

Recall, if Obama's real "Certificate of Live Birth" actually exists in its original form, the original paper document would have simply been removed from the 1961 vault file at the Hawaiian Department of Health, where we were told this one originated in this exact form in 1961, then officials would have copied it, not scanned it with a digital imager, then authenticated the copy with an official seal and signatures. It then could have been copied and disseminated to the media and the public. The process is very simple and straight forward.


But, that is not how this document image was produced.


This document image was forged. It was contrived. It was crafted. It was deceptively created. Then it was personally and publicly endorsed by Obama making him politically, criminally and personally liable, ironically, for its lack of legitimacy and deceptive content...much like the man himself.

The analysis has also commanded experts in every related industry, including computer graphics, software engineering, digital imagry and typesetting, to conclude that the document image is in no way a representation of the authentic, original document manually created by the Hawaiian Health Department or any hospital in 1961.

Also found within the image are a series of what initially appeared to be benign artifacts, errors, misspellings, graphic remnants and extraneous markings which have given rise to a range of questions about their intended meaning and purpose with regard to Barack Obama.

Now, however, The Daily Pen has researched powerful evidence suggesting that the document image was intentionally constructed or altered with cryptic symbology and graphic remnants associated with Obama’s past and to, perhaps, either insinuate a theme about the "butterfly effect" of his historical significance or poke fun at the entire 'Birth Certificate' controversy. These symbols are rooted in historical references to African diaspora (disbursement of African races by the Atlantic slave trade), Black Nationalism of the 1960s as well as the CIA.


Along with those mentioned above, these specific anomalies include the layered form of the image rather than a flat image; the presence of what appear to be incorrect spellings, extraneous drawings and words conspicuously hidden in the official Health Department stamp; erroneous hand written numbers and letters within the body of the image; the poorly concealed folding at the left margin and, most recently, the detection of what appear to be remnants of a screened newspaper photo image at the upper margin which appear as a random pattern of white dots.

"X" IGENT CIRCUMSTANCES


On December 16, 1964, a man gave a speech before a capacity crowd at the Harvard Law School Forum. In that speech, he said, "When you let yourself be influenced by images created by others, you’ll find that oftentimes the one who creates those images can use them to mislead you and misuse you."

That man's name was Malcolm X.

There is evidence suggesting the misspelling of the word “TXE” in the offical Hawaii Department of Health stamp found on Obama's Certificate of Live Birth is intentional. When compared to other examples of the stamp used by the Hawaiian Department of Health on thousands of other Hawaiian birth documents, this anomaly is not found on any of them. Not one. It is only found on Obama's. Are we to believe that a municipal agency would allow such an error in its official document authentication process?

"In 25 years of working with hundreds of thousands of official documents processed and authenticated by state, county and city agencies, I have never seen a spelling mistake in a pre-molded rubber press (stamp)," says Johannson, "They are checked and rechecked...and then rechecked again, by multiple individuals from the vendor, the agency, the document recipients and the stamp owner. The idea that this is an innocent mistake by the DOH is absolutely ridiculous."

In context, the association of "X" symbology with Barack Obama suggests that the forger is making a general reference that Obama's birth and presidency is an 'abstract' of radical ideology. Whether the association is political, ideological or biological is a matter for debate. The fact that the symbol is even present on such a document is most troubling, however.

In terms of the use of the symbol "X" in reference to Obama's biography, it is important to remember that Obama is the product of radicalism and, thus, that such symbology is not necessarily an indication of linkage to any one individual.


The "X" moniker was an identifier taken by black activist members of the Nation of Islam in the mid 1950s through the 1960s. Many of them changed their birth-given surnames to "X". Such re-identification by members of the radical black liberation movement was an expression of protest against what they believed was the geneological stripping of their rightful "African" names when their enslaved ancestors were forced to take the names of their white slave masters for proprietary purposes.

Malcolm X, as he was later known, was born Malcolm Little in 1925. He was a radical Black Nationalist and Nation of Islam member from the early 1950's until his death in 1965, who, after serving prison time, joined the NOI as one of its most influencial ministers. He changed his surname to "X", after being released from prison, as an expression of his life long hatred for white society which, as he believed, forced his enslaved ancestors to take the illegitimate names of their white slave masters.

In a March 17, 1963 interview on Chicago's "City Desk" television program, Malcolm X said, "...if it doesn't look proper for person who is Chinese to be walking around named Murphy, or Jones or Johnson or Butch or Powell, I think it would be just as improper for a black person, or a so-called negro in this country, as we are taught by the honorable Elijah Muhammed, to walk around with these names. Therefore, he (Muhammed) teaches us that during slavery, the same slave master who owned us put his last name on us to denote that we were his property..."

Since Obama entered public life at the national level, he has often been compared in appearance and ideology to Malcolm X with some conspiracists actually believing Obama is biologically related to him, and that this is the core of Obama's secretive biography that he wants hidden by concealing his records.

To date, no forensic evidence has been presented demonstrating a biological connection between Malcolm X and Barack Obama. However, the two men share a wide range of political philosophies regarding social justice.

With regard to the Certificate, however, Johannson says, “It could just be a case of some overbending wise-guy in the Obama administration paying tribute for Obama. Debates over its meaning really don't matter. The fact that it is present at all is the problem. The only thing we need to understand is that this forger and the people he conspired with are criminals. This is an image of a document meant to represent an official government record in the minds of the American people. The message the forgery conveys is subsequential to any investigation of its authenticity, foremost."

According to an FBI report released in 1983 on Malcolm X and the NOI, X was the subject of surveillance during many of his fiery speeches about Black Nationalism and the rise of Black Islamic faith. He often spoke of African diaspora and mentioned on more than one occasion the concept of the black man's metamorphasis into white society, which was a idea he greatly despised. His rhetoric was so extreme, and his power within the NOI so influencial, it prompted federal authorities to classify his case under a threat of national security.

"The 'X' symbol in the Obama certificate image could mean something much more significant. There is no real way of knowing without confronting Obama, the forger and his horde." says Johannson, "However, is it really far-fetched that a forger would put this symbol in there after all we have come to know and suspect about Obama? One of the definitions of the word abstract is: ‘To extract or select’. It also is synonymous with the words ‘seeded’ and ‘to spawn’."

However, if it is determined that Obama has been lying about his life narrative over the past many years to the American people, the consequences will be dire. Especially, after all that the American people were told about Obama's eligibility and how he met all the requirements to be president, Obama has failed to meet far greater standards than any eligibility mandate. He has failed to meet the standards of authenticity and presidential character. He is not an actual man.

Moreover, if it is finally disclosed that he does indeed have a secret association, in any way, with a radical, like Malcolm X, and he actively schemed to hide this fact for political reasons, this would be an offense far worse than only violating the Constitution. This would be an offense of such magnitude that it would undermine confidence in the political system of world government. This would mean that an elected leader and commander of the most powerful military on the planet hid his secret, ideological, and perhaps biological, allegiance with an individual who fomented the most extreme form of violent, radical, Islamic antagonism. The very scenerio our founder sought to prevent by enacting the eligibility clause of Article 2 of the Constitution.

“Whether these remnants alone indicate a real relationship between Obama and Malcolm X is another story,” says Johannson, “I am simply extricating artifacts and running them through the processes of deduction based on information we have about Obama, factual and theoretical. However, I find it intellectually impossible to imagine that the throng of criminal geniuses who have been working so diligently with this alleged messiah occupying the White House, to protect information about his nefarious origins, would now, suddenly make random and dumb mistakes within a document which they have been able to plan the content of since long before 2008. It’s ridiculous. These are not mistakes.”


BUTTERFLIES
.
Puccini's three-act opera "Madame Butterfly", based on the original short story of the same name written by American writer, John Luther Long, presses on five themes related to Obama's covert life narrative. Nationalism, natal biracialism, colonialization, betrayal and authenticity of identity.



In the story we learn of a twisted and painful tale of interracial love lost to the conflict between cultural ideology and responsibility to duty to one's country while the consequences of bearing a biracial child amid the tempest of these clashing forces results in macrocosmic illegitimacy.

Recall, on Monday, July 25th, World Net Daily published a story indicating that a graphic expert had found what appeared to be extraneous “dots” on the document image of Barack Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth. Please read the story at http://www.wnd.com/.

However, investigation of the graphic artifacts in association with historical information about Obama reveals they may have been intentionally placed on the image as a covert message about Obama's secretive political, ideological and, perhaps, biological identity.

"First of all," says Johannson, "people should first be concerned with the fact that these anomalies are even present at all, let alone be concerned with any symbolic meaning. Again, this image was disseminated by a man seen by many people, however misguided and deceived they may be, as a confirmation of his legitimacy to be President and an affirmation of their choice to trust him. The guy went on Oprah for god's sake and endorsed this thing...he told the world, 'its all okay, you can trust me'. Now, it turns out that Joe Wilson was the rightest guy in Washington when he called Obama liar during the state of the Union speach. Obama is not just a liar, he is a criminal deceiver."

Johannson continued, "The first question we should have before attempting any interpretation of symbols or secret graphic messages is 'why the hell are they even present in this document to begin with'?"

It is notable that experts have long been convinced the document image is a forgery simply on the merits of the existence of these anomalies. Tying them to significant points of corroboration with facts related to Obama has been less of a concern than simply attempting to authenticate the factual information the Certificate image contains. The bottom line, throughout the entire body of this saga, Obama has been completely uncooperative and outright secretive about his biography for 25 years.

"However," adds Johannson, a software systems engineer, “The ‘dots’, like everything else this covert administration has demonstrated through exploitation of various media are not an accident or a mistake. In fact, they, as well as all the other incongruencies with this document image, are included as an intentional, calculated attempt to send an epic message about the true identity and agenda of Barack Obama while at the same time appeasing his bowing consensus with a shallow pacification.

Obama's most vehement supporters actually hope he is an unconstitutional president. They see the Constitution as the illegitimate entity, not Obama. After all, they see the Constitution as an illegitimate document written by a bunch of white, racist, plantation owning slave masters. The very core culture against which the radical "X" movement of the 60s railed, and preached violent hatred for.

"Why the hell would anyone think they would seek to uphold mandates from such an authority?" asks Johannson, "Obama, like all of his radical influences of the 1960s, hates vintage American culture!"




"I believe the artifacts in this document image are intentional to the extent that even Barack Obama, an offspring of that very 1960s Black Nationalist, anti-White, anti-Christian, diasporic "X"ological culture himself, is aware of their presence, content and methods employed to create them.”

Johannson continued, “When I first saw the ‘dots’ it reminded me of screened images used to print photos in newspapers in the 1960s. If you look at it with ‘lazy eyes’, it resembles the outline of a butterfly in flight its body below and the wings extending above."



Johannson believes there exists a screen image somewhere on the internet which corroborates these white 'dots', which the document creator used as a template. He also believes it probably has some direct reference, or that it was taken from a photo which accompanies a story about someone, or something, connected to Obama's biography for the following reasons:



MALCOLM BUTTERFLY



Staff at the Daily Pen then did a cross reference of the terms "butterfly" and "Malcolm X" and discovered that, in 1996, a children's book author, Ken Sims, produced a coloring book called "Malcolm X The Butterfly". A graphic from the website and information about the book on Amazon.com is shown here:


"Obviously, someone is having fun with this whole birth certificate thing," says Johannson, "the connections between the "X"s placed throughout this document image, these white dots in the shape of a butterfly outline, Obama's birth certificate controversy and now, this book confirming a pre-existing reference to Malcolm X should prompt someone in the media to look into the validity of the information in this image."


Also, shortly after Obama's inauguration in January, 2009, there was posted to YouTube.com a video called "Obama Inauguration Black Butterfly" which is a montage of images of the inauguration accompanied by the song, "Black Butterfly" by Denise Williams. The video can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh2biNoQSLU&feature=related. Also, in December 2009, the TPM Web site published an image of a statue of a young Obama with a butterfly landing on his hand. The piece includes a short story called Obama's Magic Butterfly (see below).

