It’s Official – obama’s Father Was Anti-American

From Mail Online:

Revealed; Official fears from U.S. and UK over

President Obama’s ‘anti-American’ and

‘anti-.white’ father

By Claire Ellicott and Sam Greenhill

PUBLISHED: 18:00 EST, 17 April 2012 | UPDATED: 18:00 EST, 17 April 2012

In his three years as U.S. president, Barack Obama has been dogged by claims he is not patriotic enough.

Last year he even had to publish his birth certificate to silence doubters who suggested he was not born an American.

(SHAME THE BASTARD “PUBLISHED” A TOTALLY FRAUDULENT BIRTH CERTIFICATE)

Now it emerges that similar fears were expressed about his father, who was categorised with others as ‘anti-American and anti-white’ when he moved to the United States in 1959.

WOW, COLOR ME FLUKING SURPRISED.  ANTI-WHITE YOU SAY?  NAH, I DON’T BUY IT.

Mr Obama Snr had grown up in Kenya under British rule and aroused the fears of both colonial officers and American officials when he won a chance to study in Hawaii. The officials felt Kenyan students were ‘academically inferior’ with a ‘bad reputation’ for turning anti-American.

A memo from a British diplomat in Washington to Whitehall – released today by the National Archives in West London – sets out their concerns about the young Kenyans.

WOW AGAIN!  LONDON RELEASES A NON FONDLING BIT OF INFORMATION ON THIS SOMETHING CALLED OBAMA SR.  EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT NOT REFLECT BEAUTIFULLY ON THE POST RACIAL PRESIDENT OF THE UNTIED STATES.   WONDERS NEVER CEASE.  AND JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AFTER THE BIG OLE PROSTITUTE SCANDAL OF OBAMAS SECRET SERVICE ELITE.  NOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Dated September 1, 1959, it says: ‘I have discussed with the State Department. They are as disturbed about these developments as we are. They point out that Kenya students have a bad reputation over here for falling into the wrong hands and for becoming both anti-American and anti-white.’

In one of the Foreign Office files, the future president’s father appears on a list of Kenyan students as ‘OBAMA, Barack H’ – they shared the same name.

THERE’S MORE:

At the age of 23, he enrolled at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu to study economics with classmates including Ann Dunham, a 17-year-old white American from Kansas. The couple had a short marriage that led to the birth in 1961 of the future president, Barack Obama II.

Mr Obama Snr was among 100 or so Kenyan students brought to America by the African American Students Foundation.

U.S. and British officials were deeply suspicious of this outfit, observing that the AASF – though backed by singer Harry Belafonte and actor Sidney Poitier – had links to a Kenyan nationalist leader.

‘The motives behind this enterprise, therefore, seem more political than educational,’ warned a letter from the British Embassy in Washington.

It added: ‘The arrival here of these students, many of them of indifferent academic calibre and ill-prepared for the venture, is likely to give rise to difficult problems.’

.

Mr Obama Snr, who died in 1982, is not singled out for concern in any of the documents.

I PUT THAT LAST SNIP IN IT’S OWN BOX.  OBAMA SR. WAS INDEED SINGLED OUT FOR CONCERN IN QUITE A FEW UNITED STATES DOCUMENTS.  ADD TO THAT THAT THERE IS NO PROOF SHOWING OBAMA SR WAS BROUGHT OVER AS PART OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENTS FOUNDATION.  UNLESS I MISSED SOMETHING IN ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT I HAVE READ.

OH, AND HIS “AGE” RANGED BY SEVERAL YEARS, AS DID HIS DATE OF BIRTH ON OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS.  HE LISTED HIS OWN DATE OF BIRTH AS 10/18/1934 and 6/18/1936 and 6/18/1934.  IT’S ALL BEEN ON THE INTERNET HERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW.  HERE IS THE LINK TO THE IMMIGRATION FILE ON SR.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54015762/Barack-Hussein-Obama-Sr-Immigration-File

page 12 is interesting.  page 16 goes into the fact that Harvard was not impressed with him and were looking to deny him an extension.  page 18 is a good read.  page 21 is super interesting as it mentions Sr.s wife in Kenya, one in Honolulu and one in the Philippines.  actually the page numbering could be one “off” as the numbers seem to be at the bottom of the proceeding page ………. but you can figure it out.  these are quick and easy to read, and just a quick sample reference to the many gems in those pages.

THE BRITS NEED TO PULL THEIR HEADS OUT OF THEIR ASSES AND TEY NEED TO GIVE UP THE ATTEMPT TO MISLEAD THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. 

There, I took cap lock off.  I can only yell into the void for just so long.  There is so much wrong with this piece of tripe that it is a waste of my time to point it all out.  Suffice it to say, that the most the English will commit themselves to doing is the following repeated snip:

A memo from a British diplomat in Washington to Whitehall – released today by the National Archives in West London – sets out their concerns about the young Kenyans.

Yep, for the Brits this constitutes a fricken bombshell.

