Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

At Butterdezillion's blog:
[quote="Omad"][size=117]“But HRS 338-18(a) allows state laws and DOH rules to govern the disclosure of vital records, and the current rules - Chapter 8b, 2.5(A)(1)(f) - would allow any election officer transacting the placement of Obama’s name on the ballot to receive a certified copy.â€

Atty. Dr. Orly Taitz wrote, "The Kenya BC, that I am seeking to be authenticated, is more plausible then the short version HI BC posted by Obama."

[quote="[url=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts?page=6799#6799]At FreeRepublic, BP2[/url]"][size=117]August 5, 2009

by BP2

Few people know the prima facie facts tied to the Obama’s mother’s 1964 and 1980 divorces as well as a handful of us here on Free Republic. I know it probably better than most.

When I started looking at the date (Feb 17, 1964) on this new Kenyan birth certificate, I immediately started comparing it with the dates of the 1964 divorce between Obama’s mother and father – TRYING to REFUTE the Kenyan birth certificate. Was it at all PLAUSIBLE, at least based upon what we know as prima facie facts, confirmed by an independent source – such as a judge in a divorce case? If you wish to refer back to this initial comparison, the information is on Post 2,222 of the Free Republic thread [url=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts]“Is this really it? (re: possible Obama’s Kenyan B.C.)â€

Would someone please enhance the image of this fake "seal" on the "E. F. Lavender" Kenya Certificate of Birth?
It is not an embossed seal consisting of discreet points, that which a notary would stamp with an embosser.
It looks more like a rubbing of a round coin the size of a quarter,
with letters around an image in the center, and a ridge around the edge.









Is the above a rubbing of this coin?




If not, I don't recognize the coin as Kenyan, British, or Australian.

http://www.blissites.com/kenya/culture/coins.html

http://www.immigration-usa.com/ina_96_title_3.html

INA: ACT 301 - NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH

Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling

not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:

But from 1952 to 1986, in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Title 3, Chapter 1 [8 USC § 1401(g)], this last section read:

"not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:"

Barack Obama II's birth status was: a British Protected Subject, Protectorate of Kenya.

When his mother arrived in Seattle, Wash., on Aug. 19(?), 1961, his status was a British Protected Subject, Protectorate of Kenya, and possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know.

Upon Kenyan independence on Dec. 12, 1963, his status was: a British Protected Subject, a citizen of Kenya, and possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know.

On March 15, 1965, when his mother married Lolo Soetoro, who adopted (or acknowledged) Barry Soetoro (or Soebarkah) as a stepson, his status was: a British Protected Subject, still a citizen of Kenya, not having disavowed that citizenship after the age of 21, possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know, and a citizen of Indonesia.

In the summer of 1972, when he went to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, his status was: a British Protected Subject, still a citizen of Kenya, not having disavowed that citizenship after the age of 21, possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know, and a citizen of Indonesia, unless the Dunhams had him naturalized in 1972, which we don't know.

With the passage of the British Nationality Act of 1981, his status was: a British Commonwealth Citizen, still a citizen of Kenya, not having disavowed that citizenship after the age of 21, possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know, and a citizen of Indonesia, unless the Dunhams had him naturalized in 1972, which we don't know.

On Aug. 4, 1984, his status was: a British Commonwealth Citizen, no longer a citizen of Kenya, not having reaffirmed that citizenship before the age of 23, possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961, which we don't know, and a citizen of Indonesia, unless the Dunhams had him naturalized in 1972, which we don't know.

With the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1986 (the Reagan amnesty), none of the clauses retroactive to 1952 applied to Barack Obama II's status.

Upon his marriage to Michelle Robinson on Oct. 3, 1992, his status was: a British Commonwealth Citizen, possibly a U.S. citizen, if his mother had him naturalized in 1961 or if he naturalized as the husband of a U.S. citizen in 1992, which we don't know, and a citizen of Indonesia, unless the Dunhams had him naturalized in 1972, which we don't know.

If he was naturalized a U.S. citizen at any time, we have no record and no knowledge of it.

He was not a U.S. citizen at birth.

Originally Posted by In a comment at USA Today, Danae

Okubo said she has SEEN the documents. That is NOT the same as saying what is posted at Fact Check is LEGITIMATE.

Hawaii insists they can't release any records without Obama's Ok. That's true ONLY if the COLB at FactCheck and Fightthesmears is a Forgery. Otherwise Hawaii could release everything because Obama released any expectations of Privacy by posting his own COLB.

Well, he didn't do that, did he? No, Factcheck did, and it was reposted by Fightthesmears, so Obama can say that HE didn't post it. It is after all a forgery, and Hawaii can't talk about it because Privacy laws are STILL in effect.

That COLB is a forgery.

So, Hawaii Privacy Laws allow official release of any document that the documented individual has published.

Is that statement correct?

BTW, just in case credit, insurance, or bank records may include birth records, Hawaii privacy laws don't cover them.

[quote="[url=http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/09/16/aloha-corruption/]At the Post&Email, Guy4013[/url]"][size=117]His name is William H. Gilardy, Jr.

Who is he?

He is the attorney for the Hawaii Democrat Party[ HDP] for over 15 years.

According to a recent story about 2008 nomination forms for Obama [see Sharon's report ], Mr Gilardy appears to have played a major part in HDP certifying the DNC nomination form.

Out of 50 states, only Hawaii demanded the nomination form declare the candidate “Constitutionallyâ€

From the Post & Mail

WAS OBAMA'S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER STOLEN?
by Miki Booth



Second report on Columbia Trial Transcripts
8Share 0diggsdigg
WAS OBAMA’S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER STOLEN?

by Miki Booth

Dr. James David Manning, Ph.D., served as prosecutor at the Columbia Sedition trial in Harlem, NY held in May 2010

(Oct. 19, 2010) — On October 14, 2010 I released the first installment of a five-part “sneak peek,â€

FreeAndClear wrote, "___ the cosntitution [sic]! Bring on the Junta!"

FreeAndClear, parts of the Constitution have already been rendered of none effect, namely,
"No person except a natural born citizen... shall be eligible to the office of President;" Art. II § 1 ¶ 5.

ArmyCowboy wrote, "Now we have folks hoping the US becomes a banana republic and turns into a military dictatorship. "

Maelstrom replied, "You have already established a banana republic in the US. We're attempting to restore the Constitution nonviolently. Please stop opposing us."

We now have many, perhaps most, Americans hoping the US can be rescued from the banana republic / usurper dictatorship it has already become.

It has been demonstrated 70+ times over that the courts are intimidated, coerced, and helpless to enforce the law against the unlawful holder of the power of law enforcement.

As we shall see in a couple of weeks, the collective horde of bad actors have corrupted the ballot.

If it must be by a military ouster of an unlawful impostor who has inserted himself into de facto authority contrary to law, so be it. I trust the Joint Chiefs to return the Presidency to civilian control, either by succession or by election, on Jan. 3rd or shortly thereafter, just as soon as Madame Comrade Pelosi is replaced in the line of succession.

But I don't trust the Con-in-Chief, who may or might declare martial law on the day after the elections, or before Nov. 2nd in order to indefinitely suspend the elections.

So, which would you prefer: a military ouster of an unlawful impostor, or martial law in a usurper's unlawful grasp? Our options are quickly thinning out.

Originally Posted by [url=http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/10/19/second-report-on-columbia-trial-transcripts/

For The Post & Email, Miki Booth[/url]]Testimony from the May 18 trial reveals much of Obama’s mysterious past. One of the most simple pieces of evidence of criminal fraud is his use of a CT social security number. If his first job was working at Baskin-Robbins on King St. in Honolulu, his social security number would start with 575- like my husband’s, my son’s, my brother, my mom’s or 576 – like mine. Not 042- issued from CT which he currently uses in his capacity of commander-in-thief and linked to a fraudulent selective service record that is so fraught with deceit the forger(s) were unable to keep their records straight.

So how would one come about having a social security number evidently issued to someone else from CT at one time? The simple answer is that person is dead and the new owner committed identity fraud by assuming the 042-68-4425 number. A better question to ask is how does one find a number to steal? In Obama’s case, there is evidence connecting his name in various combinations of Barack, Obama, Soetero, Barry, etc. to approximately 30 social security numbers.

One answer glaringly stands out, and that is for purposes of money laundering. Obama’s mother lived for five years in Karachi, Pakistan and worked for Asia Development Bank while living at a five-star Hilton Hotel. His grandmother, Madeline Dunham, was vice-president of Bank of Hawai’i. Both of them would have access to social security numbers of deceased people and otherwise inactive numbers.

One possibility is that Barack Obama II worked for a short time before college at a nursing home in Honolulu, where he could have lifted the "042" SSN from a deceased resident.

A more likely source is his mother's mother, Madelyn Dunham, who worked as a volunteer in the Oahu Circuit Court (Honolulu County) Judge of Probate Office. She had ample opportunity to get dozens of deceased persons' SSNs and pass them to her daughter, Anna, and her grandson, Barack II.

Atty. Dr. Orly Taitz has the scoop about their numerous SSNs.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=5060
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=8496
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=5259
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=14538

Why would Mrs. Dunham do such a thing? Stanley Armour and Madelyn Dunham were communists. Mr. Dunham's Honolulu drinking buddy was CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis. In 1956, the Dunhams moved from Seattle to Mercer Island, Wash., for Stanley Ann to attend the Mercer Island High School, where "anarchy alley" was a greenhouse for communist indoctrination. In the late 1950's, the Dunhams attended "The Little Red Church on the Hill," East Shore Unitarian Church in Bellevue, Wash.. The Dunhams were especially motivated to foil the U.S. government bureaucracy.

Columbia Trial Transcripts, Part III
Share 0diggsdigg
IF HE WASN’T AT COLUMBIA, THEN WHERE WAS HE?

by Miki Booth

The conclusion of the Columbia trial held last May in New York is that Obama never attended Columbia University.

(Oct. 21, 2010) — One has to think that if this testimony is to be believed, then it’s the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. Indeed, Obama has become the most powerful man on earth and there are elements in his rise to power that must be safeguarded at all cost.

I’m reminded of the film “A Few Good Men.â€