It is clear the reference of a butterfly can be attributed to both Obama, historically. However, Johannson is not convinced the forgers of the document image have any specific association with just one concept, Mr. Sims, the video producers, or any specific media associated with such a reference. However, he believes the combination of symbology is intended to be a message by the forger of the image of some sort of connection either political, ideological or personal.

"It could just be a political message not an indication of some personal relationship between them." says Johannson. "However, forgers will often leave a remnant in their work. Sometimes they leave a 'signature' which only they can identify, or they encrypt a symbol which if discovered might be understood by only a few people but which would have shocking ramifications about the identity of the forger if investigated fully. The problem with the Malcolm X/Obama narrative is that we have theorized about this connection already. Besides, everyone knows Obama looks like Malcolm X so much that he could pass for his son, but how do you prove his parentage without authentic records?"

Another reference to Malcolm X and a butterfly is found in the book "Malcolm X: A Revolutionary Voice", in which Beatrice Gormley quotes X as saying after his viewing of the movie, Gone With The Wind', "I was the only Negro in the theater. When Butterfly McQueen went into her act, I felt like crawling under a rug."

Another source of graphic artifacts may have been used from a popular 1960s news publication, "Muhammed Speaks", which was an NOI newspaper frequently covering stories about Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammed during the height of the Black Nationalist Muslim movement. Archives of the paper are available online.

Another source to review is archives of the Amsterdam News which covered the Black Nationalist movement at the time of Malcolm X's rise to power in the Islamic organization.

THE SOUND OF FLUTTER


On July 20, 2008, writing for ABC's 'Political Punch', Jake Tapper wrote:

"There is a term in chaos theory describing the how infinitesmal variations of the initial condition of a dynamical system may produce large variations in the long term behavior of the system.

Most of us are more familiar with the more common name for it: the butterfly effect.

The butterfly effect was introduced in Ray Bradbury's 1952 short story "A Sound of Thunder," when time travelers change the world beyond measure by accidentally killing a butterfly in prehistoric times.

Similarly, international diplomacy can be impacted by careless or glibly-chosen words. (Cue President Bush's "crusade" remarks.)

Some Democratic allies of Obama's are -- off the record -- concerned that the senator too often doesn't consider the potential butterfly effect of his diction."


THE BUTTERFLY BRIEF

Then, on February 24, 2009, Newsweek published a story called 'The Butterfly Brief'.
The story states:

"At the request of top Obama administration officials, the CIA today began producing a daily secret briefing paper on the international economic crisis. At a meeting with reporters at CIA headquarters, the agency's newly confirmed director, Leon Panetta said that the classified daily bulletin, to be called the Economic Intelligence Brief, will report on economic developments in foreign countries that could affect U.S. foreign policy. He said the agency's move to begin producing such a daily briefing—which would parallel other secret daily summaries the U.S. intelligence agencies produce, such as the President's Daily Brief (PDB), which covers international threats and foreign-policy issues—was based on growing concern about how the worldwide economic crisis could produce internal developments in foreign countries, which in turn could have an impact on U.S. foreign-policy decisions."The briefing became known as The Butterfly Brief because of the effect of economic problems in small countries could severly affect the global economy.



"X"s AND "O"s



A search for historical connections between Obama and Malcolm X reveals some interesting associations.



In 1959, founders of the African-American Students Foundation created a scholarship program to enable east Africans to attend universities in the United States. Barack Obama Sr. was one such student who benefitted from the program, which, coincidentally, was created immediately following Kenyan African National Union party representative and Minister of Planning and Development, Tom Mboya's, trip to the United States in April, 1959. Tom Mboya and Barack Obama Sr. were said to be career-long friends until an alleged disagreement on economic policy strained their relationship irreconciliably until Mboya's assassination in 1969.



Serving on the AASF Council, instrumental in Organizing what was known as the "Kenyan Student Air-Lift" in September, 1959, were a host of educators and administrators, one of which was the wife of Dr. Ralph Bunche. Ralphe Bunche was a diplomat and member of the United Nations policy advisement council in the 1950's. He received the Nobel Peace prize in 1950 for his mediation work in Palestine after 1947 and, later, was a major mediation figure in the civil rights activism movement of the 1960's.



Malcolm X and Ralph Bunche are said to have had a long-running, but often contentious, relationship built upon the frame work of the two men's work in civil rights and political activism. In fall of 1963, Bunche, his wife and the entire AASF council were on hand at Harvard University to honor the organization's efforts to "proliferate educational opportunities beyond the confines of colonialized Africa." Both Malcolm X and Barack Obama Sr. were present at this convention. Malcolm X was later a featured speaker at the Harvard Law School forum in December, an event which Obama Sr., according to his memoirs to Mboya, also attended.



Travel accounts and dating of events around Mboya, Obama Sr. and Malcolm X shows there to be obvious opportunities for the three men to know one another and provide assistance in the interest of their respective causes at the time. X travelled to Africa in 1959, prior to the birth of Obama Jr., before Obama Sr. moved to Hawaii to attend school there. Mboya, using his political influence and involvement with the AASF council could have easily arranged for Obama Sr. to be in Hawaii.



Intriguing to the investigation, FBI reports show that Malcolm X also travelled to Seattle, Washington, allegedly to recruit for the Nation of Islam, sometime between January 6 and February 27, of 1959 where he spoke at a church frequented by none other than Obama's grandparents, the Dunhams, and mother-to-be, Ann Dunham. Malcolm X later returned to Seattle sometime in 1960 to establish NOI temple No. 67.




Then, there is the seemingly extraneous, handwritten "X - X" in box number 3 titled by "THIS BIRTH" on the Certificate. This scribble in pencil has been examined and, for the most part, disregarded by the general media as some kind of procedural accounting mark on the Certificate by the Health Department. However, in the context of referring to current symbols, they take on a whole new signifance.

"Well sure," says Johannson, "if a forger or Obama operative wanted to emphasize that the radical "X" ideology had influence with Obama, this would be one obscure, but obvious way of saying it. There are three 'X's in this box! I guess they really want us to know that 'X' has something to do with THIS BIRTH? Just asking the question. Just putting it out there."



OTHER MEDIA



Large media organizations have made the mistake of identifying Obama as Malcolm X as well. In late April, as reported by the New York Times on May 10, 2010, the Washington Post Web site published the headline, "Obama Touts Wind Energy in Iowa." Under the headline the, editor published a photo of Malcolm X instead of Obama, claiming it was impossible to tell the difference between the two men.



Also, in August of 1959, Time magazine printed a story about the first Governor of Hawaii, William Quinn, covering among other news the rise of communism and Black Supremacy. Specifically, a story called "Races: The Black Supremacy Movement", which is featured on Columbia University's "Malcolm X Project" website. It contained biograhical information about Malcolm X, and was curiously juxtaposed to the Hawaii Governor's story on page 25.


Johannson continued, “What we are seeing in the fraudulent presidency of Barack Obama is one of a series of capstones to a 60-year chapter of liberal activism and a brazened continuance of evil communist proclivity, under the growing religious tenancy in Islamic fundamentalism. The endgame is to simply undermine the sovereignty of free and prosperous people of western society. What better way to do this than ensconce as your leader, through any means necessary, an individual who now has the power to implement economic justice, through taxation and manipulation of the global monetary system, ruling from a stolen throne, and who is a genealogical representative of the most radical activist in American history, Malcolm X?”


Reading the history of Malcolm X we find it irrefutable that he was enveloped in a deep seated hatred for white society. He was a fanatical racist, like so many of his enemies who opposed him. His entire life was quantified by his life’s early tribulations with racial violence and then, later, his failed attempts to unite America’s black society with messages of violent retribution, reverse segregation and the Islamic faith.

“The guy is quoted to have said, ‘Christianity took me to prison, Islam got me out’,” says Johannson. “X’s father may have been murdered by members of the Klan. If that happened to you, what would your message be to your offspring? Moreover, if you found out that you were one of his offspring…what cause would you take up as your life’s purpose? Let’s just say it would not be to join a country club or a Wall Street bank. Rather, it would more likely be to carry on the legacy of your slain father-leader by becoming an activist, which Obama did, and then assume the pristine throne over your 'white enemy'. Think about it. What greater victory could Malcolm X achieve but to have his own son become president of a society against which he sought justice and reparation for what he perceived to be crimes of the white man against Allah’s black children? The racial hatred exhibited by this strain of individuals is breathtaking."



Johannson believes this is the reason Obama has concealed this information from the public for so long. His campaign would have known that a larger majority of white American society would not have voted for him if they knew of his association with someone like Malcolm X.

"This document image contains the cryptic but archetypical code one would expect to be used by Obama operatives. They are over-educated shills with a blind loyalty to Obama much in the same way Malcolm X described black allegiance to Elijah Muhammed and himself when X was a minister with FOI. For decades, these radical descedents have sought for decades to dilute the truth about their lack of social decency and fallow moral aptitude. Obama’s history, as we know it to be, is infested with radicalism and suspicious associations. Why would it be a shock if we discovered the Malcolm X was a part of that history? For me, I expect to find these things as if they are simply common facts about Obama.”

“In reviewing this document image,” says Johannson, “we must see this entire chapter of American history including Obama's fraudulent presidency, as the epic birth of an agenda of a fanatical establishment and their attempt to implement a radical, if not outright violent, form of economic justice against vintage America. This epic agenda began more than 50 years ago, with the defeat of the Axis powers of Europe and the subsequent and steady rise of communism and radical Muslim influence in the world. Our own prisons have become the reluctant Mosques wherein the defeated and criminal deviant find unity and acceptance among the brotherhood of radical religionists…a religion, unlike any other, which actually advocates the use of violence as a dutiful expression of its faith and outright lies in order to gain advantage of power over those they see as 'infidels'. Everything we now see that Obama's place in American history is based on is about being the capstone of this movement.”


Please note: We are continuing to research this and fill gaps in our information. Thank you for taking time to visit The Daily Pen. If you have any questions leave them in the comments and Dan will get back to you ASAP.

Friday, July 22, 2011

BOEHNER FINALLY REALIZES OBAMA’S FRAUDULENT PRESIDENCY DISQUALIFIES POSSIBILITY OF LEGITIMATE DEBATE

The Elephant in the Oval Office: Obama’s delusional fantasy as a legitimate U.S. president continues to erode as Speaker of the House, John Boehner, walks out of debt talks with the fraudulent office holder. However, the unspoken taboo is that Boehner’s disregard of Obama has nothing to do with ideological differences about how to spend American money and everything to do with the fact that Obama’s claims to power are the greatest felony against our blood-ransomed sovereignty in history.

Commentary by Penbrook Johannson
Editor of The Daily Pen

Washington D.C. - John Boehner is finally beginning to understand a bitter but necessary truth. He has been slapped across the face with the same sobering reality which everyone else in America has already known for more than four years. Barack Obama is not eligible to be president, and therefore, he is not qualified to have legitimate debates about the economic challenges faced by the true citizens of this country.

Only a dead person or delusional psychotic would not admit that Barack Obama was ensconced by a bowing liberal consensus for three invalid reasons. One, he is “black” (actually, he is bi-racial, but only his half blackness counts to degenerates on the left). Two, his name is not George Bush, and most importantly, three…no one in this disgraceful government would ever question Obama’s legitimacy to be President because of the first two reasons, even though the constitutional sovereignty they took an oath to protect upon their own induction was being violated and disregarded by this implacable thief.


Under the pathology driving Obama's economic justice agenda, it has now become manifest that a new “law” in America has been declared, without a single merit of standing, which says the Constitution is hereby invalid and, therefore, reparative-based, transient social values and “progressive” ideology are now the hollow standards by which a nation in freefall selects its leadership, regardless of that leadership’s identity, notorious covert history or obvious criminal intentions for the people he serves. Murderers, dictators, rapists, hedonists and bigots are likewise all legitimate according to this generation of liberal Americans. The progressive American electorate really raised the bar for Obama, didn’t they?


Essentially, as Obama emerged into American consciousness, a sick and pathetic liberal establishment, with the help of an illicit media, put forth a sociopathic standard which establishes the right of anyone in the world to be president of the U.S. as long as that candidate fits a specific, “non-white” racial profile, and that they not be an incumbent which liberal bastions self-righteously hate, while being allowed their hypocritical hatred of anyone challenging their ideological lusts. As long as their aspirant fits these binary eligibility requirements, the final decision to allow inferior candidates, and now, apparently, criminals, like Obama, to assume power will never be challenged under the oppressive fear of being disparaged, ironically, by degenerates of even lesser standing than those they condemn. This is a very strange and lascivious dual standard, indeed.

Boehner finds himself amidst his own personal revelation that, unfortunately, there exist among the lame reasons for ensconcing such an inferior applicant as Obama none which include the fact that he was actually constitutionally eligible to even hold the office, as established by the doctrinal mandates of our worthier, original hosts who actually traded their lives and welfare to ensure the rights of electing eligible leaders. This is the very fact which makes Obama such a ridiculous figure. Rather than possessing qualifications of merit upon which he could be validated with standing, he was annointed by an insipid horde for merely not being what they hate. Not exactly the ringing endorsement our founders would have desired for a someone seeking presidential status.


Essentially, when Obama's deranged constituency found itself faced with the undeniable truth that Obama did not qualify under America's requisite rules, realizing they had no extending options, they simply decided that it was the rules which were illegitimate, not the person they sought to exalt. In doing so, they simply violated the covenants of a civil society and, thereby, set an apocalyptic precedent by which America is now vulnerable to invasion from within by foreign influence because the rules now no longer apply to successors of Obama, as well. Or, did they actually believe violating the constitution "just this once" for Obama, would have no consequences for those seeking power later?

The apocalyptic consequence of such a violation, an endorsement of a creature like Obama by ignorant masses, is that America will collapse economically and socially because the deficits upon both stanchions of our society were created by a fraudulent liar to begin with, thereby making the economic conditions and social ills the consequence of that same lie.

Essentially, Boehner is realizing the economic failure of America is a minor consequence when compared to the vast implications of this government’s actual failure to protect the constitutional sovereignty of America…FIRST! More tragically, by allowing Obama to be a pretend president, America received into itself a viral disease of illegitimacy, which has weakened our effectual powers and undermined our self-governing sovereignty. Our economic leverage and moral aptitude is lessened because of Obama’s fake presidency. That’s what happens when you allow yourself to be deceived by such an epic form of identity fraud. Your dissonance leads you to your destruction…as you realize in horror that you are gleeful over your own end.

Unfortunately, Boehner has been forced to realize why it is so critical to uphold the authority and legitimacy of America’s governing powers by verifying and proving the integrity and authenticity of the candidacy of its office holders. Additionally, the speaker is also being forced to deal with the consequences of the failure to ensure that Barack Obama was even legally eligible to bear such power and position, let alone engage legitimate debate about America’s economic challenges.

When an illegitimate leader takes office, it creates a dangerous potential for destructive consequences because accountability becomes strained. There is no greater example of this in human history, except the fall of Adam, than Barack Obama’s usurpation of power over the advanced human citizenry of the United States of America.

If it was found in the beginning that our Constitution prevented legitimacy for honest reasons, then the Constitution should have been addressed through legitimate channels, not disregarded for the sake of some psychotic social indignation. If Obama wanted to become president so bad, he should have first allowed himself to be openly measured against the prescriptions of our founding doctrines with the humility expected of such an office seeker. If found deficient, he had options. Instead, he chose to lie and deceive, and in doing so, allowed at least one innocent man to languish unjustly in prison for five months (only to later provide the alleged documentation originally requested which would have prevented Dr. Lakin's court martial in the first place), and, perhaps caused the deaths of at least two others. Most assuredly, not only has truth and justice been vanguished by Obama, honor has, as well. Now, because of his willful and intentional deception, I fear a righteous wrath has been stored against him and his abettors.

Boehner’s abandonment of Obama is but one of many disseminations to come. As Boehner’s exit shows, reasonable debate no longer has the ability to bring resolution to common problems among our leadership because the initial problem of legitimacy remains unresolved. Obama was allowed to grow into a farcical rendition of illegitimate government wrought with fraudulence and covert criminality, which are the natural consequences of allowing an epic lie to spawn such realities. John Boehner is now witnessing the consequences of the lies about Obama’s true identity, first hand. He is seeing the castration of legislative, judicial and executive power.

Finally, paraphrasing the book of Romans, Paul writes: “…wrath is being revealed against the wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness...their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened...although they claimed to be wise, they became fools...Therefore, God gave them over to shameful lusts and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion...furthermore, God then gave them over to a depraved mind to do that which is unseemingly and they became filled with every kind of wickedness and depravity, full of envy, malice, murder and deceit..."

Perhaps the idealism of this place called America exists in a place untouchable by evil renditions of otherness, like Obama. Perhaps the destruction of what we falsely believe is the true America is the only way we will actually find the kingdom upon which freedom and sovereignty was intended to be based…but which, expectedly, could never be defended indefinitely. Do not be troubled by this brothers and sisters. Your eternal purpose was never to be subject to such worldliness.

In that glorious light, we, the founding descendants of this great nation, have nothing to fear in loss of this momentary, transient idea about ‘some ole used to be’. We were intended for something unimaginably better than to be identified with a nation served by the likes of an Obama. In fact, the destruction of a criminal liar like Obama is directly proportional in scope and weight to the size and historical significance of the stage upon which he has trespassed.
Perhaps it’s time we consider the idea of refusing to be afraid. Perhaps it’s time to begin evacuating our fellow nobles, tossing the lamp asunder and locking the door of this absurd theater from the outside.

Let the conflagration sort out Obama’s true identity while it lights the way out of this abyss from afar for the rest of us.




Saturday, July 2, 2011

CONGRESS KNEW OBAMA WAS INELIGIBLE…SIX YEARS BEFORE HE WAS ELECTED!

Congressional records reveal a viral premeditation within the liberal ranks of our government to alter fundamental Constitutional eligibility protections in order to covertly assist an ineligible Obama candidacy and his usurpation of America’s executive power.

by Penbrook Johannson
Editor of The Daily Pen

Some diseases are so viral, so invasive, so insidious, so contagious…that they eventually infect what most would believe is the most sanitary part of any body. Even the once honored sovereignty of America’s highest legislative body is now coming under the attack of the disease of multi-culturalism and liberal extremism.

Congressional records show that on eight separate occasions over six years, between 2003 and 2008, legislators attempted to eliminate or change the definition of the “Natural Born” eligibility clause of Article 2 of the Constitution in order to remove restrictions and, thereby, create legal justifications supporting Obama’s unlawful candidacy for President.


We now know what members of congress knew about Obama’s ineligibility, and when they knew it.


In a recently produced documentary, Carl Gallups, a senior pastor at Hickory Hammock Baptist Church for more than two decades with a ten year professional background in law enforcement, presents documented evidence showing that members of congress submitted repetitive, coordinated proposals to alter the 'natural-born' eligibility clause.


Gallups also serves on the board of regents at the University of Mobile and hosts several weekly radio programs in the northwest Florida region.


Gallups’ documentary shows that between June 11, 2003 until Feb. 28, 2008, there were eight attempts to circumvent the Natural-born eligibility clause of the U.S. Constitution.


1. On June 11, 2003, Rep. Vic Snyder, D-Arkansas, introduced House Joint Resolution 59 (HJR 59) which attempted to Constitutionally change the understood historical definition of a ‘natural-born’ eligibility for the U.S. Presidency in order to "permit persons who are not natural born citizens of the United States, but who have been citizens of the United States for at least 35 years, to be eligible to hold the offices of president and vice president.” The resolution did not make it to a senate vote at that time.

2. Then, on Sept. 3, 2003, Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, introduced HJR67, which would have defined presidential eligibility the same as Snyder's proposal, only the requirement to be a citizen in Conyers’ bill was actually lowered to 20 years, not the more stringent 35 years. Conyers’ bill was also rebuffed prior to an official vote. However, the introduction of two such proposals within a mere four month period reveals that Congressional leadership was conscious of the issue of Presidential eligibility prior to Obama’s candidacy. Whether these acts were put into motion at this time specifically for the benefit of Obama, exclusively, is unclear, but highly suspicious.

3. Then, in an attempt to contend with the obvious attack against the natural born citizenship clause, on Feb. 25, 2004, Sen. Don Nickles, R-Oklahoma, introduced Senate Bill 2128 which also failed to hit the eligibility requirement target. It defined a ‘natural-born citizen’ as someone who was born in and is subject to the United States.” This was not the understanding of the framers of the Constitution. Exhibiting the same ignorance as other legislators, Nickles failed to acknowledge that the intended purpose of the natural-born eligibility clause was to ensure that the sovereignty, identity and loyalty of a presidential candidate was measured by not only a geographic birth under the protection of the U.S. Constitution but also the possession of natural natal biology afforded by birth to TWO parents who are U.S. citizens at the time of conception AND the preservation of the continuity of that citizenship status until election.

Five months later, on July 27, 2004, Barack Obama delivered his keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention which essentially and suddenly made America aware of him at a national level.

4. Then, just two months later, on Sept. 15, 2004, House Representative Dana Rohrabacher, R-California, submitted HJR 104, which audaciously attempted "to make eligible for the office of president a person who is not a natural born citizen of the United States but has been a United States citizen for at least 20 years." Rohrabacher’s fallow resolution attempted to completely ignore the Constitution’s requirement that a president had to be a natural born citizen. The resolution was rejected on its face.

5. Four months later, on Jan. 4, 2005, Conyers pushed yet another unwanted attempt to change the definition of ‘natural born citizen’ in HJR 02, which was the exact same as Rohrabacher's.

6. Just one month later, on Feb. 1, 2005, Rohrabacher submitted a revised version of her previous resolution in HJR 15 which would require only 20 years of citizenship to be eligible for the office of president.

7. Two months later, on April 14, 2005, Snyder resubmitted his bill under another proposal, HJR42, requiring 35 years of U.S. citizenship to be eligible. Interestingly, it has long since been established that Barack Obama’s return to the U.S. from Indonesia took place in approximately 1970-1971. At that time, if Obama had re-naturalized as a U.S. Citizen, this resolution would have made him just eligible in 2005.
Barack Obama announced his candidacy for the U.S. presidency on February 10, 2007.
The Iowa Caucus is held on January 3, 2008.


8. Finally, in Feb. 28, 2008, after seven failures to change the natural-born eligibility requirement, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., attempted to parasite SB 2678 with the Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act, an amendment clarifying what "natural-born citizen" includes. Obama and Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., were sponsors of this bill.

Liberal democrats in Congress were in an obvious array to push against this long-standing Constitutional mandate at the time, coincidentally, when the first unnatural born presidential candidate, Barack Obama, began his political career at the national level. Why? Who or what was pulling their strings?


As reported by Bob Unruh of World Net Daily, Gallups’ documentary then demonstrates that “..on April 10, 2008, being "unable to alter or remove" the natural-born eligibility requirement for Barack Obama..", the Senate engaged an active deception by distracting the growing consciousness of Obama’s ineligibility by introducing Senate Resolution 511, which addressed Sen. John McCain's qualifications as a ‘natural-born citizen.’

Overcompensating for their failure to validate Obama, the Senate feigned generosity for McCain in hopes of making his eligibility the target of attention, but not criticism, by declaring him eligible as a “natural born citizen”. Senate leadership desired to avoid making McCain's eligibility the subject of criticism because they knew that if McCain was not eligible, Barack Obama was certainly not eligible. The weight of scrutiny against a worthier McCain would have caused Obama's campaign to fail, politically, if not legally.