Oh, hey – before I forget.  This is why the Constitution requires a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN status to qualify for the Presidency of this United States of America.  And that goes for the Vice Prez too damnit.

~ by ladysforest on April 17, 2012.

22 Responses to “It’s Official – obama’s Father Was Anti-American”

  1. Re Natural Born Citizen status. That includes every child born in the USA regardless of the citizenship of the parents (except for the children of foreign diplomats). Only naturalized citizens are not Natural Born and hence are not allowed to be president.

    • Actually you are incorrect. A dual citizen is not a natural born Citizen. An anchor baby is not a natural born Citizen. A child who is granted statutory citizenship at birth (14th amendment for example) is not a natural born Citizen. Anchor babies fall into that class. Foreign nationals here on legitimate visas who have children while here? Those children are statutory citizens – dual. Although for some of the latter class, if their home country doesn’t allow dual citizenship, then you have a different situation. The law of that country takes precedence over U.S. statutory provisions – through the child’s parents.

      Statutory citizenship is granted by the passing of a law – not by the Constitution. No such laws amended Article ll.

      One theory I found: “Constitutional natural born citizen” refers to the term “natural born citizen” when it appears in the Constitution or in a Constitution-related document such as a Supreme Court decision. It refers to the meaning of “natural born citizen” in the Constitution.
      “Statutory natural born citizen” refers to someone who is deemed a “natural born citizen” by Federal or State law. (The step must be taken to “deem” them a nbC – it didn’t just happen naturally)

      In addition to this we find that the United States State Dept. states that dual citizens are required to obey the laws of both countries that they are citizens of. “Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law.”

      On Fact Check, during obama’s campaign, they did state that obama was born SUBJECT TO BRITISH RULE through his father.

      So, if your position is that a British subject fits the original intent of the natural born Citizen requirement, then I suggest you do a lot of reading. Many people who thought the same as you have changed their minds once better educated.

      Also, most people are unaware as to the many attempts made by Congress to CHANGE the natural born Citizen requirement. From June 11,2003 through Feb. 28, 2008 there were eight different congressional attempts to alter Article ll – Section 1 – Clause V requirements in the Constitution. Coincidentally all taking place during obamas rise through the ranks to power.

      And never forget, a citizen born to two U.S. citizens, on U.S. soil does not require any statutory law to deem them a citizen. It’s the purest form of citizenship, and cannot be open to any question or challenge. Evah.

  2. Original Intent

    On 25 July 1787, John Jay wrote a letter to George Washington, recommending that the new Constitution should require that the President be a “natural born citizen”. The stated purpose of this requirement for eligibility was to exclude “foreigners” from exercising Presidential powers:

    “Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”

  3. Both dual citizens and anchor babies are Natural Born Citizens. Our only protection against them being elected president is, wait for it, ourselves. The founders gave us the right to chose. It turns out that we actually have elected three men who were dual citizens. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were dual citizens after they were born, having been made full voting citizens of France by the French Assembly during the French Revolution.

    Woodrow Wilson was a dual citizen of the USA and Britain when he was born. That is because his mother was a British subject. She automatically became a US citizen when she married Wilson’s father, but she never renounced British citizenship, and hence when Wilson was born, he was a dual citizen of the USA and Britain.

    Here is an actual case in which the court declares that the child of an illegal immigrant is a Natural Born Citizen:

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

    From Ladysforest ~ I edited out most of the crap you included in this comment. It’s filler for obama junkies trying to explain away why their little darling is just as good as a REAL US citizen.

    I’ll address the Wilson deal first. As you mentioned – his mother became a US citizen at marriage. She was a US citizen when he was born. Her dual citizenship was not an issue because she had US citizenship, and in fact intended to be a US citizen. Her dual citizenship would not have passed down to her son, because she was a US citizen. I am a dual citizen. My dual citizenship did not pass to my children.

    And again, for those with problems understanding, a Constitutional natural born Citizen is different than a STATUTORY citizen. A law had to be created specifically to make certain classes into a citizen, whereas a Constitutional citizen would need no such law. Nor was any law ever passed that amended the Article ll requirement. Every attempt to amend Article ll has been defeated.

  4. Hey loser – learn about proxy servers if you want to try posting under various nics, and pretending to be multiple people.

    We’ve been expecting traffic from communists like yourself to begin to pick up now that the campaigning season is on.

    I’ve seen you posting elsewhere, and since your only function and intent is to spread mis-information, you are not welcome to post here.

  5. In the immigration files for obama Sr. I found one page, UNSIGNED, UNDATED, but simply filled out by Sr. which claims $1000.00 of his expense money is from the African American Institute. So, Sr. filled it out, but the US Consular did not sign, date, or swear to the veracity of the information on the form. It is not officially accepted or verified. Page 46

  6. Hi, LF,

    Did you hear that Barky ate doggy meat?

    • Yes, I did. So, we have the Romney’s, to all appearances a very responsible family, strapping a dog crate to the roof of the car, and obama stuffing his gob with dog while he was a kid.

      I give up.

  7. tell the brits to look for the BC in their files if they are so concerned.

    What is concerning me is this constitutional party offering a candidate. it is all in at FR where almost everyone was for it. Thisis a big mistake. All these people are corruptable regardless of what they call themselves. This will guarantee another zero term. Right now one on one i think romney will win.

    • One on one Romney MIGHT win, but only because it’s all we have. No, I don’t think splitting the vote with last minute candidates is the right way to go – we are screwed with Romney anyway. At least it is now out in the open just how little our votes mean.

  8. I personally think that BO “consuming” doggy meat is worse, and I don’t know why this was put forth, well, as well as snake and whatever he munched on. It’s worse than what Romney did.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Romney fan at all. But now I don’t know who or what to vote for. One thing that I do know, I want BO, Barky, out. That’s what I know, period, final.

  9. I’m thinking now we’ve got three choices:

    1. Romney

    2. No one

    3. Obama

    • I’m still Newt until there ain’t no Newt no more.

      We don’t have a perfect candidate – hell, we don’t even have an “alright” one anymore. But I’d rather have Newt – you know what you-a-gitten – than Romney flipper. Just think of this, McCain beat out Romney last time – McCain! That shows just how damn screwed we really are.

      I wanted Perry. I like his record.

  10. Hi LF, just wondering, do you know when zero returned to hawaii from indonesia to stay with his grandparent’s, did maya stay in hawaii also? Strange if she didn’t. Yes?

    • Story is that he was 10. Maya remained in Indonesia, and always did live with her mother according to the tales. I do think that obama visited once (HI) between the time he moved to Indone. as a little boy, and when he moved back to HI permanently at age ten.

      So, Mama Stan dumped obama by the age of ten – done deal. Kept the girl with her while she traveled to lots of exotic places. When Stanley Ann moved back to HI, obama was never to live with her and Maya – he was only to visit short term, then back to the grandparents. THAT is the thing I found most unusual.

      • Yes because the reason most suspect is that the situation in Indonesia was too dangerous. But not for Maya ? Will provide more info later… Leads to further suspicions about parentage.

        • It was hinted that he was “too much of a handful” for Stanley Ann, and would behave better for the grandparents. That never made sense to me. She put herself and a little daughter in situations that were often third world and perhaps not the most predictable or safe, yet she couldn’t handle obama? Not even on her return to HI once he had been living with the grandparents for about five years – she took an apartment that was only big enough for herself and Maya. Not natural.

  11. LF, I have been reading a FR post from a year ago and there are many , many comments. I am wondering your take on this since you did tthe Polk research. There was a long discussion about the Polk seattle directory having an Anna Obama vs, Stanley or Ann. Some think this is a big clue into what was going on. It has been suggested that there was really an Anna Obama different from SAD Obama and she was the one with the child. There was an immediate story to link Anna to SAD. Separately there have been mention of an Anna Obama in Hawaii with senior as opposed to anyone named stanley or ann. Very interesting.

    Do you have any thoughts?

    • No. Because this person – who would be a big giant coincidence – has never once come to light. Three wives were mentioned for obama Sr. in his INS docs – Kenyan, Hawaiian, and one in the Philippines. I think SOMETHING occurred with Stanley – but I think the idea that he was married to a different Ann/Anne/Anna is too far of a stretch. Besides – it’s mainly important what he has gone ON RECORD with.

      Polk information was 100% canvassed back then. It was also sometimes inaccurate. The thing that I find curious and most interesting about the Polk for Stan Anns two 1961 addresses – is that BOTH addresses appeared in the Polks for the same time range.

      • So, if she married in Feb. 61 – and arrived in WA early Sept. 61 ……….. that’s a long canvass period.

        • The Phillipine connection is interesting. The other interesting theory posed on the same thread, albeit clouded in inference, is that SAD never really had a baby but was a nanny for a child that later when the child’s mother died in 1970, they (madalyn) took custody of. Photos could have been used to paint a picture of a story that never existed. Most are doctored. A facinating theory but why not?

          Many interesting theories floating around on that thread. Most are pretty convinced of their theories. I have my own. I am still dealing with the story of a newborn in seattle with a teenage mother attending courses with no support group. I find this completely impossible and dont believe a word of it.

        • Yes, I find the new mother in WA a stretch too. UNLESS she had the baby in Canada, unwed mothers home, and popped over the border. She would have gotten free medical being married to a Brit.

          I think the four different daddies, and the two + mommies to be sensationalized distractions. Maybe people mean well – but the facts are………..if he claims Stan Ann and Kenyan obama Sr. as his parents, and has claimed those birth “documents” as real and factual – then those are the “real” parents for all intents and purposes. Even with those two – there are problems enough, Constitutional eligibility issues, that adding an extra possible half dozen parents in doesn’t make him any less or more eligible.

          It just makes more mud.

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.

%d bloggers like this: