Follow The Bouncing Ball

I was mulling over some of the little nitpicky things that people on both sides of the obama eligibility battle tend to get hung up on.

Lets begin, and if I don’t finish this up today, I’ll add to it in a few days.

Some say…..obama can’t produce a certified copy of his original long form, hospital generated birth certificate because it’s sealed due to the adoption by Lolo Soetoro.

Answer:  Then how is it that Obama Sr.’s name appears on that COLB?

The adoption would have had to have been set aside, as there have been some indications did happen.  I refer to some story about how when “Barry Soetoro” was 18 or so, he went to a Judge on Thanksgiving and then showed up in his sister’s presence announcing, “No more Barry”.  Hence the multiple birth records.  Something like that -it was a long time ago that I heard that story.

So, they can’t have it both ways.  Either the COLB is a screaming forgery because it has Obama Sr. listed, or obama can indeed release his original certificate because clearly there is no “adoptive parent”/sealed original certificate restriction.

Of course, there has never been a copy of adoption records, just that Soetoro made the claim on a Indonesia school registration form that obama was his kid and was also Indonesian.

“The nation of Citizenship: Indonesia”

Some say…..obama released a perfectly legal and certified COLB, which is proof enough that he was born in Hawaii.

On this COLB, this item that is the single, solitary piece of evidence of US birth that obama has released, we find something highly unusual:

The “Father’s race” field indicates Obama Sr.’s race as “African”.  This is one thing that almost every one agrees is most strange.  Have YOU ever in your life seen or heard of a US birth certificate showing a parents race as the Continent of Africa?  I didn’t think so.  Africa is a continent consisting of many countries, it is not a race of people.  If say, Obama Sr. would have DEMANDED in no uncertain terms that he wished to be coded as something other than Negro,  which was the code in use in  1961, wouldn’t he have been more likely to demand “Kenyan”?

In 1961 the “race codes” were:

In 2000 the “race codes” were:

STILL NO AFRICAN.

Yes, a parent can self identify as to race, to an extent.  For instance, if you look Caucasian, but tell the attending Dr. or nurse that you are “British”, I’d be willing to bet that your kids birth certificate won’t have “British” as your race.  There is a reason that it is standardized.  If you tell the Dr. that you are American Indian rather than Mexican, that would indeed be reflected on the birth certificate.  Because there is a CODE for that.  You get to pick from the list.  You don’t get to create a whole new code just for your own special self.

To apply for a social security card, one has to produce more that a COLB.  Shoudn’t the president of the United States have to satisfy at least the same level of best evidence?  I mean, the leader of the free world and all – it doesn’t seem too much to expect.

On to the birth address.  By now even the most ardent obama supporter has come to terms with the fact that Obama Sr. and S. Ann never shared a residence.

So then, doesn’t that make the newspaper birth announcement for baby obama null and void as “evidence” since the address listed for Obama Sr. is fraudulent, and has been proven to be fraudulent?  I should think so.  I requested, and received, copies from the 1960’s POLK directories and phone books housed in the Honolulu State Library.  These copies were collected for me by persons known to me, so I know that they are legit.  They each collected copies for me in 2010, about six months apart.  Nowhere did a entry, or record appear showing Obama Sr. to have ever lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy.  Every record, while he lived in Hawaii, show him to reside at 625 11th Ave.  For convenience sake, I’m just pasting the image from the WND account.  I continue to maintain all of the records and copies from my research.

Next we have the faithful that say it doesn’t matter what address was used for MR. OBAMA, ’cause at least one of them lived at that address.  The newspaper birth announcements are absolute proof anyway.

But what if there are distinct anomalies with those very announcements?  Most of my regular readers are familiar with the research done into the infamous obama newspaper birth announcements. I did that piece and a bunch of follow up “support” posts with additional material, and research.   I’ll link the main post here, in case new readers want to delve into that.  It is a long read, but well worth it as it is the only work of it’s kind.  There are copies of the micro-filmed papers from three of the locations where they are housed.

One of the main things that the research established was that :

The ONE and ONLY time that the two papers published the birth list, beginning at the first announcement, in EXACT descending order, were the editions that obama’s birth announcement appeared in.  This was indeed the only time that these announcements were printed this way, as the closest the papers came to doing this again never had all the same names listed in the exact same order.  I checked a total of a two month span.  At the time I had published the research I had checked a ten day range, with obama’s announcement in the middle of that sample.

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth

I was also able to definitively expose the fraud behind the first examples of the obama birth announcements released to the blogger TexasDarlin.  I do not think she was complicit.  These things were sent to her.

I’ll add the link to my post with the info about my take on those first examples:

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth/round-pegs-in-square-holes/

Next, lets tackle the passport.

