Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Taitz Report 02.02.2014: with a bogus FOIA denial running cover, unintelligibly signed by an unidentified signer, the USPS is hiding a report on the fabricated, indefensible "80 USPO" stamp on Barack Obama's fabricated, forged Selective Service registration form.





The U.S. Post Office (USPO) ceased to exist and was replaced by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) on July 1, 1971. Therefore, a (19)80 USPO stamp is prima facie fraudulent.

But hey, if you're forging documents for the fraudulent usurper, the putative POTUS, "ya gotta go wit' whatcha got, and whoever contests whatever 'whatcha got' may be is prima facie racist," a right wing extremist, a domestic tεrrσrist, a fascist, loony, retro, or whatever works for you.



Forgive me for the reminder. After all, no one could be that gullible, right?

For each presidential candidate, [one] can put the factual history of [his] birth in the equation and see if [he fits] the bill to be president of the U.S. under the Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, and the 14th Amendment, Section 1, and the relevant federal law under Minor v. Happersett, (1874), U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898 ), and Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939).

The relevant portions of these cases and precedents are described below in their historical context..

As you can clearly see in the matrix, Obama is a citizen of the United States, but he's not a "natural born citizen" of the United States, and, as such, is not eligible for POTUS, because his father, a Kenyan, was not a U. S. citizen.

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.

If your browser does not display the matrix in an inline frame, view it HERE.

* Note: U. S. mainland includes Alaska and Hawaii. It does not include territories, commonwealths and possessions.

Click here for a comprehensive etymological deconstruction of the term "natural born Citizen," by John Greschak.

www.theobamafile.com/obamanaturalborn.htm

Case Name:	Taitz et al v. Democrat Party of Mississippi et al
Case Number:	3:12-cv-00280-HTW-LRA
Filer:	Barak Hussein Obama
	Obama for America
	Nanci Pelosi
Document Number:	102

Docket Text:
Joinder in Document by Barak Hussein Obama, Obama for America, Nanci Pelosi to [100] Response in Opposition, filed by Loretta Fuddy, Alvin Onaka, [98] Response in Opposition, filed by Democrat Party of Mississippi (Begley, Samuel)

www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/MS-filed-notice-of-additional-material-facts.pdf

________________________________________________

Originally Posted by butterdezillion, at her blog

Was Fuddy’s Body in an Open-Casket Funeral?

I’ll try to keep this as simple as possible, which means I’ll leave out a lot but hopefully I won’t lose anybody in intricacies or interpretations this way.

There is a news story at
m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7yDNyDLYGM
that shows images from Loretta Fuddy’s funeral. It also includes a patch of video which includes this image – the implication [or assumption] being that this is Fuddy's body at her funeral:

[image] #1:

Is this Loretta Fuddy? I don’t think so, because there is nothing in this image that specifically connects it to Fuddy's funeral and it contradicts 2 casket images that we know ARE from Fuddy's funeral because the photos are in context with video footage specific to her funeral. For instance, this photo shows the pulpit at which the priest speaks on video:

[image] #2:

Look closely at the embellishment on that pall and compare it to the pall on the casket in #1 (both images are darkened, to show detail):
The pall to the left has light crosses formed by corners that are darkened, alternating with dark X crosses. The pall above has a white background with gold outline of crosses formed out of circular knobs. The pall on #1 is not the pall that was on Fuddy’s casket. Presumably because it is not her casket.

Now look at another photo of the casket we know WAS at Fuddy’s funeral, because it is shown in context with the congregation and with Abercrombie at the far right. This image was posted on the Honolulu Diocese web page at
www.hawaiicatholicherald.com/2014/01/03/health-director-remembered-for-her-faith-public-service/

[image] #3:

Let’s look closely at the casket:
[image] #4:


It sort of looks like Fuddy’s head is in the middle of the casket, with the rest of her body in the covered part. #1 had a body down to the hands showing in the open part of the casket. So again, #1 contradicts the images we know are from Fuddy’s casket.

Placing a body with the head in the middle of the casket contradicts 25 years’ worth of funerals that my husband and I have been involved in as pastor and organist. Every open-casket funeral we have ever conducted or attended has had the person in the pose found in #1. We have NEVER seen a body placed in the middle of the casket with only the head visible.

But would it even be possible to fit Fuddy’s body within about half a casket’s length?

At directcasketoutlet.net/merchandise it shows all different kinds of funeral accessories. The caskets are slanted at the left end so the body is reclining at an angle. The lid that closes is just barely under half the length of the casket. The average casket length is 84 inches. Half of that is 42 inches. So suppose that the covered part of the casket is 46 inches – just over half the length of the whole casket. If Fuddy's neck was positioned right at the open portion, with the top of her head reaching into the open area by about 12 inches, that would put the top of her head at 58 inches from the right end of the casket. Can Fuddy fit within 58 inches? How tall is she?

This image (from hawaiichildrenstrustfund.blogspot.com/2013/03/loretta-fuddy-health-director-for-doh.html ) shows her to be just a little bit shorter than Neil Abercrombie:

[image] #5:

And according to the article at the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jul/17/il/hawaii807170326.html , Abercrombie is 5’ 5” tall. So Fuddy [was] probably 5’2” or 5’3”. That’s 62 or 63” tall. So no, she wouldn't fit in 58”. Maybe if she was scrunched a bit but why scrunch her when you’ve got 26” empty at the other end of the casket? That must not be her head.

Let’s zoom in and see what IS there in the open half of the casket:

[image] #5 (brightness and contrast adjusted):

The bigger of the 3 bumps is not connected to anything on either side of it. It looks kind of like an urn. Anything else would make no sense. [ED.: to me, the largest of the 3 bumps looks like two hands resting on top of a large belly. The bump is the color of hands and nearer to the shape of hands than to the shape of an urn.]


(More video and photos are at the following:

www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24280187/hundreds-gather-to-remember-loretta-fuddy

m.youtube.com/watch?v=SqCH__JxJhA

These all avoid showing what is in the casket. This image of a casket with the wrong pall is the only one I've seen that's been portrayed as showing Fuddy in the casket.)

But then, having an urn in a casket, closing the casket, and carrying it out (presumably for burial at a cemetery) - as shown in the video above - also makes no sense. If the ashes are already in an urn there is no need for a casket at all. Information about cremation is at nfda.org/planning-a-funeral/cremation/160.html#casket , and information about funerals involving cremation is at www.triskafuneralhome.com/faq/questions-about-cremation.aspx .

The only reason I can think of to have an open casket with no body inside is if you want it to appear that there was a casket with a body inside when there actually wasn't. Having the news media deceptively insert an image of a casket from a different funeral would further that agenda, as well as the family gathered around the open casket, closing the casket, and carrying it out as if the casket was going to be buried at the private burial just for family.

It’s almost as if the family and media are working together to make it seem as if there was an open-casket funeral for Fuddy, when the most anybody saw of Fuddy’s body was an urn that may or may not have contained ashes.

Conclusion: The person in the casket shown by KITV [picture #1] is not from Fuddy’s funeral. The casket at Fuddy's funeral had a different pall and had no body inside but did have an oval bump in the middle of the casket, which I presume to be an urn. The media used at least one instance of fake footage (and maybe two) to imply that Fuddy's was an open-casket funeral, the family was photographed in positions you would expect if there was a body in the casket, and the casket was treated as if it had a body inside. The public was most likely unaware of the deception to be carried out by the media and honored what they believed was her ashes if they got close enough to see the urn in the casket.

The pictures, #1 through #5, are in the original article at butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/did-fuddy-have-an-open-casket-funeral1.pdf .

An alternate conclusion: The person in the casket shown by KITV [picture #1] is not from Fuddy’s funeral, because that picture, though similar, is a stock photo. The casket at Fuddy's funeral did have a different pall from the pall in the stock photo, but everything was according to Hoyle and Robert's Rules of Order. Loretta Fuddy's body was indeed present in the casket at the funeral, as observed by the family and hundreds of others, and David Copperfield was conspicuously absent. The public was unaware of a deception, because there was none - at least at the funeral. An autopsy is being performed, though not by an impartial medical examiner independent of the government.

Beside the downed plane in the water off Molokai, there were few observers - six or eight at most - and even fewer were paying attention to the deceased, possibly only one: Hawaii DOH Deputy Dir. Keith Yamamoto, who was caring for Ms. Fuddy while they floated in the water, and holding her hand until she passed away and went limp.

Gov. Neil Abercrombie has appointed Gary Gill as acting director of the Hawaii DOH. Gill was previously deputy health director for the environment.

House Bill Introduced to Sue Obama for Violating Constitution



Representative Tom Rice (R-SC), who originally drafted the resolution to take Obama to court, has recently introduced it to the House with 74 co-sponsors.