However, in what can only be described as complete legislative incompetence, SR511 writers and sponsors specifically stated McCain was eligible because he was "...born in a territory under treaty with the U.S." and, therefore, under the protection of the U.S. Constitution and, most importantly, "because he was the son of TWO U.S. citizen parents." The language of Resolution 511 actually and explicitly commits McCain to presidential eligibility because of the citizenship of his parentage. Both of McCain's parents were U.S. citizens. This is a qualification which Barack Obama does not possess.

Shockingly, Obama voted in favor of Resolution 511 knowing he, himself, was not eligible under these same metrics. Barack Obama voted in favor of a formal resolution stating that a presidential candidate was Constitutionally eligible because the candidate was defined as being ‘natural born’ by the fact that the candidate’s birth was, in fact, to TWO U.S. citizen parent. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen and his mother was only 18 at the time of his birth which disqualified transfer of citizenship if the birth occurred outside the U.S
Obama's qualifications were never reviewed or conferred upon under any similar resolution, nor were his qualifications to be president ever vetted by any federal authority, legislative body or formal inquiry, as were John McCain’s. Not ever.

Unruh continues: “After his election, Gallups points out, Obama held a secret meeting with eight of the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court – from which no public information was released. The meeting was held even though there were legal challenges in which Obama was a defendant pending before the Supreme Court at the time. The attorneys for the plaintiffs never were told of the meeting or invited to participate in what critics have described as extrajudicial contact between the court and a defendant.”

Consider this very carefully, sons and daughters of vintage America. Barack Obama, an illegally appointed president under suspicion of violating the U.S. Constitution, actually engaged personal contact with eight sitting supreme court judges who were actively considering pending cases regarding his ineligibility as president, in covert meetings, without the presence of any opposing legal representation. The suspect was allowed to meet alone with very authorities who were presiding in law suits against him, who have the supreme legal power to dismiss, overrule or uphold these lawsuits with binding jurisdictions, without any record of the content or accounting of attendance of those meetings, and without any representation of those filing complaints against him.
This level of corruption and judicial tampering is unprecedented in American history.

Ironically, only Justice Scalia, the longest serving conservatively oriented judge, appointed by Republican President, Ronald Reagan, in 1986, was absent from this secret meeting. Scalia has often been hailed as the "conservative intellectual anchor" of the supreme court. If any one of the nine supreme court justices would have held opposition to Obama's illegal presidency, Scalia would be the first. He was either not allowed in the meeting, or recused himself for reasons of deniability about the subject.


Unruh continues, “WND previously reported on another link between Obama and a campaign to change the constitutional provision. It came from an associate lawyer in a Chicago-based firm whose partner served on a finance committee for then-Sen. Barack Obama. She advocated for the elimination of the U.S. Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural-born" citizen, calling the requirement "stupid" and asserting it discriminates, is outdated and undemocratic."

The paper was written in 2006 by Sarah Herlihy, just two years after Obama had won a landslide election in Illinois to the U.S. Senate. Herlihy was listed as an associate at the Chicago firm of Kirkland & Ellis. A partner in the same firm, Bruce I. Ettelson, cited his membership on the finance committees for both Obama and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., on the corporate website.

The article by Herlihy was available online under law review articles from Kent University when it originally was the subject of reports but later was removed.


Herlihy's published paper reveals that the requirement likely was considered in a negative light by organizations linked to Obama in the months before he announced in 2007 his candidacy for the presidency.


The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the "stupidest provision" in the Constitution, "undecidedly un-American," "blatantly discriminatory" and the "Constitution's worst provision," Herlihy begins in her introduction to the paper titled "Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and the Obstacle."


She concludes that the "emotional" reasons to oppose changing the Constitution will prevail over the "rational" reasons demanding a change.

The current American perceptions about the effects of globalization and the misunderstanding about what globalization actually is will result in Americans deciding that naturalized citizens should not be president because this would, in effect, be promoting globalization, Herlihy wrote.

"Although this argument is admittedly circular, because globalization is the thing that makes the need to abolish the requirement more and more persuasive, Americans' subsequent perceptions about globalization are the very things that will prevent Americans from embracing the idea of eliminating the natural born requirement.
"Logical Americans are looking for a reason to ignore the rational reasons promoted by globalization so that they may vote based on their own emotions and instincts," she wrote.

In the body of her argument, Herlihy said the constitutional provision simply is outdated.

"Considering that the Founding Fathers presumably included the natural born citizen clause in the Constitution partly out of fear of foreign subversion, the current stability of the American government and the intense media scrutiny of presidential candidates virtually eliminates the possibility of a 'foreigner' coming to America, becoming a naturalized citizen, generating enough public support to become president, and somehow using the presidency to directly benefit his homeland," she wrote.

"The natural born citizen clause of the United States Constitution should be repealed for numerous reasons. Limiting presidential eligibility to natural born citizens discriminates against naturalized citizens, is outdated and undemocratic, and incorrectly assumes that birthplace is a proxy for loyalty," she wrote.

Many of the reasons for keeping the limit, she wrote, "are based primarily on emotion."

Or, Ms. Herlihy, perhaps you must be forced to accept that it was simply a wise measure correctly foreseen as necessary to prevent a lying, criminal usurper, perhaps like Barack Obama, from assuming power over the value, work and lives of the greatest people in world history. There is nothing outdated in any doctrine devised to preserve that.

Is there no limit to the degeneracy of this current political roster into which they will descend in order to acheive their psychotic agenda and control over the blood-ransomed freedom, value and power of the only true decent and prosperous people of humanity?

Wake up, vintage America. Your nation is under attack from within. Liars and deceivers are stealing your daily lives, creeping closer into your personal boundaries and mocking the screaming blood of your pristine warriors.

It is time all who consider themselves decent and sovereign to reject Barack Obama as the criminal usurper that he is.





Wednesday, June 29, 2011

WORLD NET DAILY SUES ESQUIRE AND EDITOR, MARK WARREN, FOR LYING ABOUT CORSI’S ‘BIRTH CERTIFICATE’ BOOK

Obama overbender, Mark Warren, (a.k.a. Editor of Esquire) vomits liberal hatred against Corsi's docu-truth, then channels 'Andy Kaufman Defense' in desperation to diminish his eco-terrorist act as a prank. The problem for Warren's excuse is that no one is laughing...except WND's Joseph Farah...all the way to the bank.

by Dan Crosby
of The Daily Pen

Mark Warren fancies himself as a funny man. Then again, so did a now dead prankster and star of the hit T.V. show, 'Taxi'. However, unlike Warren, at least Andy Kaufman never attempted to be a journalist, either.

Just days before Jerome Corsi’s stunningly revealing book about Barack Obama’s illegitimate presidency hit the shelves, the rabidly liberal Chief Editor of Esquire, Warren, decided to do something very lame...and, not funny.

Twiddling about his dank hypogeum last month, Warren, like his horde-mates currently illegally occupying the White House, possessing no professional experience whatsoever in comedy, contrived a stupid scheme to write a blatant lie about Jerome Corsi and his publisher, WND, headed by Joseph Farah, complete with fabricated quotes and fictional scenarios, in order to make millions of people in America believe that Corsi’s book, “Where’s The Birth Certificate”, was being pulled from the shelves.

In this intentional act of malice driven by his psychotic lust to protect Obama from persecution, Warren attempted to dissuade the public from buying Corsi's book by disseminating a malicious and premeditated lie. Worse, however, was that he conveyed this lie through a blatantly illicit and abusive leveraging of his power as an executive of a major media organization. Worst yet...he actually used the resources of that media organization to print his indolent diarrhea.

The problem for Warren and his liberal hack shop is that his fake story was an act of eco-terrorism resulting in potential monetary losses for WND. For those of you who have a hard time understanding the difference between satire and a real story (as Warren so ineptly attempted to condescend in his weak-ass retraction), this one is known in legal circles as a "crime". As a general rule, true satire is disclosed as such prior to allowing damage or harm to occur before it is read, not after. As such, Warren and Esquire are now facing a multimillion dollar lawsuit filed by Joseph Farah and WND.

The punch line in Warren's poor humor is the ironic possibility of Farah owning a liberal bastion like Esquire. Now, that will be funny!

Corsi’s book outlines, in vivid detail with documented proof, the historical account and investigation into Barack Obama’s false identity and his now apparent illegitimacy as President of the United States. The book has frightened the liberal establishment so much that even George Soros is funding misinformation campaigns with media agents, like Esquire, Huffington Post, Salon and the Daily Kos, all extreme left-wing propaganda mills working to cover Obama's epic deception.

In response to the book, Obama and his band of misfits have endorsed a forged document purported to have been released by the Hawaiian Health Department showing false information about Obama’s natal history. The document has been analyzed by multiple high-level digital media and document experts who all say the image is a poorly concealed fabrication.

In his story, Warren even went so far as to concoct a story that Farah and Corsi, longtime friends for years in the media industry, had suddenly come into disagreement about the content of Corsi’s book and were on the outs with one another. Not true. On the contrary, the two have galvanized their unity through the success of their endeavor to root out the lies of Obama’s criminality. This book is testimony to Corsi's and Farah's correctness and accuracy about Obama’s lies and this current horde of leadership’s failure to protect America. Their investigation into this matter is the single most important endeavor in the history of the United States, upon which the very preservation, and salvation, of America's founding principles rest.

To say that Mark Warren is a liar would be a compliment to him, and an insult to liars throughout history. An unabashed pro-Obama hack and liberal defamatory agent, Warren actually wasted time in what’s left of his worthless existence to write the following article for publication on Esquire’s online site:


"In a stunning development one day after the release of Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President, by Dr. Jerome Corsi, World Net Daily Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah has announced plans to recall and pulp the entire 200,000 first printing run of the book, as well as announcing an offer to refund the purchase price to anyone who has already bought either a hard copy or electronic download of the book.

In an exclusive interview, a reflective Farah, who wrote the book's foreword and also published Corsi's earlier best-selling work, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak out Against John Kerry and Capricorn One: NASA, JFK, and the Great "Moon Landing" Cover-Up, said that after much serious reflection, he could not go forward with the project. "I believe with all my heart that Barack Obama is destroying this country, and I will continue to stand against his administration at every turn, but in light of recent events, this book has become problematic, and contains what I now believe to be factual inaccuracies," he said this morning. "I cannot in good conscience publish it and expect anyone to believe it."

When asked if he had any plans to publish a corrected version of the book, he said cryptically, "There is no book." Farah declined to comment on his discussions of the matter with Corsi.

A source at WND, who requested that his name be withheld, said that Farah was "rip-shit" when, on April 27, President Obama took the extraordinary step of personally releasing his "long-form" birth certificate, thus resolving the matter of Obama's legitimacy for "anybody with a brain."

"He called up Corsi and really tore him a new one," says the source. "I mean, we'll do anything to hurt Obama, and erase his memory, but we don't want to look like fucking idiots, you know? Look, at the end of the day, bullshit is bullshit."


Corsi, who graduated from Harvard and is a professional journalist, could not be reached for comment.

DEVELOPING...

UPDATE, 12:25 p.m., for those who didn't figure it out yet, and the many on Twitter for whom it took a while: We committed satire this morning to point out the problems with selling and marketing a book that has had its core premise and reason to exist gutted by the news cycle, several weeks in advance of publication. Are its author and publisher chastened? Well, no. They double down, and accuse the President of the United States of perpetrating a fraud on the world by having released a forged birth certificate. Not because this claim is in any way based on reality, but to hold their terribly gullible audience captive to their lies, and to sell books. This is despicable, and deserves only ridicule. That's why we committed satire in the matter of the Corsi book. Hell, even the president has a sense of humor about it all. Some more serious reporting from us on this whole "birther" phenomenon here, here, and here."

Notice the weasely UPDATE thrown in at the end when Warren realized what an idiotic mistake he had made.


Yea, Mark, we figured you out a long time ago, champ! Watching Farah ream your liberal hole with this suit is gonna be the greatest moment of this entire saga. Assume the position! It should be second nature for you. You’ve been doing it for Obama for four years, after all.

The only regret is that because your head is so far up Obama’s already, Jerome might have to push that much harder to get his book up there too. Based on the sales thus far, though, someone will most certainly have one for yours as well. About a million and a half now, is that right?


I hope it’s personally signed by Corsi, you degenerate, lying, liberal overbender.

WND’s Bob Unruh writes about the suit at www.wnd.com, as follows:

“WASHINGTON – WND is filing a lawsuit in the nation's capital today seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages for a faked "report" in Esquire magazine that falsely said a New York Times best-selling book, "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible To Be President," by Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., had been pulled from store shelves by the publisher.

The claim has been filed by attorney Larry Klayman for Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, on behalf of the company, WND Books, himself and author Corsi.
Defendants named include Esquire Magazine Inc., parent company the Hearst Corp., and Mark Warren, the author of
the false article.

Support WND's "Esquire Justice Fund" to support lawsuits against Mark Warren, Esquire and the Hearst Corporation for its malicious attack on Jerome Corsi's book.

"You can't just make up words and put them in people's mouths, deliberately misleading the public, deliberately defaming others and deliberately lying to inhibit commerce," Farah said. "Media institutions such as Esquire magazine and its parent, the Hearst Corporation, for which I was employed for nearly a decade, should know better. And they will as a result of this lawsuit."

"We are reacting to one of the most egregious abuses of freedom of the press that I have ever witnessed in my 30-plus year career in journalism," he said. "We are taking this action not because we desire to restrict First Amendment-guaranteed protections, but because we want to police them and guard them."

The claim explains how a significant number of people disbelieve Barack Obama's claims to be eligible to be president of the United States. A recent poll showed half the nation, some 150 million-plus people, want Congress to investigate his eligibility.


"President Barack Hussein Obama, wanting to try to eliminate this issue among voters and the American populace, recently released what many people, including Plaintiff Corsi, have reason to believe is a fraudulent birth certificate purporting to show that he was born in Hawaii," the claim explains.

"Just as Plaintiff's book was released, Defendants, each and every one of them, caused to be published and did publish at a minimum on the Internet, nationally and internationally, and specifically in the District of Columbia, an article entitled 'Breaking: Jerome Corsi's Birther Book Pulled from Shelves?,' about Plaintiffs' book," the lawsuit explains.

"This article published on or about 10 a.m. on May 18, 2011, set forth false and misleading facts about the Plaintiffs' book and stated in pertinent part: 'In a stunning development one day after the release of 'Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Hussein Obama is Not Eligible to be President,' by Dr. Jerome Corsi, World Net Daily Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah has announced plans to recall and pulp the entire 200,000 first printing run of the book, as well as announcing an offer to refund the purchase price to anyone who has already bought either a hard copy or electronic download of the book. In an exclusive interview, a reflective Farah, who wrote the book's foreword and also published Corsi's earlier best selling work, 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak out Against John Kerry' and 'Capricorn One: NASA, JFK, and the Great 'Moon Landing' Cover-Up,' said that after much serious reflection, he could not go forward with the project. 'I believe with all my heart that Barack Obama is destroying this country, and I will continue to stand against his administration at every turn, but in light of recent events, this book has become problematic, and contains what I now believe to be factual inaccuracies,' he said this morning. 'I cannot in good conscience publish it and expect anyone to believe it.' When asked if he had any plans to publish a corrected version of the book, he said cryptically, 'There is no book.' Farah declined to comment on his discussions of the matter with Corsi. A source at WND, who requested that his name be withheld, said that Farah was 'rip sh--' when on April 27, President Obama took the extraordinary step of personally releasing his 'long-form' birth certificate, thus resolving the matter of Obama’s legitimacy for 'anybody with a brain.' 'He called upon Corsi and really tore him a new one,' says the source. 'I mean, we'll do anything to hurt Obama, and erase his memory, but we don't want to look like f---ing idiots, you know? Look, at the end of the day, bullsh-- is bullsh--.' Corsi, who graduated from Harvard and is a professional journalist, could not be reached for comment."

The complaint explains when the "report" appeared, news organizations, readers, purchasers and distributors began contacting Farah, and consumers requested refunds.

"Only when Plaintiff Farah on behalf of himself and the other Plaintiffs issued a statement saying that he was exploring legal options against Esquire and Warren did they purport to issue a disclaimer," the claim says.
"However, this so-called disclaimer was as false, misleading and legally actionable as the initial story that was published by the Defendants. Adding 'insult to injury,' it represented later that day on the Internet, nationally and internationally, including the District of Columbia, the following false, misleading and disparaging information: '… for those who didn't figure it out yet, and the many on Twitter for whom it took a while: We committed satire this morning to point out the problems with selling and marketing a book that has had its core premise and reason to exist gutted by the news cycle, several weeks in advance of publication. Are its author and publisher chastened? Well no. They double down, and accuse the President of the United States of perpetrating a fraud on the world by having released a forged birth certificate. Not because this claim is in any way based on reality, but to hold their terribly gullible audience captive to their lies, and to sell books. This is despicable, and deserves only ridicule. That's why we committed satire in the matter of the Corsi book. Hell, even the president has a sense of humor about it all."


But the complaint explains the "so-called disclaimer" was no more or less than "another actionable attack on Plaintiffs and exhibited the malice of Defendants toward the Plaintiffs."

"This actionable conduct and malice later manifested itself in comments made by Defendants to The Daily Caller, another Internet publication read by a viewing audience interested, among other topics, in the 'birther issue.' Defendant Warren, on behalf of himself and Esquire, told The Daily Caller that they had 'no regrets' on posting the subject stories and that Plaintiff Corsi, and by extension the other Plaintiffs, are an 'execrable piece of sh--.'"


The truth?

"Contrary to the false, misleading and otherwise actionable statements of Defendants, Plaintiffs never contemplated, much less offered, to pull the book from shelves, refund purchases to consumers and believed at all material times that the contents of the book are accurate and newsworthy. However, the representations of the Defendants, each and every one of them, resulted in books being pulled from the shelves by booksellers, harmed sales and damaged the goodwill and reputation of Plaintiffs among the buying and consuming public, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere. Defendants' stated malicious purpose in harming Plaintiff, through their actions, succeeded as planned."


The lawsuit contains allegations of defamation, false light, interference with business relations, invasion of privacy and others.


That the faked report had an impact seems apparent. A clerk at a Borders bookstore in California told customers that the hot-selling "Where's the Birth Certificate?" had been withdrawn from the market by the publisher, based on the fraudulent story published by Esquire.

The issue was noticed by a WND reader, who reported calling the Borders store in Northridge, Calif., seeking the book. He said in an e-mail:

I called the store and asked if they had the book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?" by Jerome Corsi and the guy laughed at me and said he wasn't sure but he would look for me. He went on to say isn't that outdated being Obama just released his birth certificate and shouldn't they at least rename it. So, I played with him a bit and said the book was far beyond just the birth certificate issue and told him maybe it should be renamed "Where's the Real Birth Certificate?" and he said, why is it fake? I said many people that have examined the online image have stated it was indeed a manipulated document. He said well they must be right, in a smart-a-- tone.

Anyway, after that he put me on a hold for a few minutes and then came back on and said he searched and they do not carry the book and said he was just told the publisher pulled the book."

A subsequent telephone call to the store by WND confirmed the conversation, as a clerk said, "I think they pulled it."

"We had it, but I'm almost certain the publisher pulled it," he continued. "They didn't figure anyone would buy the book once the birth certificate was disclosed."

"There's no story here," said a spokeswoman for the Borders corporate headquarters, Mary Davis. "The bookseller saw the headline on the Esquire article below and mistakenly took it as truth. The book was coincidentally out of stock at the store and the bookseller mistakenly attributed that to this headline. Totally innocent on his part.”






Saturday, June 25, 2011

Congress Refuses to Investigate Obama’s Illegal Presidency Because They Fear “Black People Behaving Like Animals”

Sentiment Among Congressional and Judicial Leadership Insults Black Americans While They Ignore a Greater “Silent” Threat From Vintage American Wrath

by Dan Crosby
of The Daily Pen

NEW YORK – There’s a scene in the movie “Payback” when the movie’s protagonist is holding a gun to the head of a scared street hustler from whom he is attempting to extract the real identity of a lying, cheating, thief who stole from him. At one point, after the hero forcibly rips a piercing from his nose, the little weasel cries, “If I tell you his name, he will kill me.”

He then pulls back the hammer and presses the muzzle into the hustler’s sweating forehead and says, “What do you think I’m gonna do? I’m here now, holding the gun to your head. Worry about me.”

Now that Congress has made the choice to aid and abet Barack Obama in his theft and corruption of the U.S. Presidency, the legislative branch of American government, like the Judicial Branch before it, has become the proverbial, pathetic hustler trying to deny and suppress the truth about Obama’s identity.

What is congress afraid of? The loss of American sovereignty? No. They could care less about the blood ransom paid to even have a constitution or the sacrifices made for 300 years to call ourselves an independent, sovereign nation. Maybe Congress is afraid of the legislative failure of our Constitutional protections? Nope. They think rights are given by government, not God.

Maybe they wish to avoid hurting Obama’s little feelings at the expense of our Constitutional?

Actually, the reality is far more offensive than anyone can imagine. Congress refuses to obey it’s Constitutional oath to protect the American people from Obama’s criminal usurpation of power because it is afraid of…that’s right Rosa Parks and Dr. King…angry black people.

First of all, all of you black Americans should feel insulted by Obama and this Congress. They consider you no more than rabid, angry animals unable to control yourselves. Essentially, in refusing to investigate Obama’s ineligibility as President, Congress is saying to your face that they are more afraid to uphold what is morally right and Constitutionally lawful within the very nation you helped build with your blood, sweat and tears, because they think you are too animalistic to control your behavior in the face of the truth that America’s first bi-racial president isn’t actually the president at all, and, moreover, he isn’t even an American citizen.

Let that soak in my black brothers and sisters. In 300 years, nothing has changed in how this government treats you. You are to be feared, loathed, patronized in your ignorance and pacified in your anger by a cowardly ruling class. You are to be considered unable to understand the difference between racialism and morality. You are not civilized human beings to this government…you are merely a potential riot that can happen at any time. You are seen by the color of your skin…not the content of your character.

Congress knows the truth about Obama. They already know he is a fraud and a criminal usurper. That weight is crushing their ability to govern effectively because it is insanguiating the confidence of their constituencies. Congressional integrity is bleeding out. However, they also are aware, repressively if not consciously, that they are now accountable for the fall of this nation because of their choice to ignore the moment of truth. They failed to uphold the rule of law prescribed in the doctrinal foundations of the Constitution, and now they are left with the teeth-gnashing reality that there are no more available precedents upon which to justify their rank and repulsive derelictions, or their weak attempts at mitigating what they fear.

Let’s recap the reasons why Congress must investigate the identity of Barack Obama.

1. The Unenforced Definition of “Natural-Born Citizenship”. The U.S. Constitution requires that a presidential candidate be a Natural-Born Citizen in order to be eligible for the office of President.

In seeking to define the meaning of "natural born citizenship", those who blindly support Obama desperately seek a minimalist’s definition of the term. They desire that a natural-born citizen is one to whom may be ascribed as few requirements as possible in order that a candidate, with whom they share ideological fetishes, can be president regardless of his actual fitness for the office. They seek to assume jurisdiction over the declaration of being “natural born” in the minds of as many as possible while contending that "natural born citizenship" means the fewest, most remedial natal circumstances possible, which will allow their politigod, Barack Obama, just enough legitimacy to squeak by and be eligible. Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued, though obviously unverifiable characteristics of Obama's obscure citizenry, in this case, his birth place.

However, unfortunately for Obama supporters, the purposed intent of our founders was not so slight in this matter. They sought to make the meaning of being a Natural born citizen the highest, most laudable position of all forms of citizenry. After witnessing the corruption and inbreeding and treasons of monarchal rule, America’s founders desired that becoming President of the United States to be as difficult as possible…politically, socially and biologically. All arguments seeking to diminish this truth are reprobate and defamatory, made in the interest of serving one's own political lust, not defending the sovereignty of our Constitution or upholding the value of the blood ransom paid by our people. Hence, logically, our founders induced that the highest form of eligibility for the highest office would be a lawful mandate.

Consider the following:

Taking survey of all possible circumstances
which, therefore, lend credibility to one's claim to legitimacy, and thereby,
eligibility to lead, there is much more to consider than simply one's location
of birth. In order to meet the highest standard intended by our founders, we
must also consider that biology must also meet this standard.
Not only is it essential that a presidential candidate be born under the
sovereign geographic protection of our Constitution, he must also be conceived
by two parents of native citizenry, possessing U.S. citizenship.

Moreover, let's consider further extension of this ideal
by commanding that a presidential candidate also be conceived
legitimately within the bounds of legal marriage of their parentage. Having been
measured and found wanton, those subservient to bias for persons over their
respect for the office would not embrace this noble ideal. For them,
uplifting the standard of the presidency remains an inferior cause to
diminishing the requirements in order to provide access for their inferior candidate. Therefore, they seek to minimize the standard, not maximize the person. Of course, this would disqualify many from being the President...as so it should!

However, let's not even stop there. We should also
assume that our founders sought to ensure that a presidential candidate had also preserved their Natural-born citizenship from "conception to
election", never having allowed it to be revoked, or never having it revoked
even against their will. For, even those who lose their eligibility to no fault
of their own should bear up in faith that this is the intention of higher power,
sacrificing for the sake of sovereignty of the office rather than opportunity
for the man!

Let all of these metrics define the standards of
Natural-born citizenship in America. Bannish minimalism and seek the highest
mark in the spirit of exceptionalism forged by our forefathers! Hold this mantle
lest that crown be stolen by any upon the earth without seeking the interests of
God and country first! Daringly and boldly, let these marks serve as the highest
definition of humanity's advanced citizenship and the prescribed metrics for
eligibility to be President of the U.S.!

We should set a higher bar, not lower it. It is impossible to choose one's own Natural-born citizenship because it is preeminent and incumbent to one's birth. Historical writings, along with related legal precedents strongly suggest this form of citizenship is achieved when natural circumstances make it impossible for that individual to have any citizenship or allegiances other than with the United States at the time they are elected as President. Research of America's founding culture reveals that a very heavy emphasis was placed on legitimacy at birth. Therefore, it is probable that one's most authentic degree of Natural born identity does not occur at birth, but at conception. With this in mind, we must consider that the framers of the Constitution assumed it was commonly understood that the definition of "Natural-born citizenship" for a presidential candidate to mean a citizenship status that was not just acheived by the event of birth but that it was a maintained status from "conception to election" in order to qualify a sovereign candidate. This is the most complete definition of Natural born citizenship possible. There is no other degree of more complete natural circumstances which can establish the status of one's existence.

Therefore, theoretically, Natural-born citizenship, in its purest, ineradicable form, could be measured by three metrics: 1.) Biological conception by two U.S. citizen parents, 2.) birth in a geographic region under the protection of the U.S. Constitution 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. As a result, Hawaii’s Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as “Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States”.

Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi, take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal. This has never happened in the history of America’s vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obama's candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.

6. State Ballot-Fail! It is the responsibility of each states' party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve in coordination with their state’s laws. Since Obama was not Constitutionally certified to run in the state of Hawaii in 2008, no other Secretary of State, in any state, ever confirmed that Obama was vetted by federal or party authorities in their state prior to being placed on the 2008 Presidential ballot there. In fact, nearly a dozen Secretaries of State, including Hawaii’s, have officially refused to reveal any information about the vetting of Barack Obama in their state because they simply cannot even show that he was actually proven to be eligible there.

7. PUMA: The First Birthers. In early summer, 2007, the so called “Birther” conspiracy theory was first created by renegade members of an ultra leftist group known as the PUMAs. (That’s right! They were leftists). They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to surrender the Democrat party nomination to Obama after a hard fought campaign leading to the 2008 Democratic nomination. In June, 2008, PUMAParty.com began promoting the idea that their party’s nomination of Barack Obama could be overturned on constitutional grounds that he was not eligible to be president based on the fact that he may not be a natural born citizen. Thus, the Birther movement actually began in the minds of liberals, not “right-wing nuts” as Obama zealots love to claim.

8. Hawaiian Certi-Fiction. Shortly after PUMAparty.com began clamoring for a more thorough review of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility, the image of a document containing sparse information about Obama’s alleged birth was posted on the internet by undisclosed sources, from an unknown origin. The image appeared on extreme leftwing websites like the Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and later on two websites claiming to be non-partisan reviewers, Factcheck.org and politifact.com. One of the fact checking sites is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation from which the Chicago Annenberg Project received a large educational grant. Obama served as the chair on the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Project in 2002.

9. CertificaTION Of Identity, not Natural Birth. The 2008 document image was determined to be created by an unknown source from a digital template form of a Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which is a surrogate, independently published, municipal cover document issued to those applying for copies of birth certificates in the state of Hawaii since 2000. In response to Y2K system updates the State of Hawaii began migrating from paper copies of original birth records to digitally created printed documents. The state of Hawaii openly admits to changing its document format under the guise of preventing identity theft.

10. Cartoon Fun. In 2009, it was demonstrated by three separate document specialists that an image of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was easily constructed and falsely authenticated using two different medical imaging software programs. This demonstration discredited the State of Hawaii’s claims that its “Certification of Live Birth” provided better protection against identity theft than old paper copies of the Certificate of Live Birth.

11. Department of Hawaiian Native Homelands. The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was found to be so unreliable in clarifying the bearer’s legal and demographic identity that the State of Hawaii’s own Department of Native Homelands refused to accept it as a primary source of identification for its applicants seeking to purchase Hawaiian land reserved for genealogically native Hawaiians. Before 2010, the agency’s website stated:

"In order to process your application for identification as a native Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands utilizes information that is found only on the Original (Long Form) Vault Birth Certificate (‘Certificate of Live Birth’, not ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’), which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of birth than the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Long Form Birth Certificate will save you time and money since the computer-generated ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ requires additional verification…"

Only after it was determined that the Department of Hawaiian Homeland’s policy against the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” conflicted with another Hawaiian state agency, the Department of Health’s, political endorsement of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, was the policy changed and the wording against the credibility of the document scrubbed from its website. This led many to accuse the State of Hawaii government of selling out to protect against exposing the ineligibility of Obama rather than upholding the eligibility of thousands of potential native land owners in Hawaii. Some actually accused Hawaii’s land management of selling out to a liar while native Hawaiians were at risk of being deprived of their right to purchase native lands because non-natives could now use a less credible version of identification when applying for a land purchase.

12. Hawaii Denies COLB Image. After all was said and done, the State of Hawaii has refused to ever confirm that it issued the 2008 document image. In light of sophisticated, digitally based document imaging technology, the authenticity of the image remains highly questionable, especially without the official endorsement of the Hawaiian Health Department. Some independent reviewers have, unequivocally, determined the image to be a forgery.

13. The Million Dollar Birth Cerificate. On August 21, 2008, Philadelphia based attorney, Philip Berg, filed the first of several high profile cases attempting to force Obama to show authentic, legal, original documentation proving that he is eligible to be president of the U.S. Berg is a lifelong, registered Democrat with a history of running for Democratic office in Philadelphia. Following Berg’s case, other plaintiffs have filed similar suits including Alan Keyes and several military officers, all of which have been dismissed by irresponsible judges refusing to weigh the merits of evidence in the cases. Some judges have even gone on record as saying the reason they dismissed their case was because “Questions about Obama’s eligibility had already been answered on Twitter.” Since then, Obama has paid more than 1.6 million dollars to the Washington law firm, Perkins Coie to prevent the release of his original birth certificate, which costs about 20 dollars to order from the State of Hawaii.

14. Executive Order No. 13489. Obama was ensconced as President on January 20, 2009. Just one day after his inauguration, he signed Executive Order No. 13489 which essentially violates the Freedom of Information Act and prohibits the release of Obama’s personal and presidential records, during and after his presidency, by the National Archives without first being consulted by the National Archives Director and the Attorney General. Seven days later, Obama gave his famous “Transparency Will Be the Touchstone of This Administration" speech in which he hypocritically admonished previous administrations for what he feels are "too many secrets kept by government in Washington". Obama vowed to change how government deals with secret information by making his administration more open. Since this dishonest, landmark speech, the Administration has fought to keep Obama’s past secret more than any other President in American history.

15. 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 was found to have become a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist. Obama Sr. would later return to Kenya sometime in the mid 1960’s to promote his communist economic theories and work in government with his friend and leader of Kenya’s communist KANU party, Tom Mboya.

21. Hawaiian Document Proven Deficient. In August, 2008, a former U.S. Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics Registrar stated that the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” cannot be considered an original birth certificate created at the time of occurrence of the birth because “…it does not contain the signature of the licensed medical professional qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth in accordance with administrative requirements established by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division, and it does not contain the name and location of the hospital which issued the original record, which would be a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” if the child was born in the United States.” Further investigation of Hawaii’s revised statutes reveal that the Hawaiian Department of Health not only contends with federal law, it also contradicts its own self-declared authority to issue falsified birth nativity under HRS 338-17.

22. Hawaii’s Self-endowed Permission To Violate Federal Law. Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338-17.8 states:

“Certificates for children born out of State.(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”

The law permits anyone born to parents who claimed Hawaii as their residence within one year of their birth, at any time before or after the enactment of the law, regardless of the actual location of the birth, to receive an original birth record which states that the location of birth is Hawaii, and, therefore, occurred in the U.S. Hawaiian lawmakers have confirmed that the law is not constrained to the date of birth. It is applicable to the date of application for the certificate. This means this law would enable Obama, anytime after the age of 21 to apply for and receive a newly created original Hawaiian birth certificate after providing evidence that his mother or father merely resided in Hawaii for one year prior to his birth. He could have applied for this certificate any time since is parents are known to have resided in Hawaii since 1960. He could have been born outside of the U.S., however, the State of Hawaii is obligated by law to grant him an original birth certificate stating that Hawaii is his birth place simply because he was able to show that his parents claimed Hawaii as their residence. Moreover, the evidence provided with Obama’s application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.

23. Obama’s Own Words. On page 26 of his 1995 Autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama admits to possessing a copy of his original birth certificate in the late 1970’s. This document was an official copy of an original vital record assumed to still be filed with the office of Vital Statistics in the city where Obama was born, wherever that is. Why does Obama not still possess this copy and where is the original used to produce it? Where is the official, original birth record used to produce the document which Obama himself admits to having more than thirty years before being issued a fake document from Hawaii? Why is Obama lying about this document? What information does this document contain?

24. Obama Loses Natural-Born U.S. Citizenship By Adoption. Barack Obama claims to have lived in Indonesia with his mother from approximately 1967 to 1971 where he assumed the surname of his step father, Lolo Soetoro and became a citizen of Indonesia. Since Obama became a citizen of Indonesia, he forfeited any claim he may have had to Natural-born citizenship in the U.S. Recall, a Natural-born citizen is one whose citizenship is achieved by natural circumstances which, if unrevoked, make it impossible for them to have citizenship loyalties to any other governing power. If a Natural-born citizen becomes a citizen of another country at any time prior to running for the office of the president, he or she is no longer eligible. Because of this forfeiture, Obama is not eligible to be president because his Natural-born status cannot be reclaimed once legal or administrative procedures are employed to repatriate him in the U.S. Also, despite Obama’s claims that he remained in Indonesia during this time, there is photographic evidence placing him in Hawaii in 1969. Questions remain how and why Obama may have traveled to Hawaii at this time, including any documentation he used, which raises doubts about the validity of his origins narrative, and therefore, doubts about his identity.