People claim that obama had an Indonesian passport that allowed him to travel to Pakistan when he was a young man.  There are still people claiming that the “proof” he had an Indonesian passport is that Pakistan was on a “no travel” list for the US at that time, and he would not have been able to travel there on a US passport.  Listen carefully to me……..it was not.on.a.no.travel.list!  It was on a travel at your own risk kind of status.  I forget the official term just now, but you know what I mean.  Anyway, so that can not be used as proof that obama only had a Indonesian passport in his youth.  It is quite plausible that he did have one issued to him to travel back to the states from Indonesia when his loving mamma dumped him on his grandparents.  And quite likely he could have maintained it.

From the US State Dept Travel.State.Gov site:

Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S. citizenship.

Information on losing foreign citizenship can be obtained from the foreign country’s embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. citizenship in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.

How could he get a US passport if he didn’t have a legitimate BC to show?  Well, we know for a fact that diplomatic passports, the type Senators and even the Presidents carry, are automatically issued when you are elected.  You don’t have to go through all the crap that a citizen does.  Go figure.  So, no COLB or long form birth certificate need be produced.

If he would have had to submit his birth cetificate, the passport would show his name as Barack Hussein Obama ll.  The “ll” is absent.

Thems the facts Jack !

About these ads

~ by ladysforest on January 22, 2011.

32 Responses to “Follow The Bouncing Ball”

  1. You state: If he would have had to submit his birth cetificate, the passport would show his name as Barack Hussein Obama ll. The “ll” is absent.

    I didn’t know this myself. That’s extremely interesting too. I have had a passport, although I need to have it renewed. Why did the blank out places, do you think?

  2. The explanation of “fathers’ race African’ was stated repeatedly by the officials in Hawaii, who were members of a REPUBLICAN governor’s administration. It was, and is, that a person could then and can now describe his race anyway that he wants, and Obama’s father said “African.’

    Obama was not adopted in Indonesia, nor became an Indonesian citizen, nor had an Indonesian passport, nor even changed his name legally while in Indonesia, as a simple telephone call to the Indonesian embassy in Washington will confirm (ask for the press officer).

    Obama had a US passport–repeat, a US PASSPORT–from at least the time that he returned from Indonesia to attend high school in Hawaii. He returned alone, meaning not on his mother’s passport. And, if he had traveled from Indonesia to Hawaii on any kind of a passport other than a US passport, he would have needed a US visa on that passport. In turn, that would have required an application for a US visa in Jakarta, Indonesia, and no such document has been found.

    Obama was the first and so far is the only US president to have shown his birth certificate, and he has shown the OFFICIAL AND ONLY birth certificate that Hawaii has issued to anyone since the short-form certification of live birth became the official birth certificate in 2001. Thousands of people use it every year, and in Obama’s case, the facts on his birth certificate–that he was born in Hawaii in 1961—were twice confirmed by the officials in the former Republican governor’s administration of Hawaii, and by the former Republican governor herself.

    • Listen Trollgrade-you are very junior league.
      Why slither your way to my nice clean blog and attempt to steer the discussion away from proven fact? Why do you dash yourself against the rocks my friend?
      *The “fathers race” issue has never once been addressed by a single official in Hawaii. Until you submit proof to me otherwise, proof that can be verified, you lose. While you are at it you moron, try showing us even three or four other examples of any UNITED STATES birth certificate that shows “African”, or “Swedish”, or “Italian” as the “race”. Guess what? You lose again. YAWN.

      *As you are fully aware, I did NOT STATE that obama was adopted IN Indonesia. Neither did I claim that HE caused himself to become an Indonesian citizen. Follow me here, it’s hard I know but, do try……he was registered as an Indonesian citizen at the school by his (adoptive) stepfather. If we presume that his (adoptive) stepfather and mother were not criminal frauds, then it is safe to assume that they registered him in good faith, and that at the time of his school registration he was a Indonesian citizen.

      *Show me any image of his US passport, issued PRIOR to his diplomatic passport, and we will concede this point to you. Bring it.

      *There are accounts of his mother bringing him back to Hawaii, none I have seen that he returned all by himself from Indonesia.

      *obama, being a child, could not have changed his OWN name legally – at no time did I suggest such a thing.

      *Try finding most of the phony bastards records/documents – I double dog dare you.

      *A visa can be (and usually is) applied for at entry into the county you are traveling to. I’ve traveled to other countries my friend.

      *He has not shown his “birth certificate”, and if you posses so little intelligence as to be unable to comprehend such a basic fact, then you don’t rate respect.

      *The former Gov. never did confirm anything. Do your research in the archives, not the obot blogs.