The resolution is a response to Obama’s liberal use of executive authority. He believes he does not need Congress to remove, change, or create laws that match his agenda.
“Our Forefathers carefully crafted our Constitution. No American is above it,” Tom Rice wrote on his Facebook page. “And certainly no elected official is above it.”


WLTX writes:

The STOP Act stands for “Stop This Overreaching Presidency.” If it passes it would not be binding.
House Republicans are taking issue with several executive orders including a year-long extension of health care policies that were ending under Obamacare, a one-year delay on the employer mandate of Obamacare, a deferment on deportation of illegal immigrants who came to the US as children, and a waiver of part of the welfare work requirement. [...]
The proposal has 74 GOP co-sponsors including all of South Carolina’s Republican congressmen.
Rep. Jeff Duncan says the President is overstepping his authority with executive orders. “We legislate; the president doesn’t,” Duncan told reporters. “And I think that our founding fathers would be appalled by what they see coming out of the executive branch with the usurpation of that legislative authority. They would hope that we would exert our checks and balances on the executive branch and say ‘no you can’t rewrite law with just a pen.’”

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), one of the bill’s 74 co-sponsors, released a statement regarding his sponsorship of the bill which would compel Obama to comply with the law:

The fact that we were forced to introduce legislation to judicially force the President to comply with the laws of the land is incredibly sad. One expects imperial behavior in countries ruled by dictators but not in the United States of America, which was once known worldwide as a beacon of freedom and hope. From President Obama’s capricious one-year delay in the ObamaCare employer mandate to his arbitrary decision to grant deferred removal action to illegal immigrants, his transgressions against the Constitution are egregious and must stop.

The executive branch’s sole responsibility is to execute the law. Obama has proved over and over (and over) that he is either incapable of or actively refusing to do so. It’s time to take action.
Help us spread the word about Rep. Tom Rice’s resolution to prosecute Obama by sharing this article on Facebook and Twitter.


Get our DAILY, politically incorrect updates for free... find out what the media isn't telling you:

http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/house-sues-obama/

Read This Next:

1. 30 Congressmen Sponsor Bill to Sue Barack Obama
   
2. Bachmann: Obama Has “Rewritten the Constitution for Himself” (Watch Video)
   
3. Bill Introduced to Abolish the IRS and End the Income Tax
   
4. REBELLION: Bill Introduced in Missouri to Nullify Obamacare
   
5. Wow: Bipartisan Bill Introduced to “Outlaw” NSA in California
   
6. Rep. Bachmann: The House is Preparing to Sue Obama
   
7. Obama Administration Says Treaties Trump the US Constitution (SHARE)
   
8. Bill Introduced to Outlaw Obamacare in Missouri
   
9. REBELLION: Legislation Introduced in Tennessee to Nullify Obama’s Gun Control
   
10. Constitutional Amendment Introduced to Ban Obamacare
    
11. Oklahoma House Passes Bill Nullifying Obamacare… Media Ignores It
    
12. 100+ Representatives Cosponsor Bill to Stop NSA’s Unconstitutional Spying
    
13. DC Insurance Commissioner FIRED After Criticizing Obamacare “Fix”
    
14. WATCH: Rep. Gowdy Explains Why He’s Helping Sue Obama (VIDEO)
    
15. WATCH: Congressman Tom Rice Wants to Take Obama to Court (VIDEO)

Get our DAILY, politically incorrect updates for free... find out what the media isn't telling you:

Institute On The Constitution Calls For Congress To Immediately Impeach Obama

Impeachment is Appropriate:

An Open Letter to Congress

By Michael Anthony Peroutka

Institute on the Constitution

( Video via The American View. )

Leading up to the January 28th State of the Union Speech, Barack Obama and his spokesmen made statements to the effect that he plans to use his pen to sign executive orders to enact law on his own authority. He says he will do this because, in his view, Congress has not, or will not, pass certain legislation that he desires.

Based on this bald assertion of prerogative by Obama, articles of impeachment should be filed against him immediately. And I am calling on my Congressman, Representative Andy Harris of Maryland, to do just that. I urge you to do the same with regard to your own representative in Congress. In fact, you might send this short video to your Congressman along with your request that he impeach Barack Obama.

Let’s talk about the legal reasoning for this

The very first sentence of the Constitution (after the preamble) begins with the word “all.”

Before we go any further, let’s just define this term. Can we agree that the word “all” means, well…“all”?

Now, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, and here’s what that first sentence says in its entirety:

“All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

With this sentence in mind let me ask a question.

If all law making authority is vested in Congress, then how much is left over for the executive branch?

Asked another way: How can a president make law when only the legislative branch has that power?

The fact is he cannot.

And when an elected official threatens to act outside his constitutional authority, he is inviting and deserving of impeachment and removal from office.

So I am asking Representative Harris, along with all other members of Congress, who, of course, have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, to impeach Barack Obama.

Why?

Barack Obama has identified himself as an enemy of the Constitution by declaring his intention to violate it.

By Michael Anthony Peroutka | The American View | Institute on the Constitution | -

http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/02...ach-obama.html

WND EXCLUSIVE

Ayers dishes details on relationship with Obama

Confronts claims that parents paid president's way through Harvard

Published: 14 hours ago Jerome R. Corsi About | Archive

Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Corsi's latest book is "Who Really Killed Kennedy?"

Editor’s note: This is third part of a three-part series based on an interview with former Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers after his debate with Dinesh D’Souza. In the first part, Ayers suggest Dinesh D’Souza would take a plea bargain on his indictment for alleged violations of election laws. In the second part, Ayers affirmed he wrote Obama’s “Dreams from My Father” before denying it.


HANOVER, N.H. – In a wide-ranging, exclusive interview with WND, former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers insisted Barack Obama is a moderate politician whom he barely knew as a resident of his Chicago neighborhood
At the conclusion of his debate with Dinesh D’Souza at Dartmouth College Jan. 30, Ayers repeatedly criticized Obama.
“I wish Barack Obama had listened to me and followed my advice, but it didn’t happen and it’s not going to happen,” Ayers told WND.
Ayers said he has “a lot of criticisms of President Obama,” providing hints as to why Obama, in his second term, may be losing the support of the far left.
“I am a militant, anti-war activist. I would pull out of these Middle East wars,” Ayers explained. “Also, I believe in single-payer health care, and I believe Medicare should be extended to everybody.”
Some observers of Ayers, who note his many documented ties to Obama, interpret his public distancing as a strategy to promote the president. Ayers and Obama both studied the tactics of the guru of 1960s radicalism, Saul Alinsky, who believed the most effective way to transform America into a socialist state was through infiltrating the system and bringing about incremental change.
When Obama ran for the presidency in 2008, Ayers claimed even then that the candidate was a “moderate,” and Ayers minimized his direct role in funding, coaching and otherwise assisting Obama in his meteoric rise from obscurity in Chicago in the 1990s to the White House.
See for yourself the left’s blueprint for “fundamentally transforming America” in Saul Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals”
Ayers insisted he has “no impact on President Obama or his policies.”
“If I did, we would be stopping the drone strikes, we would be closing Guantanamo, we be shutting down the Pentagon and the NSA. That is what I would do,” he said.
Ayers rejected suggestions Obama cleverly played to the political left as a campaign strategy to win the presidency in 2008 and 2012.
“People on the left thought Obama was winking on them, signaling, ‘I’m going to do what you want me to do.’ But, no, he wasn’t winking. You can see his record. Obama said he was a moderate, look at his record.”
Ayers argued that because the political left’s interpretation that Obama was “one of them” was incorrect, the political right also was wrong to demonize him.
“People like you say, ‘Uh, I don’t know … a secret socialist … a pal of terrorists … some sort of a black nationalist thing going on,” Ayers said. “Just like Obama wasn’t winking to the left, he also isn’t a secret socialist.”
Ayers characterized the view of Obama as a “secret socialist” as “paranoid schizophrenic.”
Asked to explain how, in his estimation, the right could have such a distorted view of Obama, Ayers answered, laughing: “I have no idea. I think that once you go down a rabbit hole, the logic of the world kinds of bends itself to you, rather than you opening your eyes to the world as it is. Obama said he is a moderate. What could be truer or clearer?”
WND pointed out that in his famous encounter with Joe the Plumber in the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama also said he wanted to redistribute income in America.
Ayers again deflected the question.
“Oh, come on, we redistribute income all the time in this country. We redistribute it up. The fact is, Eisenhower was a guy who knew how to redistribute income, I mean, 90 percent,” Ayers said, referring to the top marginal tax rate at the time.
“I mean those guys really knew how to tax and redistribute income, only upward. What was Truman, a socialist? And FDR, a communist?”
Ayers insisted his interpretation that Obama is in reality a political moderate is the only correct understanding of the president’s political views.
“I thought that Barack Obama was exactly as he advertised himself in the 2008 presidential campaign – a moderate, compromising, pragmatic, middle-of-the-road politician – very ambitious, and so ambitious that I used to say to my wife that, ‘I think he wants to be mayor of Chicago.’ That was the limit of my imagination.”
Ayers didn’t answer directly whether or not he supported Obama’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.
“I’ve only ever voted for Democrats twice in my life, and both times without any illusions,” he said.
Ayers maintained he’s “not an electoral politics guy.”
“I don’t think elections are the way we solve the problems of our country. What was it in 2004? Kerry and Bush? I mean really? Is that it? Is that who was running? I can’t remember. We should be involved in elections but only as it promotes and builds a larger strategy for social change.”
‘A guy in the neighborhood’
Ayers claimed throughout the interview that he barely knew Obama in Chicago.
“Before he was president, I knew Barack Obama just like thousands of other people know him. In Chicago, just like the campaign said, as ‘some guy around the neighborhood,’” Ayers said. “I never had any policy discussions with Obama when we were together.”
Ayers did not discuss the role he and his Weather Underground wife, Bernardine Dohrn, played in launching Obama’s public career. In 1995, Ayers and Dohrn held in the living room of their Hyde Park home the first fundraiser for Obama in his effort to win a seat in the Illinois state Senate.
In 1985, the Woods Foundation gave a $25,000 grant to the Developing Communities Project in Chicago that allowed the DCP to hire Obama, then 24 years old.
It was the job offer that allowed Obama to move from New York City to Chicago.
Ayers was a director of the Woods Foundation for nine years, from December 1999 to December 2008, overlapping with Obama for three years, with Obama serving on the board from December 1999 to December 2002.
From 1995 to 1999, Obama led an educational foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, CAC, and remained on the board until 2001,” Stanley Kurtz noted in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece in September 2008. “The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists. The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s.”
Kurtz concluded that Ayers’ criticism of Obama as a moderate politician is designed as disinformation to deflect attention from the importance Ayers truly played in the rise of Obama to prominence, not only in Chicago radical politics but also on the national scene.
Ayers’ claim that he wasn’t really “into” Obama because of the future president’s “moderation” is simply “unconvincing,” Kurtz said.
In his 2010 book, “Radical-In-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism,” Kurtz noted Obama biographer David Remnick made almost no mention of Obama’s foundation work.

After all, it was at Ayers’ behest that Obama was put in charge of dispensing money to Chicago’s most radical activists. Obama’s conduct at CAC reveals him to have been a reliable supporter of Ayers’ most troubling projects and actions. It’s extraordinary, moreover, that Remnick’s biography has virtually nothing to say about Obama’s foundation work. Maybe that’s because it is impossible to tell the story of Obama’s foundation experience without facing up to the reality of the future president’s extensive partnership with Ayers.

Kurtz left no doubt he regarded the attempt to distance Ayers and Obama in Chicago is not supported by the evidence.
“The truth about the extended political partnership between Ayers and Obama stands in sharp contrast to the president’s famous April 2008 campaign claim that Ayers was ‘just a guy who lives in my neighborhood,’” Kurtz wrote.
He said Ayers’ “notoriety turned him into a particularly noticeable tear in the carefully woven fabric of Obama’s moderate image.”
“A few more tugs and the cloak itself would unravel, revealing the socialist secret beneath. That is why the Ayers story had to be suppressed,” Kurtz said.
Still, in the WND interview, Ayers insisted twice the Obama campaign’s claim in 2008 that Obama knew Ayers only because Ayers was “a guy in the neighborhood” was true.
“That’s all he was to me,” Ayers said. “Just a guy in the neighborhood.”
‘But Dad was a Republican’
WND asked Ayers if it was true that his father, Tom Ayers, helped fund Obama’s education.
The senior Ayers was a prominent Chicago businessman who was president of Chicago’s electric company, Consolidated Edison, from 1964-1980 and chairman from 1973-1980.
WND reported in 2012 Allen Hulton, a retired U.S. Postal Service carrier who delivered mail to the home of Tom and Mary Ayers in the late 1980s and early 1990s, claims to have been told by Mary Ayers that she and her husband were funding the Harvard Law School education of “foreign student” Barack Obama.
Hulton claims he later met Obama in front of the Ayers’ home.
Ayers laughed in response to the question.
“Not true, my dad was a Republican. Why would he fund Obama?” Ayers countered. “He never funded Obama.”
Then, distancing himself from his father, Ayers added: “I never had any policy discussions with Obama, and I never had any policy discussions with my father either, who lived with me for the last three years of his life. I mean, a great guy, but somebody I didn’t agree with politically.”
In “Radical-In-Chief,” Kurtz notes that John Ayers, brother of Bill Ayers, a leftist also involved in the Chicago movement for radical school reform, benefited from his father’s status in Chicago’s business community.
Bill Ayers, Kurtz noted, did not arrive back in Chicago until the spring of 1987, after going underground to avoid prosecution in his Weather Underground days. Ayers surfaced, only to have the criminal case against him dismissed because government prosecutors relied on Fourth Amendment-tainted wiretap evidence.
“Bill wouldn’t arrive in Chicago until the following fall,” Kurtz wrote. “Yet already, by the spring of 1987, Obama had made contact with Bill Ayers’ brother.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/ayers-dis...H8W3wKWhBHc.99

February 3, 2014

Barack Hussein Soebarkah: In Two Places at the Same Time?

ByJason Kissner

The 44^th President of the United States is, of course, Barack Hussein Obama II.

Barack Hussein Obama II has also been known by names such as Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, and Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah).

To be sure, only supposed madmen note that the name "Soebarkah" originated in very tight spatiotemporal proximity to the operations of a cult called "Subud" that was founded by a Muslim named Mohammad Subuh -- a cult wherein personal name changes were the order of the day.

That Soebarkah's mother associated with members of the cult, and that, some 45 years later, a leader of the cult (Deliana Loretta Fuddy) would be the first non-medical ]doctor in the state of Hawaii to run the State's Department of Health (and therefore have custody over Soebarkah's long form birth certificate is, shall we say, rather odd -- but nothing more than that, except to the most determined and deluded of conspiracy theorists.

Conspiracy theorists might add that cult leader Fuddy, relatively soon after her certification of Soebarkah's origins, apparently perished in a plane crash survived by everyone on board including the cult leader herself -- until the cult leader, post-collision, poetically disengaged a hand and was swallowed by the ocean.

But, this is truly sheer madness -- all of it; there's simply no denying it.

And yet, the depths of the madness inspired by the most transformative of presidents remain unfathomed -- even by the most ardent of conspiracy theorists.

You see, there are certain very queer facts about the nameshifter that not even the most ardent conspiracy theorist will want to deny.

Astoundingly, it would appear that Soebarkah could be in two places at the same time.

Re-acquaint yourselves, if you will, with the Soebarkah version stamped May 3, 1990. On that date, as reflected by the Illinois Daily Herald, we have Soebarkah in his typical, comfortable, "Barack Obama" uniform.

He's talking, of course, about stopping "racism" at its core and how bored he is with the suburbs, but we also hear:

Obama moved to Southeast Asia at age 2 when his parents divorced and his mother married an Indonesian. Until the fifth grade, Obama attended Indonesian schools, where most of his friends were the sons of servants, street peddlers, and farmers (emphasis added)

Got that "until the fifth grade" part?

Now the LA Times, March 19, 1990 (prepare yourself; it's another tear-jerker):

Born in Hawaii, where his parents met in college, Obama was named Barack (blessed in Arabic) after his father. The elder Obama was among a generation of young Africans who came to the United States to study engineering, [COLOR=#11B000 !important]finance[/COLOR] and medicine, skills that could be taken back home to build a new, strong Africa. In Hawaii, he married Obama's mother, a white American from Wichita, Kan.

Two years later, Obama's parents separated and he moved to a small village outside Jakarta, Indonesia, with his mother, an anthropologist. There, he spent his boyhood playing with the sons and daughters of rice farmers and rickshaw drivers, attending an Indonesian-speaking school, where he had little contact with Americans.

Every morning at 5, his mother would wake him to take correspondence classes for fear he would forget his English.

It was in Indonesia, Obama said, where he first became aware of abject poverty and despair...

After six years in Indonesia, Obama was sent back to the United States to live with his maternal grandparents in Hawaii in preparation for college. It was then that he began to correspond with his father, a senior economist for the Kenyan finance ministry who recounted intriguing tales of an African heritage that Obama knew little about (emphases added.)

So, after six years in Indonesia preceded by two Hawaiian years before the separation of BHO I and Stanley Ann Dunham divorce (but click here for an interesting perspective on the BHO I//Dunham "marriage"), Soebarkah returns to the states to "prepare for college."

OK, let's just leave aside the "prepare for college" at what must have been a very early age nonsense -- or, was it such an early age?

Never mind.

Instead, direct your attention to this October, 2008 text from Hawaii Business:

Now, kids from Hawaii's public schools can also claim ties to the Democratic presidential nominee. I acquired the picture below from Winifred (Wakai) Otaguro, who was in Ms. Sakai's kindergarten class at Noelani Elementary School in 1967. Otaguro's mother, Betty Wakai, had written the names of most of the kids in the class on the back of the picture. Her writing identifies the first little boy in the third row as "Barry Obama." Obama's sister Maya Soetoro-Ng confirms that the boy is Obama, however, the Department of Education has been unable to find his records.

You will note that the Hawaii Business link features a 1967 Noelani Elementary School photo of the kindergartener "Barry Obama" (Soebarkah??) in the third row.

I thought we were told that Soebarkah was in Indonesia at kindergartener age?

Upon reflection, though, there is obviously no problem here. Soebarkah, by way of a highly classified Subud incantation, perhaps simply folded time and space and was in both locales at once.

Or, was he a kindergartener preparing for college -- genius supreme that he incontrovertibly is?

Or not.

Of course Soebarkah himself did not fold time and space; of course he is not a genius supreme.

The genuine, non-conspiratorial explanation is much more mundane.

Soebarkah lived in Indonesia, then appeared in Hawaii for a very brief spell, then moved right back to Indonesia, and then back to Hawaii again.

We can confirm this by consulting Department of Education records.

Except we can't, of course, because by mere happenstance the Department of Education "has been unable to find his records."

Perhaps instead we could simply examine the 1965 passport of Stanley Ann Dunham? Nope; the State Department informs us that Dunham's passport materials were destroyed as a matter of routine.

Clearly, these sorts of thing often happen.

Just as it frequently happens that the National Student Clearinghouse -- responsible for collegiate education verification -- goes back and forth on a whether a person was enrolled at an institution for one year or two years -- as it did with Soebarkah.

And, literary agents often, out of nowhere, suppose that their US born clients were in fact born in Kenya.

In addition, and just as unquestionably, the passports of presidential candidates with rock solid identities are breached every election cycle.

In view of the foregoing, it should be obvious that everything is cool with Soebarkah's Social Security Number, his Selective Service card, and so on; only racists and those who oppose amnesty think otherwise.

Any conclusions to the contrary obviously amount to nothing more than conspiracy theories -- racist aspersions cast upon a president whose identity is as constant and known as Ronald Reagan's was.

Dr. Jason Kissner is associate professor of criminology at California State University, Fresno.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/...#ixzz2sjppsopS
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Navy Commander: De Facto Impeach The De Facto pResident To Start The Process

- Image Credit: Revere Radio Network -

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret): We Must De Facto Impeach the De Facto President to Start the Process to Reveal to All the Enemy to the Constitution Within and Ultimately Remove Him One Way or the Other, i.e., Honduras Style if Necessary

Obama Not Constitutionally Eligible to be the President and Commander in Chief of our Military. Obama is also a criminal ID fraud. Click Image for the Proof.

People argue Congress cannot impeach a fraudulent rPresident. I disagree. It may not end Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office solely via completing the total process of impeachment and conviction process by drafting of Articles of Impeachment by the House and then trial in the Senate under the impeachment process defined in our Constitution, but it surely can start the ball rolling to ending his tenure. To those who say you cannot legally impeach an imposter rPresident I say, if Obama assumes he is the President then the Congress can assume to impeach him. And regardless of any assumptions, Obama is the de facto pResident. You de facto impeach the de facto president to start the ball rolling to break down his house of cards of fraud, deceit, and crimes. As the constitutional outlined impeachment process and proceedings start and proceed against the de facto president, and the full investigations start people willl start coming forward requesting immunity to protect themselves for their part in this in return for testifying against him. As the criminal ID document and identity fraud is exposed even more to many many more people and upon getting copies of all sealed and withheld original records via Congressional subpoenas, the process at some point would blatantly reveal and it would become self-evident to the vast majority of the electorate in this nation and all but his die-hard communist/progressive backers and enablers would admit that Obama is a criminal fraud and national security threat and demand his removal. The newly exposed original documents from the investigation would be damning. Obama would then be indicted if needed under a renewed and activated federal grand jury of We the People process as is also in the Constitution revived by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling upon demand of the People … and/or forced out under the 25th amendment … and/or … if needed, using even more extreme methods if Obama refuses to leave and surrender himself for criminal prosecution. For example, using the unified action of the Congress, Supreme Court, and the military as was used in Honduras. The impeachment process is simply the start of the process of bringing down the liar, fraud, and criminal-in-chief … the de facto usurper resident of the Oval Office. The de facto impeachment of a de facto president is simply a way to start the process by those who assume he is a legal president to bring about the collapse of his house of cards of fraud and deceit and crimes. Once exposed other processes can take over. If there is a will there will be found a way under our Constitution to remove the fraud Obama. The impeachment process is simply a start to find the ultimate, final way. CDR Kerchner (Ret)

# # # #

A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized and in process for a long time. Such is the nature of Communist activities in the USA. The target of the seditious political conspiracy we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, our culture, and our military. Remember this quote from history: “We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. … The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” Quote by: J. Edgar Hoover former FBI director. Source: Elks Magazine (August 1956).

Marxist/Communists are trained to lie. It’s their modus operandi to deceive their true objectives. Obama is not just a pathological liar, he’s an ideological liar: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ical_liar.html

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/201...t-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/02...our+Records%29

Report: Federal Judge To Submit Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Evidence To Grand Jury

- Image Credit: iMaksim -

Mr. Obama, Your House of

Cards May Be Tumbling Down

“A MODERN-DAY DIOGENES”

By Montgomery Blair Sibley, ©2014, blogging at Amo Probos

(Feb. 4, 2014) — In my last post I related that 175 federal judges had received copies of Doug Vogt’s affidavit which forensically established probable cause to believe that Barack Hussein Obama’s certificates of live birth are forgeries. The cover letter accompanying the affidavit asked each Judge to refer the evidence contained in Doug’s 95 page public affidavit – and 75 page sealed affidavit – to a Grand Jury to investigate.

One of my faithful – though anonymous – followers recently added a note to my last post stating: “So it has been almost a month now and not a single update. I think I can guess what the responses have all been. “snicker – snicker.”

Au contraire, mon ami. In fact three (3) federal judges have acknowledged receipt of Doug’s Affidavit. Two of them have forwarded the affidavit to their respective United States Attorneys. The third wrote back stating: “I was very impressed by the letter and attachments you sent to me. I do not dismiss the allegations you make as untrue.” The letter continued with the commitment to submit Doug’s affidavit to the Grand Jury for their consideration. So like a modern-day Diogenes, perhaps we have found one honest federal district court judge.

Let me posit what will happen next. Doug and I – a former criminal prosecutor with extensive experience presenting evidence to a grand jury and securing indictments – will be invited to appear before the Grand Jury. Doug to detail the forensic evidence contained in his affidavit; Me to explain the legal options available to the Grand Jury to follow up on the evidence that Doug presents them. Operating outside the control of the United States Attorney’s office and with the support of the federal judge and the United States Marshal’s Service, a dozen federal Grand Jury subpoenas will be issued and served by the Marshal’s Service nationwide. The originals of Obama’s birth records from Hawaii, college transcripts from the three colleges he attended, along with his Social Security and Selective Service records would all be compelled to be produced to this Eric Holder-free Grand Jury. Additionally, the players in the Obama Birth Certificate pageant would all be called to testify as to their roles: Remember, there is no Fifth Amendment privilege to refuse to answer a question put to a witness by a Grand Jury.

Which is why I say, Mr. Obama, the People have some questions for you.

Source link. © 2014, The Post & Email. All rights reserved. - Amo Probos.

DOUG VOGT'S LETTER:

(click to enlarge)

Sibley's Blog: amoprobos.blogspot.com

Sibley's Website: www.montgomeryblairsibley.com

BACKGROUND: www.birtherreport.com/search?q=Montgomery+Blair+Sibley

Doug Vogt's Website: www.vectorpub.com

BACKGROUND: www.birtherreport.com/search?q=Doug+Vogt


http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/02...our+Records%29