25. What’s In a Name? Barry or Barack, Soetoro or Obama, or Subarkah? Records from his time in Indonesia reveal that Barack Obama has used at least one other alias and possibly two. He was registered for school under the name Barry Soetoro as a muslim student. When Obama applied for state bar license in 1992 to practice law in Illinois, the application asked if he had ever used an alias. He stated that he had not at that time. There is evidence that suggests Obama was not honest about his use of other names throughout his life. Recent passport application information submitted by his mother in the 1960’s reveals that Obama may have had a third surname of “Subarkah” which his mother had written on the application.

26. Dunham’s Secret Absence. Many records exist confirming Ann Dunham’s presence in Hawaii from late summer of 1960 until February of 1961. However, from February until September, 1961, there are no records or eyewitness accounts of her presence in Hawaii. In fact, the void is quite stark. Obama was allegedly born during this void of time in Dunham’s documented life. The next record indicating her possible location is a class registration record showing that she had enrolled in classes for fall term of 1961 at the University of Washington, just two weeks after allegedly giving birth to Obama in Hawaii.

27. Dunham Too Young To Confer Citizenship. Ann Dunham turned 19 years old in November, 1961, almost four months after Obama was allegedly born in August, 1961. Citizenship laws in effect in the U.S. in 1961 required the mother of a child born outside the U.S., to a foreign father, to have lived in the U.S. for 14 consecutive years, five of which had to be after the age of 14. Since Dunham had not yet turned 19, she was not legally able to confer citizenship to Obama if the birth occurred outside the U.S. Therefore, Obama is, at a minimum, a citizen of Great Britain. The founding fathers, in writing the eligibility mandate, having fought a Revolutionary War against Great Britain, would have rejected Obama as a presidential candidate for this reason.

28. Hospital Mystery. No official records have ever been provided from any authoritative source to prove that Barack Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Not one administrative authority from Kapi’olani has ever verified or provided original patient records showing that Ann Dunham was ever a maternity patient there. As a testament to the longstanding controversy over Obama’s birth hospital, in the original ‘Early Life’ section of Barack Obama’s Wikipedia biography, beginning on March 3, 2004, it was stated that he was born in Queens Hospital. It was later clarified as Queens Medical Center. In 2006, it was omitted and remained blank until June, 2008 when editors stated that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center. On January 24, 2009, Kapi’olani Medical Center, on the occasion of the hospital’s centennial celebration, allegedly received a letter in which Obama wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your voice of supporters.” It was later admitted by administrators at Kapi'olani that the letter was a facsimile created in a digital format. To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center.

To date, Obama's operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obama's actual birthing doctor.

29. Obama’s Use of Multiple Social Security Numbers. In 2010, Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John Sampson revealed that President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, not 1961 at the time of Obama’s birth. Moreover, Obama’s earliest employment reportedly was around 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins in Oahu, Hawaii. The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his SSN are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses and start with 040 through 049.

“Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office,” the Social Security website explains, “The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number.”

In April, 2011, further investigation by ex-CIA personnel confirmed that Obama’s social security number was fraudulently issued after the original owner of the number, who had once resided in Connecticut, died in Hawaii in 1977. As a result, it is now supported by evidence that Barack Obama is committing social security fraud and that his number was issued through channels possibly provided by his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, who worked in the financial and banking industry and who had ties to communist support organizations and international interests. It is highly likely that Obama, when issued his current social security number, was not a legal citizen of the U.S. and, having access to records through his grandmother, was allowed to use the number after its original owner had died. It has been shown that the original owner of Obama’s social security number had opened at least one account at the bank where Madelyn Dunham was employed in Hawaii in 1965.

30. Obama’s Father Not a U.S. Citizen. Obama’s alleged father was a Kenyan national with citizenship in Great Britain. His birth registration is recorded in the British National Archives, General Register Office "Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the Protectorates of Africa and Asia, 1895-1965". Obama's children are also contained in these registers. He attended the University of Hawaii from 1959 to 1961 before abandoning Obama Jr. and Dunham to attend graduate school at Harvard in 1962. Since Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, it is impossible for Obama to be a natural-born citizen.

The Hawaiian "Certification of Live Birth" which has been misrepresented as the federally accepted, official document issued by the state of Hawaii for Barack Obama's birth shows Obama's father's race as "African". Unfortunately, this term violates the U.S. Department of Health's acceptable classifications of race for official birth certificates. According to NVSD protocols, Obama Sr. is classified as a "Negro" in 1961, not "African". The term "African" is not even an option in the NVSD manual. Africa is a continent not a race. For example, there are white people from Africa, but they would not be categorized as "African". Using this premise, we could argue that Obama's Certification of Live Birth should also list his mother's race as "North American"? If using geographic association in describing Obama's mother's race is so ridiculous, why is it acceptable to explain his father's?

The use of the term "African" to describe the race of Obama's father is yet another diminishment to the credibility and authenticity of Obama's natal records. The inclusion of such a non-specific, vague, unclassifiable, misrepresentative term to describe an individual's demography only raises yet more doubts about the ability of the Hawaiian Health Department to convey accurate vital statisics documentation.

31. Obama Marriage Mystery. To date, no documented evidence exists proving that a legal marriage between Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham ever occurred in the U.S. The two were allegedly married in Hawaii in early 1961, after Obama Jr. was allegedly conceived sometime in November, 1960. However, no public announcement, or eyewitness of the marriage or marriage license has ever been found.

In Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father”, he states, “In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky. A bill of particulars I have never quite had the courage to explore. There is no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No family members were in attendance. It is not even clear that people back in Kansas were even informed."

Obama's admission that 'There is no record of a real wedding', raises yet another doubt about his long disseminated, life biography with regard to the status of the relationship between his parents. The unanswered questions about his parents marriage contradicts the accuracy of testimony and records declaring Obama's identity, such as his birth announcements in two Honolulu newspapers which undeniably state that his parents were married, and divorce documents which do not contain any reference to a legal marriage license. There are fundamental questions about the relationship between Obama's parents which no one has been able to answer. If they were married in Hawaii, what is the name of the officiate presiding at the wedding? Where did it take place? Does the Hawaiian Vital Statistics office possess a copy of the Obama's marriage license which they used to determined their marital status for the birth announcements? If so, why was the Obama marriage never announced in those same papers? Why was the wedding kept secret? Was the marriage even legal given the evidence that Obama Sr. was already married to a woman in Kenya?


32. Divorce Decree and Custody Documents. In 2009, a set of what appears to be authentic document images of a Divorce Decree shows that Stanley Ann Dunham was awarded an uncontested divorce from Obama Sr. in March, 1964. The Divorce was granted in a Hawaiian civil Court on March 5, 1964 after a hearing to determine custody rights of the parents of Barack Obama Jr. According to the document images, Dunham had filed for divorce in January, 1964. The set of documents posted on the internet in 2009 are suspiciously missing the official birth certificate of Barack Obama Jr. which was requested by the court in order to confirm parentage.

33. Obama Sr. Already Married. Obama’s father was apparently a bigamist. He was allegedly already married to a woman in Kenya when he allegedly married Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. Obama’s other wife’s name was Kezia Aoko (also found as other spellings). This would nullify any marriage to Dunham because it is illegal in the U.S. to be married to more than one person.

34. Suspicious Death. Obama Sr. died in 1982 after an alleged car accident. Recent investigations into his death reveal unanswered questions about his declining professional status and his strained relationship with Tom Mboya after he published a scathing report called, “The Problem with Our Socialism”, criticizing Mboya’s economic development plan for Kenya.

35. Birth Announcements. In early 2009, researchers discovered announcements of Obama’s birth in two separate Honolulu-based news papers. An investigation of the procedures used to publish birth announcements reveals that the information used by the news papers came directly from the Hawaiian Department of Health’s bi-weekly birth registration lists. These birth announcements are typically published for registrations over a two week period and do not contain the location of the birth. The announcements always assume, without exception, that the parents are married, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” reveals that of the 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, there were 1044 illegitimate births in which the father was not identifiable. An average of three per day!

In every case, without exception, both papers publish all announcements with the surname of the father as if they are always married and with the assumption that two parents always exist at the time of birth, even when the father is dead. The announcements do not publish the first names of the parents or child, nor do they identify the name of the registrant. They publish the sex of the child, the address of the registrant and the day and month of the birth. The announcements do not print the location of the birth, the name of the attending physician, the name of the hospital, the time of birth or the given name of the child.

36. The Paper Chase. An analysis of all of the birth announcements published along with Obama’s announcements in both newspapers reveals that both papers published the exact same announcements, including quantity of birth announcements, in the same exact order and in the same exact contextual format in both papers. The announcements are not published in alphabetical or chronological order which begs the question: What system was used to determine their order? They are obviously not randomly ordered since they appear in the same order in both papers. The possible answer: Geographic birth registration numbering. An investigation of the U.S. Department of Health’s archived natal data reports reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on the location of the registration office they are received in.

37. Obama’s Other Address. The birth announcements were published containing the registrant’s address at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., Honolulu, HI. This address has been proven by investigators to be the residence of Obama’s grandparents, Stanley and Madeline Dunham, as well as Obama’s mother. Directory records available in 1961 show that Obama’s father, Obama Sr., resided in an apartment at 625 11th Avenue, near the University of Hawaii. Why would a married man list an address for the birth of his son that was not his address?

38. Birth Registration Protocols. An investigation reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on their associated location to the regional vital statistics registration office in which the vital event is recorded. There were four such offices available in Hawaii in 1961, two of which served immigration processing and vital events originating outside the Hawaiian Islands. Obama’s alleged birth registration number, 151-1961-010641, indicates that his birth was registered in one of these regional offices.

39. Non-Sequential Birth Registration. Obama’s birth registration number appears to be non-sequential with other births recorded at the time of his birth. One example cites the standard “Certificate of Live Birth” records of twins born to Eleanor Nordyke, whose births occurred 19 hrs after Obama’s alleged birth in Kapi’olani Medical Center. The twins were assigned birth registration numbers ending in 037 and 038, respectively. Obama’s birth was assigned number 041 despite the fact that his birth allegedly occurred before the twins in the very same hospital. If no other births occurred between Obama’s and the Nordyke’s, one would expect that Obama’s birth registration number would end in 036, not 041. If other births did occur in the 19 hours between Obama’s and the Nordykes’, Obama’s registration number would be expected to be even lower.

40. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii's Reluctant Accomplice. On October 31st, 2008, and, again on July 27th, 2009, the Director of the Hawaiian Department of Health released the only two official statements by the government of the State of Hawaii about Obama’s natal records. In her October, 2008 statement she release the following:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.”

The statement does not specify the type of original birth certificate on record and directly contradicts statements made by an official of the Hawaiian elections Office that the State of Hawaii does not possess an original birth certificate for Obama. Fukino further clarified her statement eight months later with the following:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

The problem with this second statement is, first, she, again, does not identify the title of the “original vital records” documents she has seen. Notice she uses the word “records”, plural. Whether they are a U.S. Certificate of Live Birth, a Delayed Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Foreign Birth accompanied with testimonial documents, medical records or other evidence is not disclosed by Fukino.

Second, she violated Hawaii’s identity protection law, the very same HRS 338-18 she cited in her first statement, by disclosing information from the vital records about Obama’s unverified birth place. If she is so willing to provide this private information, why not disclose the rest of it? Answer: Because this information serves the bias of the State of Hawaii's endorsement of Obama's legitimacy. Otherwise, Fukino would also disclose the other information that perhaps is NOT so favorable to Obama, as well, such as the title of the 'original vital records' or whether the certificate had been amended.

Third, and most grievous, as a state-level, municipal employee way out in the State of Hawaii, Fukino neither has the federal authority, nor the qualifications to determine the Natural-born status of a candidate for federal office. In fact, Fukino's audacious, bizarre proclamation is laughable and only exposes the State of Hawaii's fragile confidence in their documentation procedures, let alone its ability to declare the historical meaning of Natural-born citizenship. That job falls under the federal authority of the Secret Service, the State Department in coordination with the state Elections Offices.

41. Hawaii’s Amazing Legitimate Birth Rate. Both papers also published the nearly two dozen announcements assuming that every child was born to married parents living at the same address, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” shows that there were 1044 illegitimate births in Hawaii in 1961 in which the father was not identifiable. This is an average of three illegitimate births per day! Over the nine day period of births covered by the announcements in these two issues, one would expect to see at least one single mother, or unmarried couple, giving birth among the more than two dozen announcements surrounding Obama’s birth from late July to early August, 1961. In fact, a review of every issue of the newspapers in the entire year of 1961 shows that all birth announcements were published by “married parents”. If the newspapers indeed printed accurate announcements based on testimony from the actual parents or family members there should be some information which does not conform to this cookie-cutter identical format when comparing each announcement between newspapers. However, the rigidity of the format, and the possibility of inaccuracies, led investigators to conclude that the originating information used to publish birth announcements in 1961 was not conveyed from the parents or family directly to the newspapers, but instead was first processed by a single municipal source, before being provided to the news papers.

Therefore, since we know Hawaii registers foreign births as being native births, the announcements would be published without the location of the birth, or marital status of the parents, as a consideration. This then would suggest that if there is any inaccuracy originating with the source information, which occurs in the transference between the registrant and the municipal authority, the newspapers would never see the necessity to confirm the accuracy of the information. Why would a newspaper take official information certified from a government agency in the form of a list and then expend resources to get a second opinion about its accuracy from the original registrant? They wouldn’t. The newspapers print announcements without ever knowing if they are accurate or not when the information comes from the local municipal authority. Therefore, since the municipal authority does not create its birth list discerning between native birth and foreign birth registrations it employs the policy of only publishing the address of the registrant, not the location of the birth. Since the municipal authority treats all births as legitimate, by default, it would construct the birth registration list as though the parents are married in every announcement and submit the list to the newspapers who would publish what appears to be all local, native births to married couples. The problem with this flawed procedure is that the announcements are not an accurate account of the actual facts of the natal event. Unfortunately, there is no legal requirement that a birth announcement in a newspaper must match the metrics of an official birth certificate.

42. The Welfare of Baby Obama. Upon analyzing the procedures used to publish birth announcements, we discover vulnerabilities in the assumptions about the accuracy and content of the birth announcements. With a simple explanation, it becomes much more reasonable to assume that Obama’s birth announcements were never a part of some crazy-minded conspiracy but, instead, were simply the result of being included in the Hawaiian Health Departments birth registration lists after Obama’s birth was registered by Obama’s grandparents, more than likely, for the simple reason of making sure their daughter and grandson could receive state benefits as resident citizens of the U.S. Obama’s grandparents were indeed residing at the published address found in the announcements. However, ignorant, hostile Obama supporters enjoy the opportunity to claim that so-called “birthers” believe a conspiracy of such magnitude that Obama’s birth announcements were planted in the Hawaiian papers in 1961 just in case Obama might run for president some day. This is a ridiculous canard. Only a blind ideologue would fail to realize that birth announcements do not verify Constitutional eligibility in the first place.

Therefore, both sides of the argument, either lauding birth announcements or ridiculing them, as a viable part of any conspiracy to promote the legitimacy of Obama is idiotic. If Obama's birth announcements were not automatically conveyed by the registrar, they were more than likely submitted in collaboration with his mother or grandparents as a practical matter in order to simply share the news of Obama's birth with the community and to, possibly, act to secure Obama’s eligibility for welfare and baby formula, not a nomination to the presidency. However, without publishing the identity of the registrant, the editors of the newspapers printed all of the week’s announcements based on typically practiced protocols after receiving the official birth lists from the Hawaiian Department of Health. There was nothing premeditated or fraudulent about this. Municipal laws were followed and journalistic standards were correctly assumed considering the official source in the newspapers’ view. The possible breakdown in accuracy occurred as a result of the Department of Health’s legal ability to include foreign births in the Hawaiian birth registration lists and the registrant omitting birth location information, while the papers did not print it any way.

43. Obama’s Secret Natal Data. According to the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of theU.S. Volume 1 – Natality”, natal statistics were harvested using a “50% sampling method” and, furthermore, statistics were taken only from “even-numbered birth records” in 1961. Since Obama’s birth registration was allegedly an odd number, his unique natal statistics would remain ureported by the State of Hawaii, and unpublished as part of the U.S. Department of Health's annual natal data report. This is relative in the fact that, since Obama was a bi-racial, (categorized as non-white) baby allegedly born to an 18-year old, white mother and a non-white, non-citizen father, in an urban hospital in Hawaii in August of 1961, his natal statistics would be extremely notable and rare for this time and place. In fact, statistics show that less than 1 in 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, But Probable Story. Of all the sordid stories circulating about Obama’s past, the one told by Larry Sinclair is the darkest. Sinclair posted a YouTube video alleging that he and President Barack Obama engaged in sexual acts and drug use together in 1999, when Obama was an Illinois State Senator. He claims that then-State Senator Obama procured powdered cocaine for Sinclair, and crack cocaine for himself, which Obama allegedly smoked. Sinclair also alleges that their drug use was followed by sex acts that included Sinclair performing fellatio on Obama. These acts were alleged to take place in a limousine from which Sinclair provided cell phone records to prove his location on the dates in question. Testimony from the limosine driver has never been publicly published. Sinclair was asked to provide "intimate details" about Obama's physical features which would prove Sinclair's claims. His testimony has never been published or made public. Sinclair confesses openly that he is a convicted felon having served time for check fraud and drug possession. Sinclair repeated his claims about his relationship with Obama in a highly publicized press conference at the National Press Club on June 18, 2008.

48. Passport Documents Released. Documents released in July, 2010, and posted on the Scribd.com website, show that Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, applied for a passport in 1981, the same year Obama traveled to Pakistan. Dunham’s applications show that she had applied for and received three separate passports and a renewal between 1965 and 1981. However, in yet another example of convenient government complicity to obscure Obama’s actual past, the Hillary Clinton-led State Department claims that a General Services Administration directive in the 1980s resulted in the destruction of passport applications and other "non-vital" passport records, including Dunham's 1965 passport application and any other passports she may have applied for, or held, prior to 1965. The released records also document that on Aug. 13, 1968, Ann Dunham applied to have her 1965-issued passport renewed for two years, until July 18, 1970. The documents also reveal yet another possible name used to identify Barack Barry Hussein Obama Soetoro. According to the application for Dunham’s 1976 passport she uses the parenthetical name of (saebarkah), or perhaps “Subarkah”, which is a surname commonly found among Indonesian citizenry. The existence of records of a passport or travel documents prior to 1965 would reveal information on Dunham’s circumstances at the time of Obama’s birth. Therefore, we can now add Ann Dunham’s original passport to the litany of records and documents now missing from Obama’s biographical history.

49. Tim Adams. In July, 2010, Tim Adams, a senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu Elections Office in 2008, made the stunning claim Barack Obama definitely was not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, based on information he was told by the Vital Statistics office in Hawaii that there is no original birth record on file for Barack Obama. In a televised interview, Adams reported that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State. Adams' statements conflicted directly with repeated affirmations by public officials in Hawaii that they had seen or had inspected Obama's birth records that would document his representations that he was born in the state."There is no birth certificate," said Adams after leaving his position with the Elections Office and now teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green. "It's like an open secret. There isn't one. Everyone in the government there knows this. I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters' identity.

50. Hawaiian Governor Offended. In December, 2010, newly elected Hawaiian Democratic governor, Neil Abercrombie proclaimed that he is undertaking an effort, in consultation with the Hawaiian Attorney General, to make Obama’s original birth documentation available to the public. In making his proclamation, Abercrombie claims that since he was a friend of the Obama’s during their attendance at the University of Hawaii and thereafter, he is personally offended by accusation from doubters that the Obama’s were involved in nefarious dealings with regard to Obama’s natal identity. Abercrombie said he also feels it is disrespectful to the office of the presidency to question Obama’s eligibility. Despite being an alleged friend of the Obama family, Abercrombie was not invited to the couple’s alleged Hawaiian wedding in 1961, nor was he present at the alleged 1961 Hawaiian birth of Obama.

In response to Abercrombie’s proclamations, both Fox and MSNBC, while reporting on the story, admitted for the first time that Obama had not yet released an original version of his official, 1961, federal, U.S. Certificate of Live Birth signed by the attending physician bearing the name and seal of the hospital.

After exercising all of his gubernatorial power, Abercrombie later admitted to media that he could not find any official, original standard Certificate of Live Birth for Obama. Four months later, Hawaii released the image of the very document Abercrombie allegedly could not find.

51. Caught In the Lie: The Forgery of Obama’s “Long Form Certificate of Live Birth”. On April 27, 2011, the Obama White House confirmed the release of a digital image of a purported document claimed by White House officials and Obama himself as his official, original Long Form Certificate of Live Birth issued by the Hawaii Health Department. In the months following the image’s release, multiple document analysts and computer experts have denounced the image as a forgery stating that it exhibits “…blatant and poorly concealed artifacts and characteristics which make it impossible to have been created in the 1960’s before printing and typographic technologies existed…” which are shown to have been used to produce the document. One expert, with more than 30 years of experience with Adobe called the image a “literal joke”.

Among many of the document’s failures at authenticity are the artifacts revealing it was produced by a computer printer, not a typewriter, technology which did not exist in the State of Hawaii’s Health Department in 1961.

Conclusion

The only thing missing from Congress’ lack of respect for black Americans is the shipmaster and the crack of whips loading them all on.

Congress thinks you are too angry and stupid to understand that Obama’s crime has nothing to do with your race, but rather it has everything to do with corruption and deception. Or maybe they really don’t know that Obama is also half white…as if that mattered.

Congressman Bob Goodlatte stated in a recent letter to a constituent the most accurate account of this epic failure. He said:

“The Office of the Presidency is undermined if Americans don’t have confidence that the candidates for the highest office in the land are qualified for the position as required by the Constitution.”

Notice that Goodlatte does not say, correctly so, that the American presidency is undermined ‘…only if the it is proven that the indivual occupying the office is a fraud…”
No. He says it is undermined if, and merely if, Americans don’t have confidence that the candidate is qualified…”

Barack Obama has, therefore, been measured and found wanton. He has undermined the American presidency, because Americans do not have confidence that he is qualified. Their confidence is not bound by legal proof of Obama’s legality…nor is it bound to some liberal claim to social justice in having a bi-racial president. America’s confidence is bound and held by the historical moorings which serve as the immovable anchoring to our blood-ransomed heritage, our freedom and our Constitutional sovereignty as the greatest nation in human history.

Tragically, Congress has become the weasel from whom vintage America is demanding, “Investigate Obama and find out his real identity. Who is he? Where did he come from? Why did you allow him to commit the greatest criminal deception in American history?”

Congress is quivering, saying, “If we investigate Obama, black people will riot and kill us.”
Clicking the hammer back, vintage America is replying, “What do you think we’re gonna do? Worry about us.”

What is living in American worth if we allow liars and illegitimate usurpers to gain access to our pristine thrones? It destroys us all…black, white and everyone in between.

Let justice be done though the heavens fall.