      *The long form birth certificate can still be had to this day. I have proof. I have on film a woman ordering hers, in the Honolulu Dept. of Health in July 2010. That whole “the COLB is the only thing Hawaii gives out” is a stone cold lie, and has been proven so repeatedly.

      What else you got for me freak?

  3. You have demonstrated clearly the one obvious problem with the internet COLB, the data it represents cannot be from 1961 (African). This was not an approved or acceptable designation in 1961 for recording of birth. Therefore, the data was ‘amended’ or what we see is a complete forgery, or both. The COLB must state that it has been ‘Amended’ and the codes for such are absent. That means that either the codes have been removed, or the entire document is a Photoshop fake.

    We can say now that the following are true: The internet COLB released was a fake (altered or complete mock up). The State of Hawaii WILL NOT CONFIRM the internet COLB as ACCURATE, which they are required to do by law. Further, the data once birth data and COLB’s have been made public, by law, are no longer protected or sealed. Yet, the Abercrombie has said that the law requires that Obama’s original birth record not be released. That is saying, that the public HAS NOT SEEN THE ORIGINAL BIRTH DATA, otherwise by law, he could release it.

    To sum this all up, we know the internet COLB released was a fake, or altered. The state of Hawaii will not confirm the released record, which they are required to do if an original birth record has been made public. Abercrombie agrees that the original birth record has NOT been made public, as he is ‘unable to release it’.

    For all the OBOTS and DOJ paid posters out there let me be very clear. I never said Obama doesn’t have a COLB from Hawaii!!!! I said that the public has never seen the original document, birth information, and that the COLB put online is forgery. I believe that he has original birth information on file, and that his grandmother (whom wasn’t present at his birth) who had access to courts, managed to made statements for.

    This is the only reasonable explanation why the State of Hawaii has not been instructed to release HUNDREDS of certified copies to the press of the Online COLB, because they WILL NOT MATCH!!! This would demonstrate FRAUD and treason!! Thus, the original birth information is protected to prevent exposure of a criminal activity by some type of privacy laws that are still in effect because the information released on the internet is NOT REAL.

    Finally, by it really doesn’t matter if he was born on US soil. Obama mother was less than 19 at the time, and thus in 1961 could not transfer citizenship onto him.

    From “US Department of State” site:
    ========
    “Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock”
    “A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth. … For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.”
    ——–

    http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html

    Obama was born a British Subject, which he freely has admitted, after 1790. Millions of US taxpayer dollars have funded the government posters, the payoffs to the media, the treats, and even the DOJ posters whom have tried to avoid this obvious fact.

    • Very well stated, and all valid points.

      I know that a lot of people point to the mothers age re transferring citizenship, but even if we were to leave that out completely, for the sake of a less complicated discussion, it is a fact that obama was born subject to British rule through his father. He never hid that.

      Best case scenario (for obama), obama ll was born in Hawaii, to Barack Sr. and S. Ann, and was born a dual citizen – subject to British rule.

      This is his millstone, as the meaning of “natural born Citizen”, and dual citizen, can never be the same. One’s birth circumstance can never change – it is what it was. Even if one citizenship were to “expire”, it does not retroactively change history.

      We tend to make it too complicated, and so we run into trouble. We allow the DOJ jockeys to twirl us around with their artful dodges and spin. We are constantly put on the defensive, and should not allow ourselves to become distracted by all of the dodges.

      That’s why I thought to do this post. To bring out all of the small facts and fiction that we are tangled up in to the point of losing sight of the true issue, Constitutional eligibility.

  4. LF…after the past two posts I am, at least, pretty confident he was not born in the states let alone Hawaii. Does this give more credibility to the Lucas Smith document? That one still has me thinking. If it is legit, it means that a record still exists in Kenya when it had appeared the trolls were sent out to sanitize the world of records. Interesting, when you read the transcipts coming out of Kenya, they are fairly open about the fact that he was born there. They were then and now never interested in hiding this information They do not appear to understanad the gravity of the situation. They truly believe that the POTUS know he was born in Kenya and are happy that they have overcome any racial and sovereign issues to elect a Kenyan. It’s in their transcripts. They even want to change their constitution to allow a non-Kenyan to run for president. I mean it’s pretty obvious when you read the documents that they truly believe he was born in Kenya. Now whether that’s true or not remains to be seen. Can you imagine the double wammy of both the US and Kenya finding out he was not born in either place? And let’s not forget Indonesia where in the way back machine there were claims of him being born there. Is this the typical liberal mindset that facts are inconvenient things and statements become facts to meet the immediate needs at the time to accomplish a goal? Make it up as you go. What a lovely legacy.

    • The one place I seriously doubt he could have been born is Indonesia. There may be some old record there that the step dad might have been compelled to file (and perjure himself in so doing) to get Barry into school. But I honestly don’t think he was born there.

      Kenya? Frankly, if S.Ann gave birth, and I’m going to presume that she did, I do think it highly unlikely that she gave birth to him in Kenya. Yes, I have seen the transcripts from Kenya, yes I have seen articles where obama was quoted as saying he was born in Kenya, yes I have seen the vids (2008) of michelle obama calling Kenya obama’s “Homeland”.
      In light of all of those compelling indications that he could, indeed, have been born in Kenya – IT’S NO WONDER AT ALL THAT SOME PEOPLE THINK HE WAS BORN IN KENYA. I’m just not one of them.

      Think about this:if obama were to release a certified copy of his long form BC, it of course would be shiny and new, it would be a modern day copy and wouldn’t have to withstand scrutiny as to age, ect.

      So, since he clearly wouldn’t have to worry about all the forensics experts carbon dating the hell out of it, or whatever, LOL, it makes popping one out near 2012 very easy. It would also have been super simple to have done it before. We all agree on that.

      All this shit is to distract the populous from demanding the Constitutional eligibility requirements be met. I’d bet that thing (real BC) is there, and is exactly as he has been saying all along. They put out a phony looking COLB to stir people up and cause the focus to be on all of the little bouncing balls, rather than the big giant boulder sitting on the edge of the cliff.

      I could be wrong, LOL. I’ll be the first to admit if I am, no prob. I just think it’s probably not as complex as everyone is making it out to be. Sometimes I think, maybe they forged obama’s dad’s name on the BC docs. That would rock! I mean, if Appleass was such a chummie of Mom & Pop, why wasn’t he invited to the hospital to see baby? He acts like they were his dearest friends, and he must protect their memory. Horseshit I say! Why didn’t he acknowledge Ann trotting off to WA state a couple of weeks after the birthdate?

      You mention how in Kenya they now want to change their constitution to allow a non-Kenyan to run. OBAMA. He sure as hell can’t go run there if he’s been claiming US birth here, can he? He can’t out himself as Kenyan born (if indeed he was) for a long damn time after he is out of the US White House. So, to pave the way for him…….change the Constitution. I’ll buy him the fu**ing plane ticket!

  5. The officials in Hawaii, under a Republican governor’s administration, stated that someone could record their race anyway that they wanted.

    http://obamatrueandfalse.com/2009/07/30/false-obamas-fathers-race-would-have-been-reported-as-negro-in-1961/

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/the-african-race/

    Neither dual citizenship nor the citizenship of Obama’s father has any effect on Obama’s Natural Born Citizen status. ALL US citizens who were born in the USA are Natural Born Citizens. The only kind of US citizen who is not a natural born citizen is a naturalized citizen.

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

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

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

    Re: “he was registered as an Indonesian citizen at the school by his (adoptive) stepfather.”

    Answer. That is an UNSIGNED application. Repeat, unsigned, so the father could well have lied. In fact, people in Indonesia lied all the time. It is far more likely that the father or simply the clerk who filled in the form lied than that the Indonesian government would lie. The application you are referring to, by the way, clearly says on it that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    • Where to begin with you, because you are wasting my time, as is your intention I am sure.

      I will answer you as best I can because the links you posted are to FactCheck, wiki, and a obot blog known to me. There is nothing at the first link that offers any official proof or link, in short it’s gobblity gook.
      And again I will explain that yes, a person can self-identify, that is exactly correct. However, you self-identify from the list provided on the form. That has always been the case since the Gov begin keeping track.

      I will take the trouble to put up more info for you to look at over in the Race Codes page on the right.

      Now if that weird “Certificate of Live Birth” you linked to is supposed to be proof of something, you fell off of the turnip truck. Tell you what, you do the research on that one, I don’t have time right now.
      I do have examples of “Certification of Live Birth” from the early 70’s, which is the official shorter form of the CERTIFICATE of Live Birth, and like the thing that obama’s campaign site posted.

      I suspect that thing you have linked has to do with a person who is born well before standardized reporting had been developed. As the vital stats reporting was not yet standardized in 1907, and Hawaii was not a US state, Hawaii may well have recorded things in that fashion …. in 1907.
      Most births back then were entered in a ledger, with little more information than would have been entered in the family bible of such a record. In fact, in the US prior to the early 1900’s, there was no standard birth registration at all. So, the one you are linked to has really nothing at all to do with a damn thing. Thanks for playing though.

      obama was registered by his step father as a Indonesian. Fact. If his parents lied – it’s on them, it doesn’t change the fact that he was registered that way.

      Dual and natural born citizenship are not the same, so says the State Dept.:

      The current U.S. State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual discusses problems associated with dual citizenship: 7 FAM 081: U.S. Policy on Dual Nationality:

      “(e)While recognizing the existence of dual nationality, the U.S. Government does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Dual nationality may hamper efforts by the U.S. Government to provide diplomatic and consular protection to individuals overseas. When a U.S. citizen is in the other country of their dual nationality, that country has a predominant claim on the person . . . .”..

      Then there is naturalized, foreigner takes oath to become American. Then there is 14th amendment – which has become all about anchor babies.

  6. Re: “visa can be (and usually is) applied for at entry into the county you are traveling to. I’ve traveled to other countries my friend.’

    Answer: In 1961 if you wanted to enter the United States from virtually all countries including Indonesia, you had to obtain a US visa IN ADVANCE of the trip, and getting a US visa required going to a US consulate and applying, and it often took a month or more.

    Re: Your allegation that Obama did not travel alone when he returned from Indonesia to attend school.

    “In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Armour Dunham, and attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from the fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979.[23] Obama’s mother returned to Hawaii in 1972, remaining there until 1977 when she went back to Indonesia to work as an anthropological field worker. She finally returned to Hawaii in 1994 and lived there for one year, before dying of ovarian cancer.[24]” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama)

    Note that Obama returned in 1971 and his mother returned in 1972.

    • Please tell me you are not relying on wiki and FactCheck for your “proof”.

      You’re new at this aren’t you?

      Nowhere have I ever seen it stated that obama, a little boy at the time, would have been placed on a plane ALONE to fly from Indonesia to the US. The time lines for who went where when, regarding obama as a child, and his erstwhile “parents” has been fluid like the water in a river. Wiki is not a reliable source.

      The reason I requested you to come back with “proof” is because I don’t want to spend an afternoon doing your research for you. You have not provided any thing at all to back up your claims.

      • And by the way, it was determined that S.Ann did fly back to the US in Oct.71. Her passport records showing this were released via UIPA.

  7. Where Obama was born isn’t the issue, because he never met NBC status, as far as the requirements for POTUS. However, it isn’t really important as to his place of birth, but his loyalties. Those need to ask that question, “To which country(s) have Obama claimed loyalty to?” Herein is where it gets interesting!

    I believe that Obama was born in Kenya, because he has claimed citizenship into adulthood as a Kenyan. Moreover, he and his wife had both at some time claimed he was born there. Thus, he has claimed British Subject status and Kenyan Citizenship status. However, the storyline suggest that he may have travelled on a Indonesian passport. Moreover, he may have claimed citizenship to many different countries during his childhood and early adult life.

    When you combine all of these facts, his claim on Kenyan citizenship, his re-issued Connecticut Social Security number, his lack of a long form birth certificate in Hawaii, his records sealed from college and law school, and that the State of Hawaii and Abercrombie’s refusal to confirm his online COLB, you have a pattern that means FRAUD.

    The only sticky point I have with outright fraud, is the possibility that he and his entire family are connected to the Ford Foundation. Micronesia, 1970-80’s loans, banks, Ford Foundation; you have to wonder if he isn’t CIA. Perhaps that above is the most dangerous situation, if Obama and his family are CIA, then his Presidency is a CIA cooperative effort/operation on US soil, intended to deceive the American voters to his past and status.

    We must acknowledge two distinct possible histories here; 1. Obama is a complete and utter fraud that has lied his whole life taking advantage of whatever citizenship status gave him the biggest benefit at the time. 2) Obama is a CIA operative, protected and helped by the CIA apparatus as a CIA operation on US soil. The impetus for records being sealed and guarded, even against Federal court opening, is clearly obvious, but stronger for the latter.

    • Well Pete, I agree with your first paragraph, and point 1 of your final paragraph ~ everything in between,…. well.

      I can respect where you are coming from even if I have my very own point of view.
      :)

  8. well i was just over at hillbuzz where they are discussing the name on the bc being soetoro. the thing is he could have easily taken care of that minor issue during the campaign and had his name legally changed and the bc amended. i dont see it as the issue. could it possibly be that those two that put together the colb screwed it up and now he cant release anything because even if it was amended it doesnt agree with the colb which would prove it was a fraud. and if you try to have it amended to agree with the colb you cant because no one’s race is african.

    • Kind of a good point :), that last bit.

    • The name Soetoro being on the BC fills in many of the mid-to-later life mysteries of Obama. It also would explain some of the odd circumstances that have popped up at times. One of these is the article that stated ‘Obama was born in Indonesia’.

      http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Jan/08/ln/FP601080334.html

      The article was later changed:

      http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message901541/pg1

      Why would a reporter indicate Obama was born in Indonesia in 2006, almost a year before Obama announced his candidacy? Maybe the records the reporter researched did appear to indicate Indonesian heritage – as records resulting from an adoption by Lolo Soetoro would have.

      Also, the 1980 Soetoro divorce papers document a ‘child’ above the age of 18 who is still dependent on ‘the parties’ for cost of education. In the very same sentence the document refers to a ‘child’ under 18 – that is Maya. The document does not differentiate the 2. In the eyes of the law – both Maya and Obama were children of Lolo Soetoro with no differences.

      Finally, remember that the original ‘smear’ to Obama was that he was a Muslim. It was not that he was not an nbC. One of the specific reasons for this is that it was reported – by the liberal LA Times – that Obama was registered as a Muslim in both Indonesian schools he attended, including the Catholic one. His mother was never Muslim. To function in Indonesia he likely needed to be his adapted father’s child. And was.

      http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/15/nation/na-obama15

      “His former Roman Catholic and Muslim teachers, along with two people who were identified by Obama’s grade-school teacher as childhood friends, say Obama was registered by his family as a Muslim at both of the schools he attended.”

      Another interesting piece that fits here is the missing page from Obama/Dunham divorce records of 1963. The released records are clearly missing a page. I believe page 11. It has long been speculated that was Obama’s birth certificate. But the explanation of why it or what ever that page is was redacted has never been explained. Well, an subsequent adoption by Lolo Soetoro explains a valid reason for the redaction. Adoptions result in a legal changing of the past. And records in possession of the state will be changed or redacted to confirm to the ‘new facts’ of the adoption.

      And finally there are references in the MSM in 2008 and 2009 as to ‘sealed’ birth records. It was attributed to Gov. Lingle. It was said ‘she sealed the records’. Was this a lie? Or were they sealed records and lazy reporters just do not understand why and how birth records are formally sealed. First, Governors do not legally ‘seal’ records. It takes a formal court order. But if records were actually sealed why would they be. The obvious and logical answer – is an adoption, as is done in almost every adoption.

      So Obama being adopted by Lolo Soetoro seems not only plausible but explains some of the disjointed data points.

      Sorry for the long post on a Monday morning.

      • Yes, I read that Duckworth thing a while back. I think she just said something she may have presumed. I don’t know how well she and obama knew each other, but the way obama lies about his past, he may have related some story to her that caused her to assume he was born there. Since that is the single account of it in type I never put any weight on it.

        I imagine it was well known that obama spent his childhood in Indonesia, and some lazy reporter didn’t bother to question her remark. They aren’t researchers for the most part. Not for something like that.

        I think for most people the muslim thing was a bit of a surprise. I guess it just kind of never really occurred to people in general to consider how they might feel if a person who was a muslim ran for the presidency. 911 really wasn’t long ago at all.

        I am convinced that obama and his handlers were fully aware of the nbC problem, and the muslim factor was used to deflect attention. Doesn’t matter who first made it an issue, it was used as a shield through his whole campaign. That and race.

        Good point about the missing page. It surprises me though, to find the Hawaiians to have been so thorough.

        Sealed records, no doubt just referenced that the vital records are “sealed” from the public. I’m betting she didn’t want to get mixed up in that issue at all and that’s why she was always fairly general in terminology and never dealt with it personally.
        Yeah, I think he probably was adopted. That means there would have been record(s), as in multiple, as would be correct. An adoption (due to marriage) can be set aside, and at that time I believe the original BC would be unsealed. I’m not positive though, I’d have to confirm that.

      • One clarification. I had to check who really indicated that Obama was ‘born in Indonesia’. It was not Duckworth. She does not make that statement in the original article. It is the reporter. See the 2nd link above, it has a saved screen shot. See the red circling. That is statement from the reporter – no Duckworth.

        I had same view – that she may have a bad memory or she never would have questioned it. But it is not her statement.

        • Then it was the reporter that was “familiar” with the background who supplied it. You know what most reporters are-geesh.

          Frankly, I think obama always left people guessing about his real background, and they tended to fill in the blanks with whatever seemed to fit. LOL, the bastard is still at it.

  9. well i spoke too soon…you can change your name but not the name on the bc….hmm.

  10. i’m blog jumping which i havent done in awhile. so strange this statement by abercrotchie. because why wouldnt anyone in hawaii just say he was born in hawaii if he really was, then no one would have to release the birth certificate because someone put their arse on the line and said yes they had seen it and he was born there in plain and simple terms. no dicussion of name, nbc, or anything, just born there. that’s why i dont think he was born here, i dont think africa either, are we thinking canada still? remeber that one, i had forgotten.

    • Shrugging my shoulders. Canada is a possibility. I mean if he wasn’t born in Hawaii, Canada would be the most sensible next point of departure – so to speak. :)
      And speaking as a woman who gave birth to her first child before her 18th birthday, I can’t imagine traveling wayyyyyyy off to some far away country when things were, well, the way they were in 1960-1961. Hell, even in 1980 I got all kinds of weird looks, and mean comments. And I was married to a white man. I can’t imagine the early sixties, mixed race, under 18 – oiks! What a nightmare!

  11. i’m posting alot today.lol..but before i forget…i heard an interview with Jack Cashill…forget where but it was recent and he is big on the Frank Marshall Davis theory. He brought up something I had not heard before. Remember the photos of Stanley that were embarassing? he attributed those to FMD because there was a copy of a book on the table or somewhere in the photograph that linked it to FMD. I wish I would write all this stuff down when I hear it. Well really that one makes the most sense…

    I have to copy this one comment from another blog because it just really hit the nail on the head:

    “His name was Magill, and he called himself Lil, but everyone knew him as Nancy”

    When your mother is really your half sister with the first name Stanley, who claimed your daddy was an already married with children dude named Barack whom you bear absolutely no resemblance to, and then you’re adopted by a new guy named LoLo, and finally you’re raised by the guy who sired you with an unknown dark-skinned woman, then you really have no choice but to be pro-choice when choosing what you ultimately want to be called.

    Ayers probably said, “Look, let’s go with this one. I’ll make it look good for you, and you’ll have plenty of back-up. Besides, no one could ever begin to figure all this out.”

    • Theories abound. That’s what I don’t want people to lose focus on the Constitutional eligibility issue. Birthers are just making things more challenging for themselves.

      Thing is, unless some other man’s name is on that BC, then Obama Sr. gets the gold ticket. Legally, that is the Daddy. If anyone on this planet thinks they are going to DNA test obama, and the like, three “runners up” for the position of father of the year, well, I don’t see it happening. So that makes it a non-issue, to this movement anyway.

      Not that it isn’t something fascinating to think over, it just has no legs. It’s like a curious question mark. And really, how does this sound:

      His dad was Frank M.D., and he was born in Canada, to Madalyn who handed her off to Stanley Ann, who took him to Indonesia, pretended he was her son, and so he’s ……. not eligible to be president. LOL

      See, we could work up at least a dozen theories like that and just sit back and look at the mess, and see clearly the need to focus.

      The real honest to God truth would be a blessed thing to have. We already know, and have proof, that obama invented half of his life’s history – if not all of it. Politicians do that.

      So, rather than dodging all the bouncing balls, we need to come together on the main focus.

      Born a subject of Britain, obama is Constitutionally ineligible. Nice and tidy.

  12. Who is Duckworth?

    And I’ve heard of BO being born in Indonesia. I think, but I’m not 100 percent sure, that I read that in the stories written by the Don person: http://educate-yourself.org/cn/nicoloffthreestooges6part25apr09.shtml

    Not sure where that section is, though. It’s pretty wild.

    • She is a no-body as far as this issue is concerned. She is from Honolulu, about seven years younger than obama. She did an interview with the Honolulu paper when she was running for Congress in 06. The writer wrote (referring to obama and Duckworth) ;
      “Both were born outside the country-obama in Indonesia, ect…..” The way it was written makes it seem as though it was a Duckworth quote, but it was likely just sloppy “reporting” by the writer. I imagine most reporters in HI were aware that obama spent his youth in Indonesia, and so the writer probably made an assumption.

      This article, however, was the springboard for the “maybe he was born in Indonesia”, theory. This theory has the least likelihood of being possible.

      People need to take a deep breath, put these tantalizing tid-bits off to the side for now, and focus on the natural born Citizen requirement. A dual citizen subject of Britain is not nbC.

  13. Actually-I’ve been reading William Rawle’s take on the Constitution. The whole thing. I am now in the process of reading “Commentaries on the Constitution”, by Story.
    Thing is with what you referenced in a different comment (still in moderation), about the “natural born citizen” definition by William R., is that all I can find to read is an edited version-not one with the original wording. Also, Rawles mentioned three classes of citizens, one is naturalized, which he spends most time on, the other two he is very vauge. He is a RABID abolitionist, and so his comment on “natural born” may reflect somewhat on his personal viewpoint-that is just my own supposition.
    For it is not spelled out that a child born to “aliens” on US soil, would have to become naturalized prior to running for president – not in his essay or in the Constitution itself. What I mean by this is if the “aliens” were simply visitors, and never intended or desired to become naturalized, and returned to their home country, taking Baby along with them, then Baby comes back at age thirty, kicks around for awhile, then decides to run for president, are there no checks against this? He does spell out the requirements for a senator to have to be at least a naturalized citizen for no less than nine years prior to seeking office. the reason he sets out is: (emphasis mine)

    “The person appointed must be at least thirty years of age, have been a citizen of the United States nine years, and at the time of his election, he must be an inhabitant of the state by which he shall be chosen. The senatorial trust requiring great extent of information and stability of character, a mature age is requisite. Participating immediately in some of the transactions with foreign nations, it ought to be exercised by those who are thoroughly weaned from the prepossessions and habits incident to foreign birth and education. The term of nine years is a reasonable medium between a total exclusion of naturalized citizens, whose merits and talents may claim a share of public confidence, and an indiscriminate and hasty admission of them, which might possibly create a channel for foreign influence in the national council. 2″

    http://www.constitution.org/wr/rawle_03.htm

    Here is the part that you referenced:

    “It cannot escape notice, that no definition of the nature and rights of citizens appears in the Constitution. The descriptive term is used, with a plain indication that its meaning is understood by all, and this indeed is the general character of the whole instrument. Except in one instance, it gives no definitions, but it acts in all its parts, on qualifies and relations supposed to be already known. Thus it declares, that no person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president — that no person shall be a senator who shall not have been nine years a citizen of the United States, nor a representative who has not been such a citizen seven years, and it will therefore be not inconsistent with the scope and tendency of the present essay, to enter shortly into the nature of citizenship.”

    http://www.constitution.org/wr/rawle_09.htm

    The citizens of each state constituted the citizens of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. The rights which appertained to them as citizens of those respective commonwealths, accompanied them in the formation of the great, compound commonwealth which ensued. They became citizens of the latter, without ceasing to be citizens of the former, and he who was subsequently born a citizen of a state, became at the moment of his birth a citizen of the United States. Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.

    The reference is clearly to clarify that AT THE SIGNING OF THE CONSTITUTION (or when the constitution was ratified), all citizens of all the states, regardless if their parents were aliens at the time, became “natural born citizens”. Of course there were alien parents at that time – it wasn’t “quite” the United States yet, although we had been officially recognized as a sovereign nation on Sept. 3, 1783, the Constitution hadn’t been ratified yet.. The states had until that time each done their own thing as to naturalization. Once the Constitution was signed, that job was now regulated to the Congress of the United States. So, yes, at the signing and ratified, everyone born in the country was considered a natural born, and their parents were no longer “aliens” but (naturalized) citizens.

    I’ll address your other remarks in that comment above later – been ill the past few days. So, haven’t made a lot of progress with my research and cross-referencing.

  14. Re: “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”

    Notice the little word IS, repeat IS. You claim that this applied only to the states, but the little word IS means that it refers to the time that he wrote, which was after the Constitution was adopted, and he says “in the sense of the Constitution,” so he was not talking about states. He was talking about the United States.

    And, he is not alone. Dozens of Constitutional experts hold exactly the same thing:

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

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

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

    “Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it. The first, by their birth-right, became entitled to all the privileges of citizens; the second, were entitled to none, but such as were held out and given by the laws of the respective states prior to their emigration. …St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. (1803)

    The Tucker quotation shows how the Americans (not Swiss) used the term Natural Born at about the time that the Constitution was written, and as you can see “natural born citizens, (were those)… those born within the state.”

    A search of the writings of John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay (the one who wrote the letter to George Washington) and others at the time shows that they NEVER used the phrase Natural Born to refer to the parents. They always used it to indicate citizenship due to the place of birth.

    And the Federal Courts use it the same way:

    Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

    “Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

    Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

    “Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

    Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

    “The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”

    What makes the third child different from her siblings? She was born in the USA.

  15. A small note on “it wasn’t the United States yet.” Have you forgotten the Articles of Confederation? Our country was united under that for many years before the Constitution, and most of us consider that the country began with the Declaration of Independence. It certainly was recognized as a country when the first foreign warship (Dutch, I think) fired a signal of salute to the American flag.

    In any case, both before the Constitution and after, the leaders in America used the term Natural Born to refer to citizenship due to the place of birth, not to the parents of the citizen.

    • July 9, 1778 – The Continental Congress approves the Articles of Confederation.

      September 3, 1783 – The Treaty of Paris 1783 is signed by Britain and the United States, officially ending the Revolutionary War as the United States is recognized as a sovereign nation.

      OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED

      September 17, 1787 – The delegates at the Philadelphia convention approve the Constitution and sends it to the Continental Congress.
      September 28, 1787 – The Continental Congress sends the new Constitution to the states for ratification.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers

%d bloggers like this: