New Hampshire Obama Ballot Access Challenge and Fraud

via; ORYR

During the Press Conference the material that was used and discussed was broken by this blog.

Video: Press Conference with New Hampshire Representatives Regarding Obama Ballot Access Challenge and Fraud
BikerBillNH: NH state Representatives Laurence Rappaport, and Carol and Lucien Vita, and taxpayer Mark Rossetti, et al, deliver an affidavit to the NH Attorney General’s office regarding ongoing allegations of election fraud, followed by a press conference, 1/3/2012. – Video below and here.

Hat tip Gary. Prior reports on the NH ballot access challenge here.

UPDATE: Lawmakers dispute Obama ballot eligibility – ‘This isn’t partisan. This is a constitutional issue, pure and simple’ LINK.

Statements from the Kenyan Government on Barack Abdallah Husein Obama

Is Obama going to call his wife a liar?

Kenyan official: Obama born here, “not even a native American.”

Michelle Obama states Obama’s ‘Home Country’ is Kenya

Illinois State Senator Obama admits childhood in Kenya

Excellent Voting Guide for 2012

Barack Obama’s Private Attorney Files Motion to Dismiss based upon lies and deceit

Barack Obama’s Private Attorney Files Motion to Dismiss Farrar v. Obama based upon lies and deceit,

“Only the Democratic Party of Georgia can determine qualifications of candidates named on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Furthermore, the citizenship issue the plaintiff seeks to raise was soundly rejected by 69,456,897 Americans in the 2008 elections, and it has been by every judicial body ever to have considered it. Every Georgia case considering the issue ruled against the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s challenge to Barack Obama’s qualifications should be dismissed.”

Lie; ‘Only the Democratic Party of Georgia can determine qualifications of candidates named on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot.’

Fact; No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Quote;  shall be eligible to the Office of President. 

Fact: Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama aka (unknown) is not eligible as he is not a ‘Natural Born Citizen of the United States’.

Just because as  Michael Jablonski contends ‘the citizenship issue the plaintiff seeks to raise was soundly rejected by 69,456,897 Americans in the 2008 elections’. 

This is Obama’s own lawyer admitting that Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama aka (unknown) does not meet eligibility requirements of for the Office of the President as required by the United States Constitution. To clarify Michael Jablonski argument, if the majority of drivers disregard the laws concerning speeding then the law is null and void. 

The eligibility requirements of the United States Constitution are clear and Michael Jablonski admits that Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama does not meet meet the requirement.

Stop Obama From Another 4 Un-Constitutional Years

Capt. Pamela Barnett (Ret.) has founded awebsite and initiative which seeks to assist citizens wishing to challenge Obama’s constitutional eligibility and name placement on the presidential ballot for 2012.

This is a national call to action to help ensure Article II, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution is upheld by stopping Obama from getting back in the White House for another 4 un-Constitutional years. The Obama State Ballot Challenge 2012 project was created to help organize and report on the Herculean effort to keep Obama off the Presidential election ballot in 2012 because he does not meet the Constitutional standard of Natural Born Citizen that was established by Minor v. Happersett, and because of his massive fraud crimes committed before and during his tenure in the White House.

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/

Russian newscaster ‘salutes’ Obama

During a news broadcast on Russian TV, anchor Tatiana Limanova spoke about Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s appearance at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. Shortly after, the anchor mentioned that Medvedev will soon take an APEC leadership role previous held by U.S. President Barack Obama. The only odd thing to note, however, is that Limanova says Obama’s name while simultaneously showing her middle finger.

REN-TV, Limanova’s network, is reportedly one of Russia’s largest privately-owned news channels, claiming an audience of 113 million.

While inadvertent gesticulations can at times occur, this particular finger-placement can hardly be construed as anything else:

 

JustiaGate

 Dianna Cotter, PortlandCivil Rights Examiner

October 18, 2011

Someone was incredibly busy in June 2008 working on an illegal front invisible to the public; searching and altering Supreme Court Cases published at Justia.com which cite the only case in American history – Minor v. Happersett (1875) – to directly construe Article 2 Section 1′s natural-born citizen clause in determining a citizenship issue as part of its holding and precedent.  In this unanimous decision, the Supreme Court defined a “native or natural-born citizen” as a person born in theUS to parents who were citizens; a definition which excludes from eligibility both Barack Obama and John McCain. 

In June 2008 no one was discussing Minor v. Happersett 88 US 162 (1875) with regard to Obama. In fact, those who were discussing the then Senator’s citizenship status had focused instead on his birth in Hawaii in a attempt to prove the future president was not born in the United States despite publication of the Senator’s short form computer generated Birth Certificate. It would not be until October of 2008 that Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility would be questioned as to his status as a dual citizen at the time of his birth.

NOTE: Although the author is correct that in June 2008, Minor was not being discussed. I did in fact publish the ‘Barack Obama Un-Constitutional‘ in Sept 2008, the exact date Sept 26th, 2008 which does list Minor as a reference.  Again, this blog is vindicated!

Meanwhile, at the “Supreme Court Center” of the influential legal research website Justia.com, efforts were underway corrupting at least 25 Supreme Court cases by erasing references to the words “Minor V. Happersett” along with references to other relevant cases on the issue along with the insertion of misleading numerical ciations.  And In two documented cases actual text was removed.

Clearly this was done in these specific cases in order to prevent their being found by internet researchers long before anyone had even begun to look for them, even before Obama would win the Democratic Nomination at the DNC Convention inDenver,Colorado in August ’08. This is premeditation and intent to deceive.

So far, 25 corrupted SCOTUS have been identified, and this number may continue to rise as the scope of the tampering becomes apparent. These cases all relied upon Minor, some specifically referencing its definition of Natural Born Citizen – a definition which makes Obama ineligible to be President as that definition is part of the holding and continuing precedent, issued from the highest court in our nation making it the law of the land, even now.   

The most extreme sabotage so far discovered appears to have been done to the landmark decision United States v. Wong Kim Ark which was sabotaged to remove “Minor v. Happersett” three times, along with one reference to “Scott v Sandford”, another to the Slaughterhouse Cases  and some accompanying text relevant to the issue. These surgical alterations would alter and shape the national dialogue; leaving a persistent and  incorrect interpretation of the meaning of the ‘natural born citizen’ clause. There is no doubt whatsoever that this was the specific intent of those responsible for this illegal editing of American history and law.

As previously mentioned, the specific distinction between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen made in Minor v. Happersett is in the holding of the case, the section which creates the Law, and it is this Law which has been repeatedly cited over the decades since. In order to minimize the importance of Minor, someone at Justia deliberately decided to make these supporting citations as difficult as possible to find.

This has had the desired effect, diluting the importance of Minor v. Happersett in the national dialogue across the blogosphere’s political spectrum ever since. The end result: the one case which defines Natural Born Citizen was reduced to seeming irrelevance, and thus the conversation never got past doorkeepers already in Obama’s camp in the mainstream media.

Of course, a lawyer going into Court would never rely upon anything but an official source for Supreme Court law, but 99.9% of the population have no access to dusty law texts, or expensive legal research services such as Lexis and Westlaw. Those who committed these crimes were well aware of this, and used it to their advantage.

The manipulation at Justia.com diluted the importance of Minor by killing the citations in Supreme Court cases spanning over 100 years. Since Google most often returns Justia.com’s version of the case being searched for as the first or second hit, Justia’s version of Supreme Court opinions are most influential in the blogosphere’s forums and comments. Erasing those citations and text on the internet literally erases the importance of Minor and its precedents to millions of Americans otherwise unlikely to ever step into physical Law Library.

This is nothing short of appalling. Justia swapped their tampered versions of the cases for the actual Supreme Court opinions and then pawned them off as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text” of the Supreme Court’s opinions. Yet Justia CEO Tim Stanley claims that making case law available to the public for free is the mission of Justia. In reality, Justia has been re-inventing our legal history and passing it off as genuine.

Attorney Donofrio’s Full report “Justia.com Surgically Removed “Minor v Happersett” from 25 Supreme Court Opinions in run up to ’08 Election”,  published today explains that exposure to criminal punishment is a direct result of not just the tampering, but more specifically, as a result of placing text on every tampered page which states, “Full text of case”:

Regardless of who you supported in 2008, or whether you agree with the assertion of Minor’s relevance, every American should be outraged that 25 Supreme Court cases were surgically sabotaged and then passed off to the public as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text of Case”.  This is the very definition of “Orwellian” fascism.  It’s propaganda.  And there is no place for it in the United States.  The sacrifices for truth and justice which created and have sustained this nation are wantonly debased by the subversive deception emanating from Justia.com servers. – Leo Donofrio Esq.

Clearly, the corruption of Supreme Court Cases was systemic and surgically targeted within Justia.com, one of the largest and best known legal research sites on the internet. Justia is nothing if not efficient in driving traffic to its site; this is after all their business. Today they partner with Google and have Google Analytics within their site which does two things; it increases Justia’s visibility on Google searches, and it pushes their website to the top of those searches done on legal issues. When specific search terms are erased out of a document, naturally that document will not appear on a search. Anyone searching for the case name “Minor v. Happersett” and “citizenship” would never see the dozens of cases manipulated by Justia.com.

Justia founder Tim Stanley has for years prided himself and his companies on principles of ‘freedom of information’.  On June 19th, 2008, Stanley addressed the Legislative Council Committee at the Oregon State Legislature with the following statements:

“Our goal is to provide academic researchers, government officials, attorneys, and the public with advanced features, including full‐text search, annotations by legal professionals, and comparison tools to visualize the differences in the law between the individual states…”

And

“In the end, we both recognize the importance of providing the public with online access to our nation’s laws because such actions promote understanding, participation in and respect for our democratic institutions and legal system.”

To describe these comments, made at roughly the same time Supreme Court Cases were being scrubbed and deliberately altered at his site as ironic, is an understatement of gross proportions.

Only a person thoroughly educated in the law would know precisely which cases to look for in order to direct the changes to be made to those cases. Furthermore, only someone with access to Justia.com’s database could physically make these changes from inside the website. This artificially created a near empty result set and the cases which did turn up led those inexperienced in the law, nowhere.

This appears to violate every principle Tim Stanley and Justia.com have built their business upon.

The manipulations at Justia.com were initially discovered by Attorney Leo Donofrio on July 1, 2011, when he published his initial report, “Justia.com Caught Red Handed Hiding References to Minor v. Happersett In Published US Supreme Court Decisions,”. Upon publication of his original discovery documenting the sabotage of Boyd v. Nebraska, and Pope v. Williams, two Supreme Court cases which cite to Minor v. Happersett as precedent on citizenship, two things happened almost immediately: First, the altered pages were returned to their original versions at Justia within an hour or so of Donofrio’s publication. Second, despite Justia CEO Tim Stanley’s cries for freedom of legal information (and law suits compelling the same), robots have now been placed on the Justia URL’s for the Boyd and Pope cases at InternetArchive.org, also known as the Waybackmachine.  These robots make it impossible to see the tampering as it unfolded in mid-2008… with those cases. 

So much for freedom of information. 

One can, however, still see the tampering from screenshots taken by Donofrio and are attached to that original report on July 1, 2011 at his blog, Natural Born Citizen, which has been singularly focused on the issue of Presidential eligibility since late 2008.

As Donofrio documents in his article today, when he discovered a third tampered case, instead of rushing to publish it, he contacted a number of other bloggers and reporters to help document the evidence before Justia dispersed their robots to block it.  While Donofrio originally only discovered two cases of tampering, somebody at Justia knew where the bones were buried and went about reinstating “Minor v. Happersett” in the at least 25 cases which it had earlier sabotaged.  It appears that whoever knew about these additional despoiled cases, must have believed by fixing them before the corruption was exposed no one would ever suspect they too had been altered.

What tipped Donofrio off last week to the extent of Justia’s tampering was the case “Luria v. United States”. This case also firmly supports Minor on citizenship, and he double checked the text to see if it included references to Minor. It did… something he had not noticed upon previous readings of the case at Justia.com.

With his new insight into SCOTUS case tampering, he plugged the URL into the Waybackmachine to see if it had been altered in the past. Bingo. It had. Furthermore there was nothing blocking his ability to see those snapshotted pages, and how they had been altered compared to the original text. The gun wasn’t just smoking, the bullet was still flying.

A brief explanation of the how the Waybackmachine works. It takes snapshots of internet pages. It may not record the day a given webpage changed, but it documents the changes when it does hit that page. Thus a date on the Waybackmachine of April 13, 2004 means this was the date the snapshot was taken, not when the changes were necessarily made. There is no way of knowing precisely when the change occurred as the waybackmachine does not record the precise instant the change is made, it is only sometime later when the Internet archive records it.

The evidence he discovered there, at the time of publication of this article, is still available and shows the same exact same pattern of behavior – deception – that Justia exhibited with the Boyd and Pope cases Donofrio published back in July.

If Justia hasn’t blocked access to the WaybackMachine for their publication of Luria v. US, 231 U.S. 9 (1913) by the time you read this, then it continues to be evident and accessible that on Nov. 4, 2006 the Waybackmachine recorded  Justia published the true original opinion issued by the Supreme Court with no tampering evident. Minor v. Happersett is cited on page 22 directly referencing Presidential eligibility as follows:

“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 165, 22 L. ed. 627; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101, 28 S. L. ed. 643, 645, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 41; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 827, 6 L. ed. 204, 225.”

The July 6, 2008 Waybackmachine snapshot of Luria v. US is the first snapshot that shows the tampering:

“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society.  These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other.  Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency.   88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; 22 U. S. 827.”

Notice that “Minor v. Happersett” has been removed along with the reference to “Osborn v. United States”, another case which causes trouble for Obama (and McCain).  All of the WaybackMachine snapshots between July 6, 2008, and April 13, 2010 for this case, show the same tampering.  The current, live Justia page for Luria v. US has been un-scrubbed and shows the original Supreme Court text. It is only with an archival resource such as the Waybackmachine that the alterations can be seen.

At publication, insertion of the URL into the Waybackmachine for this page at Justia still reveals the changes made to this page over time. Repeat this entire process with 25 Supreme Court cases and the extent of the tampering becomes evident.

This is disturbing enough, yet there was another subtle and insidious layer of deception. In every single instance of tampering, the numerical citation attached to Minor V. Happersett, has also been altered.  (See Donofrio’s blog for a complete break down of this.)  Changing these numbers is yet another layer of deception practiced at Justia.

While Donofrio documents in detail what the finer points of law in both versions mean in his article, this Examiner.com publication documents what this reporter has personally witnessed – the tampering of Supreme Court Cases online in the guise of “Full Text of Case”. This article is not the legal opinion of an attorney; it is witness to an event.

It’s important to note that the only way Justia could block all access to previous versions of their publication of cases would require .txt robots to be placed on their entire domain records at the Waybackmachine.  If Tim Stanley were to secure Justia.com from the honest and forthright archiving of the WaybackMachine, he would be an instant pariah in the freedom of information scene of which he is a leader. 

Furthermore, ifStanleywere to place robots on only the 25 (or more) cases which cite Minor v. Happersett, it would be a de-facto admission of guilt. 

It appears that whoever tampered with these cases went back and “fixed” all of them, including 23 Donofrio wasn’t aware of until this week when he conclusively established the sabotage by Justia.  For all 25, the pattern is precisely the same. In 2006, the cases at Justia are pristine in the Waybackmachine; word for word from official Supreme Court cases. Then at various points in 2008, the cases are corrupted by removal of the case name “Minor v, Happersett” ( as well as some other case names and text.)

The cases remained corrupted, according to the snapshots of the Waybackmachine in most cases, until late 2010.

Today however, all 25 cases have been painstakingly returned to their official Supreme Court versions; all references to Minor are back, the case and page numbers have been restored, as well as all missing text and references to other cases.  Still, the pattern is clearly visible to anyone who takes the time to look at the evidence made available by the Waybackmachine.  The sophistication and surgical elegance used to sabotage these cases is astounding, and has been personally witnessed by this reporter.

Every case which has been found to date by Mr. Donofrio has been documented with great attention to all these details. This has been accomplished by downloading the full code of the original un-tainted pages and the corrupted revisions from the Waybackmachine’s date stamped archive, along with screenshots of the pages as they appeared in browsers such as Mozilla Firefox before and after the tampering occurred, and the restored pages.

The volume of data is significant and Mr. Donofrio is in the process of making the entire archive available to the public. The article he has published today contains what he refers to as a “document dump“. It is in reality evidence. The reader is strongly encouraged to view the images which document Justia’s actions. Upon doing so, every member of congress should be notified of the existence of this information. Such usurpation of American history and law cannot be allowed.

Screenshots and links have been sent to several specific media contacts which include the Washington Times, Accuracy In Media, and Free Republic. In the interest of putting this information in front of as many eyes as possible before publication, it has been made freely available since Friday October 18, 2011 in the form of screenshots and saved page code. Should the information presented here be altered on the internet following publication, there will be a significant number of media outlets with knowledge and proof of any further alterations to internet archives.

The penalty associated with violating the “False Writings Statute”, 18 U.S.C. 1018 is jail and a fine for each count. With at least 25 counts if not more, this could mean upwards of 25 years in prison. The manipulation of Supreme Court cases is an offense against all Americans, and the Court itself. If like Fast and Furious this scandal reaches directly to the White House, the ramifications are both dire and catastrophic.

Minor v. Happersett defined the one specific term which Barack Obama could not overcome with “Hope and Change” though he could ‘hope’ someone would ‘change’ the cases which help define the term “Natural Born Citizen,”.  This case, if it had been sufficiently known to the public and media, and sufficiently documented by supporting citations, might have eliminated the possibility of Obama’s nomination and/or election. Either Obama got lucky in this regard, or the “constitutional law professor” and former editor of the Harvard Law Review had some hand in directing the efforts to erase the very citations in law which define him as a citizen, and at the same time rule him out as a constitutional candidate for President of the United States.

Just as certainly as the corruption at Justia.com has been documented and archived, more will be revealed. Stay tuned, it is expected that this information will generate some significant updates. They will be reported here as they happen.

Continue reading on Examiner.com JustiaGate – Portland Civil Rights | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/civil-rights-in-portland/justiagate#ixzz1bR3mM19i

Read from Leo’s site http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/justia-com-surgically-removed-minor-v-happersett-from-25-supreme-court-opinions-in-run-up-to-08-election/

 

Citizenship Jeopardy By Cindy Simpson at American Thinker http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/citizenship_jeopardy.html

Barack Obama is NOT even a US Citizen – so says the law – Pt 2

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama was under British Law and British jurisdiction at birth and not theUnited States. Therefore was Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama even a citizen of theUnited States.

“The Supreme Court’s in Elk v. Wilkins 112U.S.94, 5 S.CT. 41, 28 L.ED. 643 (1884), the court ruled that the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” the court held, mean “not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiange.” 100% jurisdiction required.

Per Tench Coxe (May 22, 1755 – July 17, 1824) was an American political economist and a delegate forPennsylvaniato the Continental Congress in 1788-1789. He wrote under the pseudonym “A Pennsylvanian”.

Written during the discussion of the United States Constitution

TO THE CANDID READER.

Quote “Our President must be matured by the experience of years, and being born among us, his character at thirty-five must be fully understood. Wisdom, virtue and active qualities of mind and body can alone make him the first servant of a free and enlightened people.”

The United States Naturalization Act of 1790 is clear; the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States….” Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father.

Again; the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

In the year 1873 the United States Attorney General ruled the word “jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment to mean:

The word “jurisdiction” must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United Stateshad over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment… Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them. (14 Op. Atty-Gen. 300.)

House Report No. 784, dated June 22, 1874, stated, “The United States have not recognized a double allegiance. By our law a citizen is bound to be ‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.” There is no way in the world anyone can claim “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” affirms the feudal common law doctrine of birth citizenship to aliens because such doctrine by operation creates a “double allegiance” between separate nations.

All persons born in the allegiance of the United Statesare natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law. There are two exceptions, and only two, to the universality of its application. The children of ambassadors are, in theory, born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent; and slaves, in legal contemplation, are property, and not persons. The common law has made no distinction on account of race or color. Free persons of color, born within the allegiance of the United Statesare citizens, and have always been entitled to be so regarded.United Statesv.Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. iS. 28, 40; lAm.L. T. U. S. Ctt. 22.

Citizen has relative applications, which modify its sense in given cases. In its highest political sense, it signifies the persons who constitute the political society. It is not confined to persons enjoying the right of suffrage; and, on the other hand, a person may be an elector without being a citizen. And the mere fact of birth within the territorial limits of the United Statesdoes not constitute one a citizen. Opin. of Atty.-Gen. dishing, on Relation of Indiana, 7 Op. Att.-Gen. 746.

“And the mere fact of birth within the territorial limits of the United Statesdoes not constitute one a citizen.”

Birth and allegiance go together, get it.

Domicile in a foreign country does not affect the fact of citizenship, nor work a forfeiture of political rights. When the territory and government of a kingdom pass to and become merged in the territory and government of another nation, all of its subjects pass also. The tie which binds them is not bodily presence, but allegiance. Brown v.United States, 5 Ct. of CI. 571.

 “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

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

By the common law, a subject travelling abroad on public or private business, with the express or implied license of his sovereign, is under that sovereign’s protection; and, consequently, both he and his children born while so travelling owe allegiance to and are citizens of the native country of their father. The length of the father’s residence abroad is not material, so that it was, in intention and in fact, temporary, not perpetual. And whether the mother was a citizen or not is unimportant: the status of the child is determined by that of the father. Ludlam v. Ludlam, 31 Barb. 486; Davis v. Hall, 1 Nott fr M. 292; Lasportas v. De la Motta, 10 Rich. Eq. 38.

Quote: “By the common law, a subject travelling abroad on public or private business, with the express or implied license of his sovereign, is under that sovereign’s protection; and, consequently, both he and his children born while so travelling owe allegiance to and are citizens of the native country of their father.”

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”

Under the act of April 14, 1802, ch. 288, 5 4, the children of persons duly naturalized under any of the laws of the United States, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of their parents being so naturalized, are, if dwelling within the United States, to be considered as citizens of the United States.Campbellv. Gordon, 6 Crunch, 176.

Is Barack Obama naturalized as a United Statescitizen? NO!

Although a state, by its laws, passed since the adoption of the constitution, may put a foreigner, or any other description of persons, upon a footing with its own citizens as to all the rights and privileges enjoyed by them within its dominion and by its laws, that will not make him a citizen of the United States, nor entitle him to sue in its courts, nor to any of the privileges and immunities of a citizen in another state. Dral Scott r. Sandford, 19 How. 393.

The term citizens of a state, as used in the constitution, applies only to natural persons, members of the body politic, owing allegiance to the state, and not to artificial persons created by the legislature, and possessing only the attributes which the legislature has prescribed. Paul o.Virginia, 8 WaU. 168.

Created by the legislature equates to persons ‘naturalized’, even if Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama was ‘naturalized’ he would be an artificial person.

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama born a Brit never legit, foreign and alien to theUnited States.

Obama’s Birth Certificate Forgery Proven

I have been looking into the Obama Birth Certificate.  Here’s what can be said.

Currently there are two different Birth Certificates. One off Obama’s web-site and the other on FactCheck. Here is the one on His web-site.

Notice that it does not have three items, Date stamp, signiture, or seal. The seal is embossed. Hence would clearly be visible.

It COULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED BY THE STATE OF HAWAII.

Even if it was sent in a flat box, it is still missing the requied items, from the State. Nor would the Sate release the document electronically as some Obama supporters have suggested.

If the BC on his website was released by any official State Dept, it would have been notorized with the embossed SEAL, signed, and dated before it was released to ANYBODY. Including Obama himself.
If it was printed out by the Dept of Health via computer, it would have to have checked, verified, and Sealed, dated, and signed, before it was released to ANYBODY. Precaution to ANY official document.

The dept official stated that it should have the seal and date. Janice Okubo.

No let’s go to the FactCheck Birth Certificate.

Although this looks like a “Certified” Birth Certificate it is a forgery.  It does appers to have the date stamp, and signiture, however the SEAL is the give away to forgery.

Here is an actual Hawaii Birth Certificate;

Notice the embossed SEAL. Now we will look at the seal. We cropped the seal, flipped it, increased the contrast and look what we have. Below is the cropped/enlarged SEAL off a known good Hawaii Birth Certifcate.

Clearly able to read the following: “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii”

[The above SEAL is NOT on Obama's]

Now lets do the same with the embossed Sael off the FactCheck Birth certificatem, and see what we get.

again, another shot

Whats that, NO lettering stating where it was “Certified” from:

There IS NO lettering in the embossed SEAL.  There is NO “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii” Some have e-mailed me claiming they can see the lettering… Sorry folks, the State of Hawaii confirmed that it is NOT their seal used. You can clearly see the difference between the two, and one is a fake seal. The fake seal is on Obama’s.

Below is a side by side comparison between the two seals. For all the Obama supporters out there who claim they see things on the seal that is not there. The one on the left is from an actual Hawaiian Birth Certificate and the one on the right is from the Obama Birth Certificate from FactCheck. OK, here it is again, the one on the left is REAL, the one on the right is Obama’s. Sorry if you tell the difference between right and left.

Here is an e-mail that I recieved from the State of Hawaii.

Do you understand what it says.  The official State seal used by the Department of Health, has lettering embedded into the seal.

Obama’s does not have any lettering and is not an official seal from the State of Hawaii.

It’s a forgery.  Obama can’t porduce a valid Birth Certificate, nor can he prove Natural Born Citizenship.

Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetor when he moved to Indonesia and the following is his “Official” registration at school in Indonesia.

Notice the name: Barry Soetoro Nationality: Indonesian Religion: Muslim

There it is folks. Obama busted!

I have been swamped with people saying that comparing Birth Certificates from two different states is not a valid comparison.  Here is an official US Guide for Birth certificates. There are standards for Birth Certificates, and the information contained therein.  The short form is limited in data, hence the long form or “Vault” copy prefered.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/techap99.pdf

 

 

 

 

Standard certificate of live birth

 

The U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth, issued by the Public Health Service, has served for many years as the principal means of attaining uniformity in the content of the documents used to collect information on births in the United States. It has been modified in each State to the extent required by the particular State’s needs or by special provisions of the State’s vital statistics law. However, most State certificates conform closely in content to the standard certificate.

The first standard certificate of birth was developed in 1900. Since then, it has been revised periodically by the national vital statistics agency through consultation with State health officers and registrars; Federal agencies concerned with vital statistics; national, State, and county medical societies; and others working in public health, social welfare, demography, and insurance. This procedure has assured careful evaluation of each item for its current and future usefulness for legal, medical, demographic, and research purposes. New items have been added when necessary, and old items have been modified to ensure better reporting or, in some cases, dropped when their usefulness appeared to be limited.

1989 revision

 

–Effective January 1, 1989, a revised U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth (figure 4-A) replaced the 1978 revision. This revision provided a wide variety of new information on maternal and infant health characteristics, representing a significant departure from previous versions in both content and format. The most significant format change was the use of check boxes to obtain detailed medical and health information about the mother and child. It has been demonstrated that this format produces higher quality and more complete information than do open-ended items.

 

 

Obama’s COLB is forged

The Hawaiian COLB contains security features that some might be be aware of. The lines on the paper are designed to prevent forgery and fraud. I will post several images of real Hawaiian Birth Certifications and Obama’s which can be seen as a forgery and a fake.

Here we have an actual Hawaiian Birth Certification.

I have adjusted the contrast and brightness and flipped the image to be able to read the SEAL and Date

Notice the impression of the embossed SEAL and Date stamp.

Here is another Hawaiian BC found on the internet

This one we will use to again, compare the Obama forgery. Notice that the SEAL’s are in the same general area on both.

Now here is the Obama “COLB” posted on “Fight the Smears”

Notice that there is NO indications of a date stamp, or embossed SEAL.

We will now compare the area were the SEAL should be. Here is the SEAL for the 1990 COLB above. It has been cropped tp cover the bottom righthand section. We will now, adjust the contract and brightness to the area

Notice the security line [vertical and horizontal] are broken where the SEAL is embossed. Below is a close-up of the embossed SEAL area.

again, clearly showing the security lines broken, due to the SEAL. Here is the section and area used

Now here is the same bottom righthand section on the Obama “COLB”.

Notice there are NO lines broken or anything indicating that a stamp or SEAL was ever applied to the document. Here is a comparison of the same areas togather.

This is proof that the “COLB” posted on Fight the Smears is a computer generated forgery that could in no way be an Official document from the State of Hawaii, as they could not ever release a COLB without the SEAL or Date Stamp.

Obama and his campaign fabricated a forged document.

Here is what a REAL Hawaiian Long Form Birth certificate looks like.

and another Long Form

Notice the following the 1962 Long Form has the same security lines and you can see the embossed seal.

Even the 1963 Long Form has the same security lines.

Reverse showing the back

Even the 1962 Long Form that was taken by hand and NOT scanned can you see the embossed seal. WHY CAN”T YOU SEE IT ON Obama’s? Because it’s FAKE!

Natural Born Citizen legally defined

There has been much debate as to whether the term “Natural Born Citizen” has ever been legally defined or will some court have to finally define it, such as the Supreme Court of the United States.  The term “Natural Born Citizen” is a requirement for only two positions within our government, President and Vice-President.  What did the Founding Father’s and Framers of the United States Constitution mean to do or accomplish by placing this requirement for the highest office?

First off, let us look at what the Framer’s used as a guide.

The Founding Fathers of the United States, used Vattel’s Laws of Nations as their guide and reference to meanings and definitions within our Constitution. 

The myth that the founding of American Republic was based on the philosophy of John Locke could only have been maintained, because the history of Leibniz’s influence was suppressed. The American Revolution was, in fact, a battle against the philosophy of Locke and the English utilitarians. Key to this struggle, was the work of the Eighteenth-century jurist, Emmerich de Vattel, whose widely read text, The Law of Nations, guided the framing of the United States as the world’s first constitutional republic. Vattel had challenged the most basic axioms of the Venetian party, which had taken over England before the time of the American Revolution, and it was from Vattel’s The Law of Nations, more than anywhere else, that America’s founders learned the Leibnizian natural law, which became the basis for the American System.

Benjamin Franklin’s (a signer of our Constitution) letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December 1775
“I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author”?

I am sure most reading this will know who Benjamin Franklin was. However one reference will not squell the unbelief that Vattel’s Laws of Nations, is not clear enough. So do a search on Laws of Nations and you will get HUNDREDS of responses. http://rs6.loc.gov/ammem/hlawquery.html This from the Library of Congress.  Another excellent post is the following; The concept of judicial review, which Hamilton had championed in Rutgers v. Waddington, was included in the U.S. Constitution. In {The Federalist Papers,} No. 78, “The Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” circulated as part of the debate over the new Constitution, Hamilton developed a conception of constitutional law which was coherent with Vattel’s conception. Hamilton stated that it is a “fundamental principle of republican government, which admits the right of the people to alter or abolish the established Constitution, whenever they find it inconsistent with their happiness.” However, the Constitution can only be changed by the nation as a whole, and not by the temporary passions of the majority or by the legislature. Both to protect the Constitution, but also to ensure just enforcement of the law, the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and the executive branch is essential. The judiciary must be the guardians of the Constitution, to ensure that all legislative decisions are coherent with it. This idea championed by Hamilton, that the courts ensured that the Executive and Legislative branches followed the Constitution, was later established as a principle of American jurisprudence by Chief Justice John Marshall

Again proving the Constitution, it’s meaning, it’s wording , and it’s definitions were clearly a result of being referenced to Vattel’s Laws of Nations. So what does the Laws of Nations say about a “Natural Born Citizen”?

Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following. 

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

As I have stated before and will state here again.  Barack Obama, he has admitted being a British citizen at birth. From his own web-site,  “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

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

How can a British subject at birth, be free from any foreign influence as described by John Jay in the following; 

The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 [Farrand's Records, Volume 3]
LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3
[Note 3: 3 Documentary History of the Constitution, IV, 237.]
New York 25 July 1787

Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.

Again Alexander Hamilton (a signer of our Constitution) in the Gazette of the United States, published in Philadelphia, on June 29, 1793 “The second article of the Constitution of the United States, section first, establishes this general proposition, that “the EXECUTIVE POWER shall be vested in a President of the United States of America…The executive is charged with the execution of all laws, the law of nations, as well as the municipal law, by which the former are recognized and adopted.”

“The Law of Nations” provides the Constitutional definition of a “natural born citizen, historical records reveal that Vattel’s work was quoted at the Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787, various State Constitutional Conventions, and was also referenced in a 1785 letter by John Jay regarding a diplomatic matter.

Should any court finally decide that there IS ample evidence that Barack Obama is not qualified to hold the Office of the President of the United States, they will have to rely on Vattel as the defining definition and argument, and stare reality in the face that not only is Barack Obama unqualified, but that he is not even a US Citizen.

As a final note concerning the Supreme Court and Laws of Nations, I direct you to the following;

The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Volume 3]
Saturday, June 21, 1788.

Page 564

There is to be one Supreme Court–for chancery, admiralty, common pleas, and exchequer, (which great eases are left in England to four great, courts,) to which are added criminal jurisdiction, and all cases depending on the law of nations–a most extensive jurisdiction. This court has more power than any court under heaven. One set of judges ought not to have this power–and judges, particular, who have temptation always before their eyes. The court thus organized are to execute laws made by thirteen nations, dissimilar in their customs, manners, laws, and interests. If we advert to the customs of these different sovereignties, we shall find them repugnant and dissimilar. Yet they are all forced to unite and concur in making these laws. They are to form them on one principle, and on one idea, whether the civil law, common law, or law of nations. The gentleman was driven, the other day, to the expedient of acknowledging the necessity of having thirteen different tax laws. This destroys the principle, that he who lays a tax should feel it and bear his proportion of it. This has not been answered: it will involve consequences so absurd, that, I presume, they will not attempt to make thirteen different codes. They will be obliged to make one code. How will they make one code, without being contradictory to some of the laws of the different states?

Allow me to make one more reference;

The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Volume 4]
Seamen’s Bill.–For the Regulation of Seamen on Board the Public Vessels, and in the Merchant Service of the United States.
House of Representatives, February, 1813.

Mr. SEYBERT. The Constitution of the United States declares, Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies, throughout the United States.” Sir, the rule only relates to the mode; it is only operative during the nascent state of the political conversion, and it ceases to have effect the moment after the process has been completed. Your Constitution only recognizes the highest grade of citizenship that can be conferred. The alien is thus made a native, as it were, and is fully vested with every eight and privilege attached to the native, with the exception impressed on the Constitution Your statutes cannot deprive any particular species of citizens of the right of personal liberty, or the locomotive faculty, because the Constitution does not characterize the citizens of the United states as native and naturalized. Our great family is composed of a class of men forming a single genus, who, to all intents and purposes, are equal, except in the instance specified–that of not being eligible to the presidency of the United States. The only exception to the rule is expressed in the Constitution. If other exceptions had been contemplated by the framers of that instrument, they would also have been expressed. None other having been expressed, he said, it followed that your legislative acts could not make individual exceptions touching the occupation of a citizen. All freemen, citizens of the United States, may pursue their happiness in any manner and in any situation they please, provided they do not violate the rights of others. You cannot deny to any portion of your citizens, who desire to plough the deep, the right to do so, whilst you permit another portion of them the enjoyment of that right.

 

Mr. ARCHER. The framers of our Constitution did not intend to confine Congress to the technical meaning of the word naturalization, in the exercise of that power–the more especially when the comprehensive word rule was made use of. The principle upon which the power was to be exercised was left to the judicious exercise of Congress; all that was required was, that the rule should be uniform throughout the states. In the grant there is no other specification, as to the exercise of it, than that of its uniformity. The term naturalization was borrowed from England. It must be understood here in the sense and meaning which was, there attached to it. Whether it was absolute or qualified, it was still a naturalization. But the grant of a power in general terms necessarily implied the right to exercise that power in all its gradations. It Was in the political as it was in the natural world: the genus included the species. Besides, the power to naturalize was an attribute to sovereignty. It was either absolute or qualified; and if the grant to Congress only implied a power of unlimited naturalization, the power to qualify existed in the states or in the people, for what was not specifically granted was reserved.

In treating of the executive power, the Constitution defines the qualifications of the President. It declares that he should be a natural-born citizen, or a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution. This article is unquestionably no limitation of the power of Congress upon the subject of naturalization. It was impossible to abridge a specific grant of power without a specific limitation, and the article alluded to could not be tortured, by the most ingenious mind, to diminish, even by implication, the authority of Congress upon a subject to which it was totally irrelevant.

Natural Born Citizen- Visual Guide

Here is the Natural Born Citizen. explained visually.

A Blog Response

Recently on another blog: The Right Side of Life posted the following;   Rep. Deal Wants Obama’s Birth Certificate; Let the Blowback Begin!

Apparently Rep. Deal knew he was going to stir up quite the proverbial hornet’s nest by seriously suggesting that he was going to ask the President to see his birth certificate. So, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (h/t PeachPundit), the castigations are now beginning.

As you read through what I post from the article, below, I’m going to interject my own commentary into what the included public figures say, because I think most of them are seriously full of it; the idea that somehow someone is considered to be, essentially, other than rational for daring to question the President is, itself, asinine:

“I have looked at the documentation that is publicly available and it leaves many things to be desired,” Deal said in an interview Friday.

Deal’s statement came a day after he noted in an online chat that he would join other U.S. House members in writing the president and asking that he release a copy of his birth certificate.

a poster that goes by siseduermapierdra posted again the flawed Wong Kim Ark decision in his rantinmgs. I posted the follwing reply. Posted here for you all to read.

I hate to break the news to you, but I have been saying the following LONG before Leo.

Quote; Barack Obama has admitted that he is a British subject [CITIZEN] at birth, was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 [JURISDICTION] and followed the condition of his father, a foreign national from Kenya [ALLEGIANCE] to the British Crown.

The 14th Amendment and Title 8 state that NOT only being born in country, but that you have to have the Jurisdiction.

You attempt to solve a math problem with only half the equation, it does not work.

Citizenship + Jurisdiction + Allegiance = Natural Born Citizen

Even SR511 that allowed McCain, was flawed as it clearly stated the requirements for NBC status.

 Senate Resolutions is a resolution is often used to express the body’s approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution.

Again, I will note: being protected by a constitution.
What Constitution are they refering to that protects the NBC requirement.

“”"Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it…”"”

Note BORN TO TWO (2) US CITIZEN Parents, but OUTSIDE the Country.
Which we know McCain was NOT born in a US Military hospital on base, as there WAS no hospital on base.

Please state who are Barack Obama TWO (2) US Citizen parents?

Now, lets take a look at John Bingham, ‘author’ of the 14th Amendment of which you attempt to use a flawed decision of KWA.

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen -Rep. John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment, before The US House of Representatives ((Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291, March 9, 1866 ) http://grou.ps/zapem/blogs/3787

Note: that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty.

Barack Obama has admitted that he is a British subject [CITIZEN] at birth, was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 [JURISDICTION] and followed the condition of his father, a foreign national from Kenya [ALLEGIANCE] to the British Crown.

I believe Obama fails, based on John Bingham

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
-Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happersett (1875)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0088_0162_Z…

Now Justice Waite;
it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

Again born in country to parents who are citizens

Please state the US Parent(s) of Barack Obama, both of them.
Oh, that’s right his father was a foreign national, or ‘as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.’

“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied.
“That is mine, too,” said Leahy
-Homeland Security SecretaryMichael Chertoff and Senator Patrick Leahy, (April 03, 2008) http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200804/041008c.html

Again, please provide the names of both the United States citizen Parent(s) of Barack Obama.

that’s right, his father was a foreign national. He was from a foreign country.

Since you like to use KWA, here is another
“In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the fourteenth amendment now in question, said: ‘The constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.’ And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the construction of this provision.”
-Justice Grey, in US v Wong Kim Ark (1898) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=1…

Where is this other resort that the Supreme Court and other cases used to determine.

E. Vattel, the Law of Nations.

 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

It’s hard for Obama supporters to face facts.

Too Late to Apologize: A Declaration

Statements by the Kenyan Government on Obama

 

Kenyan Parliament notes dated 11/11/2008
 
There is big talk about Obama and Kogelo, and the increased tourist attraction in that area. However, the road in that area cannot allow people to reach Kogelo. Of course, I am glad the Government is in the process of expanding the airport. But one would need to take a drive to appreciate the situation.

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

Or from the 12/11/2008 

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

Or this one

 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 25th March, 2008

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

 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 2nd December, 2008

 In fact, it has been part of our own customs. The mursik, that beautiful milk from Kipsigis land is based on the concept that if we introduce carbon to milk and ferment it, the pathogens will be attracted to the carbon and no mursik is known to cause any illness. That is biotechnology. Biotechnology has been used extensively even in Ukambani. We know the root systems in a lemon are much more advanced and so by cutting a shoot from a lemon and introducing an orange, that is biotechnolgy. You have a very stable plant which will be an orange and not a lemon.
Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, biotechnolgoy has been used extensively during the hybrid concept. The hybrid concept is taking those animals or plants which are said to be superior or have certain characteristics. For example, if you were to breed for milk production, those ones with good characteristics, good conversion ratio and so on and so forth. That cross-breeding or upgrading brings in hybrids, and the hybrid system has been used extensively again here particularly in maize and that is what has made Kenya Seed Company prosper. This is close to Obamaism. Mr. Obama is a cross breed of the very best from Africa. That is hybrid and it is a fact. It is S1 cross and a superior person. That is technology.

Is Obama a freak?

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

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

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

 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Tuesday, 20th January, 2009

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

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

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

Nail in the COLB Coffin

The Barack Hussein Obama COLB [Certification of Live Birth] that has been posted on the internet, first the DailyKos and then Fight The Smears and finally at FactCheck now been proven to be a fake, fabricated, and forged document. There is no doubt that the original is not an authentic State of Hawaii, Department of Health issued document.

Here is an example of a Hawaiian long form issued in September of 2010, a date where the Obama liars claim that Hawaii no longer issues what is presented below.

The following is the second sheet requesting the ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ not a Certification of Live Birth [COLB]

With some analysis work on the two images, here is what we can detect.  Using the same application as in the “Prove it to yourself series” Removing the layers, we can detect the underlying details.

and on the second sheet

The images [settlethebet] were what was posted on the following web-site

 

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/

 

Direct link

 

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/10/confirmed-hawaii-department-of-health.html

 

I was attempting to analyze the documents when I noticed that I was able to detect the layering. The ‘redacted’ info, the persons private info. I then tried the same to the original ‘DailyKOS’ COLB that was posted, I then tried the same with the ‘Fight the Smears’ COLB and noticed that the similar lines were detected.

If the lines were full and across as in the DailyKOS image, that would be a good indication that the COLB that was presented as ‘authentic’ should have numbers [the same indications of the 'settlethebet' where the lettering was detected. But it does not, hence without the presence of 'letters/numbers' it would support my initial theory that the DailyKOS image was based on the 'Hawaiian Blank Template' that was on the internet, and then the area that was supposed to contain the certification number was blanked out, because there was no number there to begin with. If there was, it would have been simpler to confirm that number with the one Hawaii would have on Obama. The fraud would have been exposed at the beginning.

 

If you'd like to repeat the process, do the following

 

1. Download 'Image Analyzer' http://meesoft.logicnet.dk/Analyzer/

     direct link    http://www.freewarefiles.com/downloads_counter.php?programid=5125

 

2. Install Image Analyzer

 

3. Copy the 'settlethebet' images from http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/10/confirmed-hawaii-department-of-health.html

 

    Direct links;

 

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g172/Danae_photos/SettleTheBet1.jpg

 

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g172/Danae_photos/SettleTheBet.jpg

 

Save the files to your local drive.

 

4. Open Image Analyzer and open one of the 'settlethebet' images

 

5. Open the 'Color Mapping', the 11th icon in the menu bar. (looks like a graph with a curve)

 

6. Use the drop down menu and select 'Zero Point' the setting will start at 127, move the slider to the bottom and

    notice the layering disappear and the lettering become visible. At 4 or 5 is the best for seeing that the lettering

   is evident.

 

7. Now attempt to try the same with the Obama COLB's.

 

Here is the 'original' Barack Hussein Obama [COLB] displayed on the DailyKOS

 

 

Here is the same with the ‘redacted’ layer exposed.

 

The security ‘Ratan Pattern’ is clearly detected but no lettering or numbers are. Here is a composite with both areas togather.

Proof that the original COLB that was posted had no numer or lettering indicating that it was never issued by the State of Hawaii Department of Health. It was based on the following ‘Blank Template’ and nothing more.

 

Final question, How could Obama release a document that has no certification number from Hawaii?

 

UPDATE:

Here is another surpise that the Obot’s can attempt to refute.  Note that the three distinct marking on each the Obama COLB and the Hawaiian Blank match up. The odds are astronimical of two seperate images, having the same markings.

Tyranny in Tenn

http://www.riseupforamerica.com/

Notice the injuries in his mug shot? I’m surprised his left ear is stll there.
Consistantly despicable reporting (if you can call that reporting)
New number to try:
TN Veterans Affairs Office
Director John Keyes
615-741-4790
Asst. Director Don Samuels

Oct. 27 report:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/10/27/monroe-county-gestapo-beat-and-taser-retired-naval-commander/
Can anyone in TN visit Lt. Cmdr. Fitzpatrick with a camera and document his injuries?

Here’s something everyone can do right now. Call this number plus the ones below and demand a resolution to this criminal activity before LC Fitzpatrick suffers the same fate as the Monroe County elections official, Jim Miller (found shot to death, in the trunk of his car, by a MC Deputy). Start with the Knoxville FBI–
TN FBI Phone: (865) 544-0751. Fax: (865) 544-3590.

The powers that be are completely out of control and it will only get worse unless and until you say “NO MORE”.
The time is now to take your stand. Take it in Monroe County, TN. Yes you can wait till after Nov. 2nd but after that it is time for all of us, from all over the country, to
TAKE A STAND!
Bogus arrest, Bogus justice with evil intent

I need a thousand people a day to be there until Lt. Cmdr. Fitzpatrick is released and his original complaint of treason against the usurper addressed. Who among you will put fear and your own self interest aside to fight in this noble cause?
This will be your legacy to your children and your childrens children.

This blog says ‘Thank You’

This blog may appear to be small in the world of the internet, however I would like to say thank you to all the sites and blogs that have used my political posters, research, and breaking news over the past year. Here is a small sampling of those blogs and sites that deserve to be recognized. Thank you!

Hawaii Gov Can’t Find Obama Birth Certificate – DUH!

Jerome Corsi, WorldNetDaily

Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.

Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president’s chances of re-election in 2012.

Donalyn Dela Cruz, Abercrombie’s spokeswoman in Honolulu, ignored again today another in a series of repeated requests made by WND for an interview with the governor.

Toward the end of the interview, the newspaper asked Abercrombie: “You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plan to release more information regarding President Barack Obama’s birth certificate. How is that coming?”

In his response, Abercrombie acknowledged the birth certificate issue will have “political implications” for the next presidential election “that we simply cannot have.”

Suggesting he was still intent on producing more birth records on Obama from the Hawaii Department of Health vital records vault, Abercrombie told the newspaper there was a recording of the Obama birth in the state archives that he wants to make public.

Abercrombie did not report to the newspaper that he or the Hawaii Department of Health had found Obama’s long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate. The governor only suggested his investigations to date had identified an unspecified listing or notation of Obama’s birth that someone had made in the state archives.

“It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down,” Abercrombie said.

For seemingly the first time, Abercrombie frankly acknowledged that presidential politics motivated his search for Obama birth records, implying that failure to resolve the questions that remain unanswered about the president’s birth and early life may damage his chance for re-election.

Read more: Hawaii governor can’t find Obama birth certificate

Update

Officials in Hawaii have tracked down papers indicating that President Obama was indeed born in their state, according to its new governor.

Gov. Neil Abercrombie, who took office in December, told Honolulu’s Star-Advertiser on Tuesday that “our investigation” indicates there is a recording of his birth.

“It actually exists in the archives, written down,” he said.

The new Democratic head of the state vowed when he took office that he would do his best to end the debate over Obama’s birth, which began in 2008 during the presidential campaign.

What does this really means

That record on file can not be a long form Birth Certificate issued by any hospital or birthing facility. Had Obama been born in any hospital or medical facility that would have automatically resulted in a long form Birth Certificate being submitted to the Department of Health. The COLB presented as Obama’s as a valid and authentic document issued by the State of Hawaii and containing data verified by the Department of Health and issued by the State of Hawaii based upon a long form Birth Certificate with recorded data in the index file is ‘NOTHING BUT A FRAUD, AND FORGERY, and a LIE’, as I have maintained since Aug 2008.

The only record that could exist upon Abercrombie’s statement is an affidavit on file and that being such supports Tim Adam’s claim that Hawaii has no Birth Certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II.

An affidavit on file with no collaborative evidence supports that Obama is nothing but a fraud and criminal, who claims to have been born in Hawaii. Claims and facts are two realities.

The address in the newspaper announcements point to Orland S. and Thelma S. (Young) Lefforge, who lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy.  There is no other reason why the address was listed as 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy when neither Barack Obama Sr or Stanley Ann resided there. If Madelyn Dunham had registered the birth as some speculate, why would she have used another address, especially the address of a professor of Barack Obama Sr? 

But, why would Orland or Thelma Lefforge use their address in registering a birth of a foreign exchange student from Kenya?

Because the birth took place outside the United States, during the time school was out [summer break], and both Barack Obama Sr and Stanley Ann did not establish a residence in Hawaii.

UPDATE #2

Pressure was mounting on Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie today amid increasing confusion over whether President Obama was born there.  The Daily Mail UK reports – Link

Abercrombie said on Tuesday that an investigation had unearthed papers proving Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.

He told Honolulu’s Star-Advertiser: ‘It actually exists in the archives, written down,’ he said.

What is written down? A note from his mommy? A note from Obama Sr’s college professor?

But it became apparent that what had been discovered was an unspecified listing or notation of Obama’s birth that someone had made in the state archives and not a birth certificate.

Not a BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

Then what was the COLB information based on? Remember the COLB is supposed to be backed up by an official generated long form BIRTH CERTIFICATE issued by an official or agency responsible for filing the birth with the Department of Health. So what is the COLB presented by Obama based upon, nothing, absolutely nothing but hot air, fictitious, and made up propaganda, and again is nothing but a forgery.

That the COLB that was used to present Obama as a ‘valid candidate’ is a fraudulant document, and that there is no document [long form Birth Certificate] backing it up as the Obamatards continuely like to state as ‘prima facie’ evidence, in a criminal act.

1. False Identification Crime Control Act of 1982
P.L. 97-398
H.R. 6946, December 31, 1982
96 Stat. 2009, Added 18 U.S.C § 1028 & 18 U.S.C. § 1738

The False Identification Crime Control Act of 1982 was passed to prohibit fraud in connection with identification documents. The act added two new statutes, “Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents” (18 U.S.C. § 1028) and “Mailing private identification documents without a disclaimer” (18 U.S.C. § 1738, since repealed by P.L. 106-578). Violators face fines and/or imprisonment for producing or transferring an identification document known it to be false or stolen. The Act also prohibited producing, transferring, or possessing a document-making device with the intent to produce false identification documents. However, the usage of the word “document” indicated that a defendant would have to actually possess the physical identification.

The same violation also covers those that created the fake Kenyan birth certificate.
I would also like to cite the following

18 USC Sec. 1001 01/05/2009

EXPCITE

TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I – CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 – FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
Sec. 1001. Statements or entries generally

STATUTE

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -

(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B,
110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.

FRAUD

18 USC §1028: Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information
(a) Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection (c) of this section

(1) knowingly and without lawful authority produces an identification document, authentication feature, or a false identification document;
(2) knowingly transfers an identification document, authentication feature, or a false identification document knowing that such document or feature was stolen or produced without lawful authority;
(3) knowingly possesses with intent to use unlawfully or transfer unlawfully five or more identification documents (other than those issued lawfully for the use of the possessor), authentication features, or false identification documents;
(4) knowingly possesses an identification document (other than one issued lawfully for the use of the possessor), authentication feature, or a false identification document, with the intent such document or feature be used to defraud the United States;
(5) knowingly produces, transfers, or possesses a document – making implement or authentication feature with the intent such document – making implement or authentication feature will be used in the production of a false identification document or another document – making implement or authentication feature which will be so used;
(6) knowingly possesses an identification document or authentication feature that is or appears to be an identification document or authentication feature of the United States which is stolen or produced without lawful authority knowing that such document or feature was stolen or produced without such authority;
(7) knowingly transfers or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law; or
(8) knowingly traffics in false authentication features for use in false identification documents, document – making …

Friend says Abercrombie told him, ‘There is no birth certificate!’

Hollywood Reporter Mike Evans: Governor Abercrombie told me there is no Barack Obama birth certificate in Hawaii; Absolutely no proof!

Via American Thinker; – Friend says Abercrombie told him, ‘There is no birth certificate!’ – By Jack Cashil

During an interview on the KQRS morning radio show on January 20, Mike Evans, a long-time friend of Hawaii governor Neil Abercrombie, shared a conversation he had with the governor the day prior. The reader is advised to judge for himself the credibility of Evans’ account, but he sounds convincing.

Evans, Honolulu born and now a Hollywood-based celebrity journalist, claimed that Abercrombie had promised him that he when he became governor, he planned to find absolute proof that Obama was born in Hawaii.

When Evans spoke to Abercrombie on January 19, Abercrombie reportedly told him that he searched the relevant Hawaii hospitals using his powers as governor, and concluded, according to Evans, “There is no Barack Obama birth certificate in Hawaii, absolutely no proof at all that Obama was born in Hawaii.” After Abercrombie made such a fuss about finding the birth certificate, Evans concluded of his friend that he has “got some egg in the face.”

Curiously too, when Evans asked Abercrombie when he first encountered the young Barack Obama, Abercrombie reportedly said, “I remember him playing in a T-Ball league,” when he was roughly five or six years old.

When did Kenya became Hawaii? Pt 2

In Part 2, we post even more evidence that Kenyan-Born Barack Hussein Obama has perpetrated a fraud against the Americam people and electorate.

Note in the first article below, Kenyan-Born US Senator. This was published when Barack Hussein Obama was a state senator and not running for the US Presidency. As a state Senator, there is no Constitutional requirement of being a ‘Natural Born Citizen’, only Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States. Note the ‘Years a Citizen’.

Article I – The Legislative Branch Section 3 – The Senate

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

[click on the images for a larger view]

In the third example posted above, the ‘Kenyan-born US Senator’ exploring ways of helping home province. Notice that it does not state ‘ancestral’ but directly ‘home’ province.

With the latest admissions from Neil Abercrombie and Mike Evans, that Hawaii has no Birth Certificate on file and that only a ‘notation’ is on file. It’s no wonder that Hawaii can’t produce a valid long form Birth Certificate, it does not exist. As Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya, as his wife stated Kenya was his ‘home country’.

Michelle Obama states Obama is Kenyan

This video has been on my Youtube channel.

Here is Michelle Obama clearly states Obama is ‘Kenyan’, not African American but flat out ‘Kenyan’. Note at the :16 sec mark.  “Someone like Barack Obama, a Kenyan, a blackman…”

Barack Obama in Africa 2006 “I Am So Proud To Come Back Home…”

From ObamaReleaseYourRecords

Video Flashback: Barack Obama Speaking In Western Kenya With Mass Murderer Raila Odinga: “I Am So Proud To Come Back Home…” – August 26, 2006 – Hat tip to RS. Clip embedded below…

ITNsource.com: U.S. Senator Barack Obama arrived in western Kenya on Saturday (August 26) to a welcome from thousands of cheering well-wishers, there to greet the rising political star of the America’s Democratic Party as a native son. Obama flew into Kisumu, on the shores of Lake Victoria, on the way to his Kenyan father’s village for the highly anticipated climax of his two-week African tour…. -Source.

Here is another newspaper article that even states Obama was born in the same area that he made the statement in the video.

As a State Senator Obama admits childhood in Kenya, Obama’s next big international journey will be in 2007 –he’s looking at China, India and Indonesia, “where ironicall I actually have more of a childhood than I do in Kenya.”

Michelle Obama – Obama, a Kenyan, when we visited Barack’s ‘Home Country’ of Kenya, on video multiple times.

Newspaper articles;

NPR Radio – Kenyan Born
Nigerian-Observer – Kenyan Born
All Africa – Kenyan Born
My Auburn California – Kenyan Born
East African Standard – Kenyan Born
Ghana News – Kenyan Born
Modern Ghana – - Continent of his birth
Newspage Weekly – Kenyan Born
BBC News – who last visited his Kenyan home in 1992
Sunday Standard – Kenyan Born
Tanzania – US Senator born here, He’s born here, who live in the US.

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

Neil Ambercrombie, current Gov of Hawaii, used a search warrant and was not able to locate any records in Hawaii of the supposed Barack Abdallah Husein Obama’s birth, per Ambercrombie ‘there is no proof that Obama was born in Hawaii’

Former Elections official Tim Adams, “there is no long form Birth Certificate on file in Hawaii for Barack Obama”

Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate – NOT!

So here we are in 2011 and Obama has released his long form Birth Certificate, NOT!

Here is an actual 1961 Hawaiian Birth Certificate

Here’s what Obama released

 Why if the Obama long form was isued in the same month as the Nordyke Twins [image above Obama] is there a different ‘registrar’ ?

Why is there no SEAL on the document as in the Nordyke’s? There is no embossed seal, either from 1961 [as in the Nordyke Birth Certificates] or from 2011. WHY?

What happened to Dr. Rodney West, who was supposed to be the doctor that delivered Obama?

Per the State of Hawaii concerning the SEAL;

The Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11, Department of Health, Section 11-1-2, regarding the Seal of the Department of Health, state:

§11-1-3

§11-1-2 Seal of the department of health.

a) The official seal of the department of health shall be circular in shape, two and one-fourth inches in diameter. At the curve on the top portion there shall be the words “DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH” and at the curve on the bottom portion there shall be the words “STATE OF HAWAII.” At the curve on each side portion shall be a star. In the center of the seal shall be the Caduceus, a winged rod entwined with two serpents, which has long been recognized as a universal symbol of medicine. The Caduceus shall be encircled by an indentation, which shall separate it from the words “DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH” and “STATE OF HAWAII.” For illustrative purposes, a black and white drawing of the official seal is attached at the end of this section as Exhibit “A,” titled “Seal of the Department of Health,” and dated November 1, 1988, and made a part of this section.

(b) The official seal of the department of health shall be embossed near the signature of the director of health to verify commissions of appointment of deputy directors and notaries public, certificates, and other formal official documents on which the official seal has been customarily used or is appropriate to be used, as the director of health may determine on a case-by-case basis.

(c) The seal of the department of health may also be reproduced, in either an enlarged or a reduced size, on official stationery, reports, certificates, equipment, supplies, uniform insignia, and other objects and items to be used or produced by the department of health, but the reproduction and use of the seal shall always be subject to the exclusive control of the director of health.

[Eff 2/14/2005 ] (Auth: HRS §§321-9, 91-2) (Imp:  HRS §§321-9, 91-2)

According to the web site the name didn’t change to Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital merged with Kapi‘olani Maternity Home in 1978. So how could his official long form birth certificate that was generated in 1961 have the name of the hospital that wasn’t created until 1978?”

Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital opened in 1909 named for Emma Kauikeolani Napoleon Mahelona (1862–1931), the wife of Albert Spencer Wilcox (1844–1919). In 1978, it merged with Kapiʻolani Maternity Home to become Kapiʻolani Medical Center for Women and Children.

So the hospital that is on the document Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital, changed/merged with Kapiʻolani Medical Center in 1978 and Hawaii updates all existing records to reflect the name change on file. Does the State of Hawaii issue new and updated Birth Certificates to all persons born there in the past?

I am not stating that the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital did not exist, nor that the Nordyke’s Birth Certificates are not vaild as they also state Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. What needs to be pointed out is that Nordyke’s 1961 long form Birth Certificate is different then the long form presented by Obama.

Why are there seams on the background and the appearance that the document was scanned? Recall that Hawaiin officials have stated that the current COLB’s are computer generated and printed out.

If this was a certified copy of the 1961 original, then why doesn’t it look like a 1961 long form?

This is nothing more then another attempt to pass off a forgery with additional information to make it appear that it is authentic. The COLB that was pawned off before this one, has the registration as ‘FILED’ this one says ‘ACCEPTED’, there can be no difference. As the COLB is supposed to be ‘EXACTLY’ the same data as the original it’s supposed to represent.

Where is the Director of Health’s name and signiture?

Where is the Registrar General’s name and signiture?

The date on this that Stanley Ann signed was on the 7th, while the birth was supposed to take place on the 4th. Mothers normally sign the birth registration within minutes of given birth. Any mother will attest that right after the baby is born, the paperwork begins.

So if Obama was born in Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital on Aug 4th, 1961 why is there not the same long form Birth Certificate on file as the Nordyke twins, born just after Obama was supposed to.

Why is Obama’s long form contain data that is on the index and is not contain the signitures and SEAL that a correct and valid Birth Certificate that would have been forwarded to the Department of Health in Hawaii in 1961 have?

Was Stanley Ann even pregnant!

Is it 1959 or 1962?

UPDATE:

Does the Long Form consist of layers?

How does a computer printout, based on a database contain imaging layers?

Here is a second video exposing the forgery. Seems like this fraudulant document is being caught on the first day of posting by numerous people.

Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate – NOT! Part 2

There is numerous other bloggers that are posting about the Obama long form Birth Certificate is a forgery, based upon the layering and the linked additions being rotated 90 degress. However there is even a reason to doubt the authenticity of the document that has been posted.

Here is the Obama long form that the White House states was issued by the Department of Health from the State of Hawaii.’

To date there is no other Birth Certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, that shows the left side bent, as it is in the Obama version. The image above clearly was copied onto the security paper using a copier. However that is not the point of this post.

The information in the long form Birth Certificate should ‘VALIDATE’ the information that was presented on the COLB [Certification of Live Birth] aka the short form version. However there is one glaring discrepency and this can’t be attributed to an error with the index file or database.

Below is a comparison between some various Birth Certificates and Obama’s COLB. Note that on the Obama COLB the field states ‘Date Files’ and the long form states ‘Date Accepted’. As the information is supposed to be taken from the long form and entered into the database, whereas the computer generated COLB data is pulled from that database, any discrepancies is not only questionable to the single document, but the entire database is then called into question.

Below is a comparison of the fields on the documents.

Here a copy of the Nordyke Twins long form Birth Certificates

Both the Nordyke’s Birth Certificates, there is no field labeled ‘Date Filed’, nor is there a “Date Accepted’ on the Obama COLB.

The Obama COLB is ‘FILED’, whereas the long form is ‘Date Accepted’, how can there be conflicting information, when the long form was supposed to be entered into the database as  valid and authentic information.

This means that either the COLB is correct and the long form a forgery, or the long form is correct and the COLB is a forgery, either way Barack Obama has issued a fraudulant document and there are laws regarding document forgery. There is no need to attempt to go over the layers, the 90 degree links and the differences between the AP and the White House versions. The fact that there are discrepancies between the two documents is proof enough that there exists a major problem that indicates document forgery.

 If this is in reality Obama’s 1961 long form Birth Certificate why is the data not in the database, where a computer generated document would be printed out, or the original 1961 long form Birth Certificate would have been certified from the microfiche file [like the Nordyke's], and this long form does not have the Director of Health’s and Generla Registrar’s signiture nor the embossed seal of the Department of Health.

The False Identification Crime Control Act of 1982, Public Law 97-398, amended Title 18 of the United States Code to provide penalties for certain false identification related crimes.
Birth Certificate Fraud 18 OEI- 07-99-00570 Section 1028 of that law addresses fraud activity in connection with identification documents. This law makes it a crime to knowingly produce, transfer, or possess false identification documents with the intent to defraud the United States. Punishment for an offense under this Act is a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment for up to 5 years. Many State statutes also address identity fraud, but it is considered a felony in only 23 States. In 28 States, birth certificate fraud remains a misdemeanor.

18 USC Sec. 1001 01/05/2009

EXPCITE

TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I – CRIMES CHAPTER 47 – FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS HEAD

Sec. 1001. Statements or entries generally

STATUTE

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully – (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years
or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or
both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements,
representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services,
personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to
the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or                                                                                           (2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.

SOURCE

Is Barack Obama even a United States Citizen?

 

Is Barack Obama even a United States Citizen, based upon the Founding Fathers and Congress at the time the United States Constitution was ratified?

 Although you might think this is a trick question, consider the following:

 The United States Constitution requires that to be eligible for the Presidency, that person must be a ‘Natural Born Citizen’.

 Tench Coxe, ofPennsylvania, a member of the Annapolis Convention and the Continental Congress, and author of a number of pamphlets on the finances and commerce of theUnited States. The four letters written over that signature were among the first to appear in favor of the Constitution, and were reprinted in many of the newspapers of the day. As he wrote An Examination of the Constitution for theUnited States of America, Submitted to the People by the General Convention, At Philadelphia, the 17th Day of September, 1787;

 The President of the upper-house (or the chancellor) in in England, is appointed by their king, while our Vice-President, who is chosen by the people, through the electors and the Senate, is not at all dependant on the President, but may exercise equal powers on some occasions. In all royal governments, an helpless infant or an inexperienced youth may wear the crown. Our President must be matured by the experience of years, and being born among us, his character at thirty-five must be fully understood. Wisdom, virtue and active qualities of mind and body can alone make him the first servant of a free and enlightened people. LINK

 Born among the Citizens by a Citizen Father.

 To be a Citizen of the United States, Congress in 1790 passed the original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) which provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free white persons” of “good moral character”. It thus left out indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and later Asians. While women were included in the act, the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in theUnited States….” Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father.

 Citizenship was a ‘birthright’ inheritance from the father to his offspring, as such that as Vattel stated that “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.”

 This natural allegiance was perpetual and difficult to severe or alter (Once a English subject, always a English subject) and was found odious in this country (America went to war against this “natural allegiance” in 1812). The State ofVirginiaoutright rejected the common law doctrine in 1779 when it adopted the following doctrine written by Thomas Jefferson:

 [A]ll infants, wheresoever born, whose father, if living, or otherwise, whose mother was a citizen at the time of their birth, or who migrate hither, their father, if living, or otherwise, their mother becoming a citizen, or who migrate hither without father or mother, shall be deemed citizens of this Commonwealth until they relinquish that character, in manner as hereinafter expressed; and all others not being citizens of any, of the United States of America, shall be deemed aliens.

 Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment, confirmed this principle: “All persons born in theUnited Statesand not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of theUnited States.”

 Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said “Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.” Thus, the statute can be read as “All persons born in theUnited Stateswho are not aliens, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of theUnited States.”

 During the debates of the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause, both its primary framers, Sen. Jacob Howard and Sen. Lyman Trumbull listened to concerns of including such persons as Chinese, Mongolians, and Gypsies to citizenship. Additionally, Sen. Fessenden (co-chairman of the Reconstruction Committee) raised the question of persons born of parents from abroad temporarily in this country – an issue he would not have raised if Congress were merely reaffirming the common law doctrine – and of course, the question of Indians.

 Sen. Trumbull attempted to assure Senators that Indians were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of theUnited States. Sen. Johnson argued that Sen. Trumbull was in error in regards to the Indian’s not being under the jurisdiction of theUnited States. This must have raised concerns with Howard because he strongly made it known that he had no intention whatsoever to confer citizenship upon the Indians under his amendment, no matter if born within or outside of their tribal lands.

 Sen. Trumbull further added, “It cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is ‘subject to the jurisdiction of theUnited States.’” Sen. Jacob Howard agreed:

 [I] concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Trumbull], in holding that the word “jurisdiction,” as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.

 Sen. Trumbull further restates the the goal of the language: “It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws,  that we think of making citizens…” Note thatTrumbulldoes not say temporarily within our jurisdiction, but completely within our jurisdiction.

 In the year 1873 the United States Attorney General ruled the word “jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment to mean:

 The word “jurisdiction” must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as theUnited Stateshad over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment… Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them. (14 Op. Atty-Gen. 300.)

 House Report No. 784, dated June 22, 1874, stated, “The United States have not recognized a double allegiance. By our law a citizen is bound to be ‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.” There is no way in the world anyone can claim “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” affirms the feudal common law doctrine of birth citizenship to aliens because such doctrine by operation creates a “double allegiance” between separate nations.

 As Bingham stated “all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural-born citizens.”

 In 1866, Sen. Jacob Howard succinctly spelled out this intent of the 14th Amendment by stating: “Every person born within the limits of theUnited States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of theUnited States. This will not, of course, include persons born in theUnited Stateswho are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of theUnited States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of theUnited States….”

 This understanding was reaffirmed by Senator Edward Cowan, who stated:

 [A foreigner in theUnited States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word…

 Therefore again, children born to foreign parents was never the intent.

 Even as John Bingham wrote; “At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”

-Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happersett (1875)

 Title 8 and the 14th Amendment both state;  All persons born or naturalized in theUnited States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of theUnited Statesand of the State wherein they reside.

But here again, is the term ‘Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof’. Under Jus Soli, the following is written “The Supreme Court’s first holding on the sublect suggested that the court would give a restrictive reading to the phrase, potentially disqualifing significant number of persons born within the physical boundries of the nation. In Elk v. Wilkins 112U.S.94, 5 S.CT. 41, 28 L.ED. 643 (1884), the court ruled that native Indians were notU.S.citizens, even if they later severed their ties with their tribes. The words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” the court held, mean “not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of theUnited States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.” Most Indians could not meet the test. “Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indian Tribes, (an alien through dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more ‘born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’*** then the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government ***.Id.at 102.

It continues that Congress eventually passed legislation with the ‘Allotment Act of 1887, that conferred citizenship on many Indians.

 The fact remains, the United States Supreme Court held, complete and sole Jurisdiction is ‘required’ and that just being born anywhere in the United States, does not qualify anyone for automatic citizenship, jurisdiction is required, sole and complete.

Barack Abdallah Husein Obama was not born of parents [plural] that were free form foreign allegiance and citizenship. Barack Obama Sr was a foreign national and a British subject, Governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948, and that same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children, including foreign born Barack Abdallah Husein Obama.

 “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

 Barack Abdallah Husein Obama, born of a foreign father, a British subject, under the allegiance of the British Crown is in direct opposition to the Founding Fathers, the Congress of the United States, the United States Supreme Court, the United States Constitution including the 14^th Amendment.  that sole and complete ‘Jurisdiction’ is required for citizenship in theUnited States.

So is Barack Abdallah Husein Obama even a United States Citizen?

My answer is ‘No he is not!’

Obama’s ‘In your face’ dinner on the taxpayers dime.

When there are 45+ million people on food stamps, 9%+ unemployment, and minority unemployment over 15% and that figure is being under reported, the following should make anyone puke at the revolting audacity of vulgarity and pompous arrogance of the Obama’s, and that includes Barack and Michelle.

First off, both took seperate planes to their  extravagant Martha’s Vineyard vacation spot. A vacation that in itself is nothing more then excuse to have the tax payers foot the bill for the laziest good for nothing resident of the White House to play another round of golf and get his kester and dead beat family out Washington DC.  Barack must be bone dead tired after the triple state ‘Rollin’ Misery Tour’ where he did nothing but blame everyone but himself and expects people to believe his “let me get back to you in Sept with my jobs plan.

The extra transport to get the the First Lady  to the island for only a few more hours of vacation time will have cost taxpayers thousands in additional expenses.

The costs related to Mrs Obama’s solo trip mainly include the flight on the specially designed military aircraft she took instead of Air Force One, as well as any extra staff and Secret Service that had to be enlisted to go with her.

She would also have had her own motorcade from the airport to her vacation residence

Obamas Share Sacrifice at Pricey Vineyard Restaurant

by Keith Koffler on August 19, 2011, 10:00 pm

President and Mrs. Obama are sharing in the sacrifice tonight at the Beach Plum Restaurant on Martha’s Vineyard, which features an array of overpriced selections for the first couple to choose from that could easily bring the bill within the range of $200.

They might, for example, choose to start the meal with a $15 chunk of pizza cheese – I’m sorry, “Fresh Mozzarella” with “Fresh Basil, vine ripened tomatoes, aged balsamic reduction, and chive dill.”

This is a good mix because some things are fresh, and some things are aged.

But the sacrifice really gets serious with the entree, where the Obamas may want to order half a chicken for $38. Excuse me, please, “Herb crusted roasted half Katama Farm chicken; garlic mashed potatoes with steamed broccollini, rosemary jus.”

This would be perfect for me, because when I get tired of Perdue, I alway switch to Katama Farm.

There’s also the steamed twin Menemsha lobsters for $48. Isn’t Menemsha some kind of club for geniuses? I’ll take those.

But to be sure that they’re twins, I’ll need a BIRTH CERTIFICATE.

The restaurant notes, “We would be happy to split single entree items for an additional charge of $15.”

Well, of course! I’m sure being paid $15 to heap the same junk on two plates instead of one would make them very happy indeed.

So if the Obamas go with the cheese and the chicken we’re at $53 before dessert, tax, tip and booze. Now, looks like it’s bring-you’re-own-drinks with a corkage fee of $10. So if we assume $10 for a drink, $10 for dessert – you know they’re both having dessert – a 6.25 percent Massachusetts restaurant tax, and a 20 percent tip, we’re at $93 each, or $186 for the couple.

The average weekly Social Security check for a retired worker is about $274. Just saying.

And guess what? No peas on the menu. The Obamas don’t have to eat their peas.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/08/19/obamas-share-sacrifice-pricey-vineyard-restaurant/

UPDATE!

This blog is not in the habit of posting the comments we receive or responding to them, however we did receive the following and will repond in part. The sender’s comments will be edited as to the senders ID, however the entire context of his comment is posted..

Comment:
While I do agree with certain aspects of your blog, I do find it ridiculous that you act as though the Obamas are the first family to ever eat dinner at an expensive restaurant or to enjoy an extravagant vacation.  As a man from a modest but happy upbringing, I can certainly agree with your complaints that our president and his family made little effort to cut costs on their vacation, particularly in light of  moderately high poverty levels throughout the United States.  It is a perfect illustration of the moral hazard problem, where decision makers fail to minimize costs when they are not asked to foot the bill.  However, should you not also complain when CEO’s and other corporate leaders eat into potential profits by utilizing private jets, expensive dinners, etc., while they likely employ workers who earn only a small fraction of their own yearly salaries?  You may argue that I am comparing apples to oranges, but there are parallels between the two situations.  If you want the President Obama and his family to eat meals that are more in line with the meals of typical American families, why not call for Warren Buffett, Michael Jordan, and Bill Gates to do the same thing.

My response -  First off, Warren Buffett, Michael Jordon, and Bill Gates are private citizens and not public servants, living off the public’s expense.

News reports have also stated that Michelle Obama has spent over $10 million in vacations over the last year and taken 1 day in 9 for vacations, at the public expense. Not only is that excessive, but even some Dem’s are calling that outragous.

Shared Sacrifice by Everyone but Barack and Michelle Obama.

The Obamas’ summer break in Martha’s Vineyard has already been branded a PR disaster after the couple arrived four hours apart on separate government jets.

But according to new reports, this is the least of their extravagances.
White House sources today claimed that the First Lady has spent $10million of U.S. taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.

Branding her ‘disgusting’ and ‘a vacation junkie’, they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.

The ‘top source’ told the National Enquirer: ‘It’s disgusting. Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while the most hardworking Americans can barely afford a week or two off work.

Branding her ‘disgusting’ and ‘a vacation junkie’, they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.

The ‘top source’ told the National Enquirer: ‘It’s disgusting. Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while the most hardworking Americans can barely afford a week or two off work.

The economy may have had its first downgrade, but not the Obamas.

From the National Enquirer:

White House source: “IT’s DISGUSTING!” as MICHELLE OBAMA blows a whopping $10 million in taxpayer money on ritzy vacations, THE ENQUIRER reports!

 With most Americans struggling to make ends meet, first lady Michelle Obama has blown a whopping $10 MILLION in taxpayer money on ritzy vacations in the past year alone!
 
“It’s disgusting!” a top White House source told The ENQUIRER.
 
“Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while most hardwork­ing Americans can barely afford a week or two off work.
 
“When it’s all add­ed up, she’s spent more than $10 million in tax­payer money on her vacations!”
 
White House sources claim President Barack Obama is “absolutely furious” at his wife’s luxuri­ous, leisure lifestyle but can’t curb her “out-of-control” spending, which in­cludes wild s h o p p i n g sprees, costly massages and her expensive taste in booze.
 
The Obamas pay for some of Michelle’s personal expenses and travel, but according to a report on the website whitehousedossier.com, “the amount is dwarfed by the over­all cost to the public.”
 
In August 2010, Michelle and her entourage spent five days at a pricey golf resort in Spain.
 
 The tax­payers’ tab for transportation and security totaled $375,000, prompt­ing one columnist to blast her as a “modern-day Marie Antoinette” for vacationing while the American economy hemorrhaged jobs.
 
“The vacations are totally Mi­chelle’s idea.She’s like a junkie.
 
“She can’t schedule enough getaways, and she lives from one to the next – all the while sticking it to hard-working Americans.”

Thank you for your comment, but this blog stands by the post and the updates that support the initial post.

US Department of State confirms Vattel

The US Department of State posted the following and thereby confirms Burlamaqui and Vattel, both whom I and others here have stated defined the term ‘Natural Born Citizen’ as understood by the Framers, Founders, and signers of the United States Constitution.

“America’s Founders were inspired by the ideas and values of early Swiss philosophers like Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui and Emer de Vattel, and the 1848 Swiss Constitution was influenced by our own U.S. Constitution. Swiss commitment to democracy is an example for nations and people everywhere who yearn for greater freedoms and human rights.”

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/07/169371.htm

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama – foreign born, foreign spawn, foreign allegiance, foreign national.

 “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Vattel

Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following. 

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

Here are some of Burlamaqui’s statements about ‘members of society’

Burlamaqui refers to ‘law of nations, and that that even if Barack Obama was allowed to attain as Burlamaqui states the years of discretion, Barack Obama maintained citizenship, allegiance to the British Empire as a british subject and a Kenyan Citizen till 1983, into his adulthood.

As the 1866 Act provides: “All persons born in the United States, and NOT SUBJECT to any foreign power, (excluding Indians not taxed,) are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”

quote; “NOT SUBJECT to any foreign power”

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama has unequivocally stated that at birth he was a British subject, whose allegiance,  protection, and jurisdiction was to the British Crown and  WAS SUBJECT TO A FOREIGN POWER.

Obama’s statement never acknowledges any United States citizenship, allegiance, or Jurisdiction, in any part thereof, nor any other country.

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama acknowledges only one allegaince and that is to a foreign power.

 “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Michelle Obama stated ‘Barack Obama a Kenyan’

Michelle Obama  ‘When we visited Barack’s home country of Kenya’
A ‘citizen’ is not a ‘Natural Born Citizen’, as proven by the distinction in the Constitutional eligibility requirements in the United States Constitution.

United States Constitution Art 1, sec 2

Representitive eligibility requirement.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have …been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, .

CITIZEN!

United States Constitution Art 1, sec 3

Senatorial eligibility requirement.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have…been nine Years a Citizen of the United States

CITIZEN!

United States Constitution Art 2, sec1

Presidential requirement.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!

If they equated to the same definition and meaning the Founding Fathers, Framers, signers of the United States Constitution would have used the same wording.

Who’s next?

 The Obama weapon mass destruction, had begun inflicting its world-wide damage to human civilization to his puppet-masters even before the election of 2008.

Recall that the Obama WND’s first address to the world was in Cairo,Egypt, the same speech that the Obama WMD lied aboutUShistory and claimed that there was any Muslim’s influence on this nation. Out right lying and pandering to the radical Islamic extremists was what this was all about. Obama WND’s false face in pretending to be a friend ofEgypt’s President Mubarak, as seen below.

 

 Who was the first to feel the Obama betrayal? Hosni Mubarak ofEgyptof course. The Muslim Brotherhood’s Arab Egypt’s riots and civil unrest were a test of keeping the Obama WMD in line and seeing how he would react in the keeping with his handlers agenda. The Obama WMD in his best false face forward, did nothing till the end was certain and then in his community organizing ways, cheered on change, regardless if it was for the worse. The abyss of Obama is always for change, it keeps stability and any chance of normalizing a crisis away. That is why crisis is the Obama WMD’s best friend. 

 

 Now, even before the Obama WMD ascended to his pivotal position to be the destroyer of all things civil, there were others that touted the Obama WND as their friend and brother, such as Muammar Gaddafi, as in

 

 

 

 

 

 Now thatEgypthas fallen into the Obama abyss of insanity, the Obama WND can turn its destructive agenda towardsLibyaand another dictator. Without authorization from Congress the Obama WMD has invaded another sovereign nation and at the behest of his puppet masters the Obama WMD willing fully disregarded the laws of theUnited Statesin order to bow to the interests of foreign nations and for religious purposes.

 

  One might ask why Obama is targeting dictators and promoting civil unrest?

 The Obama WMD is eliminating competition. By removing other dictators in its path, the civil unrest and breakdown of any civil society, it’s ensuring that human nature is reverting to the basic animal instincts and carnage that the Obama puppet masters are striving for.

 The one that is closest to the Obama WMD and is pushing the buttons is Valarie Jarrett, the Obama WMD is doing the dirty work of the Iranian regime and ensuring that the destruction ofIsraelis coming.

 The Obama WMD has done everything to ensure thatIsrael’s place in history is just that – history.

The Obama WMD has done nothing to stop Iran in its attempt to gain nuclear weapons, nor has the Obama WMD done anything, but pursue the creation of a Palestinian State even to the point that the Obama WMD has openly criticized a sovereign nation Israel for building communities within their borders, demanding that Israel accept the 1967 borders,President Barack Obama is endorsing the Palestinians’ demand for their future state to be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war, in a move that will likely infuriate Israel. In a speech outliningU.S.policy in the Middle East andNorth Africa, Obama sided with the Palestinians’ referring to the 1967 borders.

 The Obama WMD is out of his league when it comes toIsrael. The citizens of theUnited Statesmight have been doped to allow an illegal undocumented foreigner like Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama to ascend into power, but GOD will not be mocked.

 So whom will the Obama WMD target next? Which one of the leaders that Obama graced during the Obama World-wide Apology tour, will see their fate sealed as Mubarak did or as Gaddafi is now, will it be?

 

The Illegal Obama – Pt. 2

President Obama’s uncle had Social Security ID

By Dave Wedge and Laurel J. Sweet
Tuesday, August 30, 2011

 President Obama’s accused drunken-driving uncle — who was busted after a near collision with a Framingham cop — has had a valid Social Security number for at least 19 years, despite being an illegal immigrant ordered to be deported back toKenya, the Herald has learned.

The president’s 67-year-old uncle, Obama Onyango, has had a valid Massachusetts driver’s license and Social Security number since at least 1992, said Registry of Motor Vehicles spokesman Michael Verseckes.

Onyango, whose sister, Zeituni Onyango, made headlines when it was revealed she was an illegal immigrant living in public housing in South Boston, was wobbly legged, “slurring” and had “red and glassy eyes” when he was pulled over at 7 p.m. Wednesday on Waverly Street in Framingham.

A marked cruiser pulled him over just past the Chicken Bone saloon, about a mile from Onyango’s single-family home. Onyango, the half-brother of the president’s father identified in some press accounts as “Uncle Omar,” initially denied drinking but admitted having “two beers” after police said they smelled booze on his breath, according to a police report.

“It was clear that he was moderately unsteady on his feet,” Framingham Officer Val Krishtal wrote.

Onyango’s white Mitsubishi SUV was pulled over after the vehicle made a sudden right turn in front of a cruiser at a stop sign, causing Krishtal to slam on the brakes to avoid a collision. Onyango blew a .14 on the Breathalyzer and continually interrupted the officer, the report states.

“(Onyango) spoke English well, albeit with a moderate accent. I detected what I believed to be some slurring as he spoke,” Krishtal wrote.

Onyango was ordered held without bail on a federal immigration warrant after his arraignment Thursday in Framingham District Court. Court papers show he was the subject of a previous deportation order. He was being held in the Plymouth House of Correction last night.

Mike Rogers, a spokesman forClevelandimmigration attorney Margaret Wong, who is representing Onyango, said he “wouldn’t know how” Onyango obtained a Social Security number. Wong is the same lawyer who represented the president’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, in her fight to win asylum last year. Reached at her apartment in a South Boston public housing complex yesterday, Zeituni Onyango said of her brother’s arrest: “Why don’t you go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. inWashington,D.C., and ask your president? Not me.” She then hung up on a reporter.

The bust came just days after another illegal immigrant was charged with running down and killing a 23-year-old man inMilford.

Asked about the issue yesterday, Gov. Deval Patrick said: “You know my stance: Illegal is illegal. We need comprehensive immigration reform.”

Howie Carr and Jessica Heslam contributed to the report. Link

The questionable and forged documents of Barack Abdallah Husein Obama are now even more in question as multiple family members have been exposed in having forged documents and being in the US illegally.

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama – Forged COLB [Certification of Live Birth] Certificate

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama – Forged Long Form Birth Certificate

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama – Fraudulant Social Security Number, issued from the State of Conn, where Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama was never a resident.

Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama – Fraudulant Selective Service Registration

Is Barack Abdallah Husein Obama in the US illegally as well?

UPDATE!

Information from Susan Daniels;

 

Obama’s Uncle Onyango Obama:

 

OBAMA, O. ONYANGO
Gender: M
SSN: 027-38-XXXX
Issued between 1964 to 1966 in the state of Massachusetts.

 

Obama’s Aunt Zeituni Onyango:

 

Zeituni, Onyango
Gender: F
313-23-XXXX
Issued between 2001 and 2002 in the state of Indiana. There is no evidence Zeituni Onyango ever stepped foot in Indiana.

 

Lame Cherry’s O’Looser

Lame Cherry has posted an interesting article on O’Looser. One point in the post is the following;

“We now for certain that there is absolutely no Obama birth certificate. (I have noted before that Jerome Corsi and Joseph Farah already knew this for certain, but now he rest of us children have confirmation there is no COLB.)
How do we deduce this? If there was a COLB, they would have allowed Taitz to see it and end this all by humiliating the Tea Party. “

As I have stated for over the past two and a half years, ‘there is no Long form Birth Certificate in Hawaii that the forged COLB was supposed to be based on.” There is nothing supporting that Baracka Abdallah Husein Obama or any alias that he has, was ever born in the United States.  The COLB that was placed on the DailyKOS is a forgery, a fabrication, a digital creation. That the FactCheck and Fight the Smears images and printed out copies are based upon the same digital creation.
http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2011/08/olooser.html

H/T Lame Cherry

Remember 9-11

 

 

To all those who responded on 9-11. The New York Police, Fire Fighters, and first responders a heartfelt thank you.

Again, this blog has been vindicated!

Via TheObamaFile and CDR Kerchner

Dean Haskins says we spent a very long (and hot) day talking with many people on the island (Hawaii) and filming several scenes with the “big check” that will be compiled into a video once we get home.  There was one conversation, however, that I want to share with you tonight.  We spent at least a couple hours at the Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children today.  I got a call this morning from a reporter with the Honolulu Civil Beat who wanted to interview us, so he met us at the Medical Center.  His story should run tomorrow.
 
After that interview, we went into the records office, and Miki asked to file a form to get her son’s birth records.  While she was filling out the form, I happened to overhear a woman who was sitting at a desk say something about the “race” field on a birth certificate she was preparing.  I asked her if this was the office that responsible for filling out the birth certificate information for babies born there, and she said that it was.
 
Because she had just asked something about the “race” field on the birth certificate she was working on, I asked, “Back in 1961, would anyone have ever entered ‘African’ as the race of a parent?”  She said, “No, back then they probably would have listed a black person’s race as ‘negro.’”  I asked, “So, the word ‘African’ wouldn’t have been used, because that is a nationality and not a race, right?”  And she responded, “Right.  Nowadays we can use ‘African American’ though.”  To which I added, “But, the word ‘African’ by itself has never been used as an entry for race?”  And she simply said, “No.  Never.”
 
And there you have it . . . from the folks at Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children.

There were federal regulations in place in 1961 that provided the requirements to the states for birth certificates, including the acceptable values for “Race” — enter “227″ in the “Page” text box and hit “Enter.”

As this blog has repoted prior to this admission

2. Race of Father, this is an official US document and again refering back to the US Natality doumentation, on what legal entries were exceptable. African was NOT an acceptable entry.  http://www.nber.org/vital-statistics/historical/ and the 1961 Guideline http://www.nber.org/vital-statistics/historical/nat61_1.CV.pdf  Refere to Section 5 for the Technical Appendix and look under Race

Finally!

The Hill’s Blog Breifing Room

Issa to launch probe of Obama actions on Solyndra, LightSquared

By Justin Sink – 09/20/11 09:55 AM ET

 Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Tuesday that his committee plans to investigate government loan programs to private corporations in light of allegations of improper dealings between the White House and failed energy company Solyndra and wireless start-up LightSquared.

“I want to see when the president and his cronies are picking winners and losers… it wasn’t because there were large contributions given to them,” the chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee said Tuesday morning on C-SPAN.

Issa said the committee was looking at whether it was improper for members of Congress or White House staff to select companies eligible for subsidized government loans when those companies could give campaign donations. Loan programs have been a popular tool to provide funding for popular industries — like tech, green energy, and American auto companies — at more favorable terms than could be secured privately.

 The Obama administration has been defending itself against criticism by Republicans that it exerted improper influence to the aid of both companies.

Solyndra abruptly filed for bankruptcy earlier this month, surprising both employees and the administration, which had secured $535 million in low-interest loans for the company.

Republicans in Congress quickly mocked the bankruptcy as emblematic of the president’s green technology initiatives under the stimulus bill — and noted that a key Solyndra investor had been a bundler for the Obama campaign. House Republicans say they have emails showing the White House pressuring Department of Energy bureaucrats to expedite the loan approvals, although the White House has argued that nothing improper occurred.

Republicans have also charged that the White House pressured an Air Force general to revise testimony before a closed congressional hearing to aid LightSquared, a wireless start-up company. Emails between the company and the White House make mention of the fact that the company’s CEO would be attending Democratic fundraisers in Washington, and administration officials met with executives from the company on the same day that CEO Sanjiv Ahuja wrote a $30,400 check to the Democratic National Committee. 

The company is facing a tough regulatory road after initial tests showed LightSquared’s technology had been found to interfere with military and aviation GPS. But both the company and White House have denied any influence-peddling.

Although Issa did not specifically accuse the White House of wrongdoing, he suggested that government loan programs tempted corruption. 

“This is another reason that crony capitalism … is dangerous, because they’re going to pick winners that they ideologically, or in some cases because they support their candidacy, want to see win,” Issa said.

The congressman said he also wanted to expand the investigation to see whether congressmen were also exerting influence on the bureaucracy, which is commonly tasked with approving low-interest government loans.

“We see that as a backdoor, easy way to end up with corruption in government,” Issa said.

Headline off the Drudge Report;

Bitter Clinger

 

Michelle Obama’s claim she’s being branded an ‘angry black woman’ underlines White House desperation

Trump ‘Obama’s mother never in the hospital’

 

As stated here, Stanley Ann did not give birth to Obama.

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/the-obama-nativity-fable-exposed/

2012 can’t come fast enough

2012 can’t come fast enough to help this hateful and spiteful and the worst First Lady to ever represent this nation or the American people. 2012 can’t come fast enough to end her living off the public. Michelle is a disgrace to the morals and integrity of the United States of America.

UPDATE:

Michelle Obama’s Africa Vacation Cost More Than $432,142

Link to article

 

First lady Michelle Obama’s family trip toSouth Africa andBotswana in June cost taxpayers well over $424,000, according to new accounting based on Air Force manifests obtained by Judicial Watch, a taxpayer watchdog group.

The use of Air Force aircraft alone for the June 21-27 trip cost $424,142, said the group, and that doesn’t include the food, lodging, and ground transportation for the 21 family and staff members.

Judicial Watch said it based the jet costs on the Pentagon’s hourly rates for the C-32A aircraft used for the trip. The documents don’t give exact cost calculations, which is typical for presidential and first family trips.

Obama is like many first ladies, spending summers traveling on good-will missions, sometimes with family and friends. On the June trip, during which she was accompanied by her daughters and mother, the first lady urged young people to engage with their governments and she pushed her education and wellness agenda. They also took a safari inSouth Africa, well known for its beautiful Lion King-like settings.

The costs of the trips have often won media scorn, as did her trip toSpain the previous summer.

But presidential experts say that the value of first lady visits is priceless, especially in cases like Obama’s to Africa where the first family has special ties and where the president has been pursuing a personal agenda, especially in Kenya, the home of his father.

Here is a link to the Judicial Watch files and their release:

Charges for the Aircraft and Crew Alone Amount to $424,142

Contact Information:

Washington,DC– October 4, 2011

Judicial Watch, the organization that investigates and fights government corruption, announced today that it has obtained mission expense records and passenger manifests from the United States Air Force related to the June 21-27, 2011, trip taken by First Lady Michelle Obama, her family and her staff to South Africa and Botswana. Judicial Watch obtained the documents pursuant to an August 19, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Air Force (No. 11-1496)). Judicial Watch is investigating the purpose and itinerary of the trip as well as a breakdown of the costs to taxpayers.

On June 28, 2011, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request seeking the mission taskings, transportation records, and passenger manifests for Michelle Obama’sAfricatrip. Documents were only provided after Judicial Watch filed suit:

• According to U.S. Department of Defense’s published hourly rates for the C-32A aircraft used for the trip, Judicial Watch calculated the total cost to American taxpayers was $424,142 for use of the aircraft (34.8 flight hours x $12,188 per hour). (The C-32 is a specially configured military version of the Boeing 757.) Other expenses – meals (off the plane), transportation, security, various services, etc. – have yet to be disclosed.

• The passenger manifests confirm the presence of Obama’s daughter’s, Malia and Sasha on the trip. The two girls are listed as “Senior Staff.” The manifests also list Mrs. Obama’s mother, Marian Robinson, and niece and nephew, Leslie and Avery Robinson, as well Mrs. Obama’s makeup and hairstylist (Carl Ray and Johnny Wright).

• The expense records also show $928.44 was spent for “bulk food” purchases on flight. Overall, during the trip, 192 meals were served for the 21 passengers on board.

The professed purpose of Michelle Obama’s trip to South Africa and Botswana was to encourage young people living in the two growing democracies to become involved in national affairs; and during her scheduled stops in Pretoria and Cape Town, South Africa and in Gaborone, the capital of Botswana, the First Lady used the opportunity to speak on education, health and wellness issues.

The trip also included such tourist events as visits to historical landmarks and museums, plus a nonworking chance to send time with Nelson Mandela, a meeting that Mrs. Obama described as “surreal.” The trip ended with a private family safari at a South African game reserve before the group returned toWashingtonon June 27.

“This trip was as much an opportunity for the Obama family to go on a safari as it was a trip to conduct government business,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This junket wasted tax dollars and the resources of our overextended military. No wonder we had to sue to pry loose this information.”

Previously, Judicial Watch uncovered that the First Couple’s 2009 “date night” trip to New Yorkfor dinner and a Broadway show cost taxpayers over $11,000 in Secret Service costs alone.