Dunham v. Obama: Document Confirms Fatherhood, FactCheck.org UK-Kenyan Colonial Law
I had originally reported DecaLogosIntl.org’s posting of divorce paperwork, and Ed Hale of PlainsRadio.com received further documentation this evening as well (FreeRepublic.com has posts here and here; InvestigatingObama has the play-by-play as well as pages from Mr. Hale).
What we have, ladies and gentlemen, is another piece of the puzzle coming to light, making the whole eligibility issue for Barack Hussein Obama becoming more and more clear.
What can be confirmed is that Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. is, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama II’s biological father. Please see this PDF, paragraph IV (under the Plains Radio “watermark”), which reads the following:
That one child has been born to said Libellant and Libellee as issue of said marriage, to wit: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II, a son, born August 4, 1961.
Of course, this does not say where the presumed President-elect was born. Also, for those who are not familiar with the legaleze, “issue” is the legal term for a child or children (can be inherently construed as singular or plural).
Therefore, what has been confirmed by FactCheck.org (Leo Donofrio’s take here) has now officially been confirmed by these divorce papers. Granted, this is not exactly breaking news, but it puts legal backing behind the fact that Barack Hussein Obama II’s birth was governed by the UK colonial laws of Kenya in 1961 regardless of where Barack Husssein Obama II was geographically born. In fact, even if Barack Hussein Obama II was born on American soil in Hawaii, his nationality status would have still been governed by Britain!
So, to bring this full circle. We now know — via Ms. Sandra Ramsey Lines’ forensic work — that the FactCheck.org and related site’s certification of live birth is on record as being officially debunked (I would be open to hear of an opposing expert’s opinion who is willing to substantiate that the certification of live birth, as posted on the Internet, is enough to substantiate Barack Hussein Obama II’s natural born citizenship). Further, you’ll note from this comment that Dr. Polarik further explains how even the pictured certification’s certificate number is questionable.
And today, we now know that UK colonial citizenship had officially been linked to Barack Hussein Obama II via his father, meaning that, officially, Barack Hussein Obama II is an American citizen of some sort, but not a natural born citizen.
InvestigatingObama goes on to summarize Stephen Pidgeon’s commentary (attorney for 13 Plaintiffs in Broe v. Reed):
Then, he explains how Hawaii COLB’s are not birth certificates of the kind which are required for fundamental identification. Then, he explains how it is admitted knowledge that Stanley Ann’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro adopted Barack, whose name was changed to Barry Soetoro and who was registered in an Indonesian elementary school as an Indonesian citizen. After this, the discussion gets into the question of whether Barack Obama might be guilty of criminal fraud, if he were born in another nation. …
Now, Pidgeon explains how becoming an Indonesian citizen voids the status of natural born Citizen, requiring naturalization, if one is to then become an American citizen, again. And now, the discussion goes to this peculiar, new working assumption of Ed Hale has that there is a immigrant’s birth certificate for BHO II on file in America
We’re also in for a big week next week, where both Berg v. Obama and Broe v. Reed have big days in court (I’ll be posting a summary of that action for next week).
Update: TheSteadyDrip blog has an interesting article on Obama’s mother around the time of his birth.
-Phil
Oh, on my Jan 4 post, I was in error. Obama Sr. was NOT an East-West center grantee and survived on private funds gathered by Tom Mboya. This means the the extra money to afford his move from a tiny apartment in Manoa to a house in Kaimuki had to have come for the funds from senior Dunhams alone.
Also we have found additional testimony from his East-West Center buddies — and they never mention Ann Dunham.
Second error is that a marriage license from anywhere in Hawaii is valid anywhere else in Hawaii. Thus my statement is changed that the license could have been obtained in either Honolulu or Maui.
Obama will be sworn in as the 44th President tomorrow — so this is all wasted musing — though my support of the fight to reveal the truth on this fraud on the American people will not cease.
But a comment on the divorce paperwork. It is only good as “proof” that a “legal marriage” existed as long as Ann Dunham did NOT perjure herself. We believe she lied. First, according to the Obama story Dunham and Obama Sr. ran away to Maui to be married. However, the state of Hawaii requires that a female under 18 (Ann Dunham was 17) must have BOTH parents signatures on the license. According to the story, the senior Dunhams objected to the marriage. How did Dunham get the signatures? Second, the marriage license once signed by the minister/justice of the peace becomes the marriage certificate. They could have gotten the license in Honolulu or Wailuku, Maui. Once signed the MINISTER/OFFICIAL sends the document back to the issuing office and the couple get a certified copy in the mail. The only problem is that no document has ever been found by investigators either in Maui or Honolulu.
Thus the legal marriage is only good if Ann Dunham’s word is good –and we believe that the facts show that Ann Dunham was a liar about this marriage from the beginning.
We have believed because of Ann immediately running off to Washington in Aug 1961 after Obama Jr.’s birth and enrolling in the Univ of Wash for the Autumn semester that the marriage was a sham. We also show as proof that records show that Obama Sr. living at a separate address than that on the birth announcement. We also reference Obama Sr’s friends who never mention Ann Dunham — except for Neil Abercrombie who said she was at a few weekend parties. After Aug 1961, Obama Sr. never mentioned them to friends. We believe there was no marriage and it was an arranged sham to give respectability to the Dunhams and the child. The divorce was to make everything “legal” — which everyone here agrees that it does.
The bottomline is that if Ann Dunham could lie about her marriage to Obama for three years, what makes you think she wouldn’t lie about it on a divorce decree?
We also believe this divorce decree was supposed to “legitimize” Obama with a name as we believe his birth certificate showed him as fatherless and listed as “Barry Dunham” — the mother’s maiden name. She did not enter Obama’s name on the birth certificate after the divorce because to do so showing the divorce decree would show she had perjured herself. How do you legitimize a child with a divorce decree name that isn’t on the birth certificate?
This is why when Obama returned in 1970 on an Indonesian passport under the name of Barry Soetoro — and accepted into Punahou School in what we believe was a foreign student tuition assistance scam. We also don’t believe that the story of Stanley Dunham’s boss interceding is a bogus tale as no one has found out his name and even the store’s name. Instead, it is more logical that Madelyn Dunham (now a Bank of Hawaii VP) interceded for her INDONESIAN grandson promising to provide housing and sustenance, but used Lolo Soetoro’s income to show they couldn’t afford the expensive Punahou tuition. HOWEVER, Obama Jr. was registered as BARRY DUNHAM because that is what was on his Hawaii birth certificate.
Remember that Obama would be a dual entity. The Indonesians viewed him as ONLY Indonesian. The US viewed him as ONLY US — because the Indonesian adoption was NOT reflected on his birth certificate as he was adopted in Indonesia. He was a US citizen. But in the eyes of Punahou officials, he was a DUAL CITIZEN because they would not realize the circumstances. Thus Obama Jr. was entered as Barry Dunham from the birth certificate — but qualified for tuition assistance as an Indonesian citizen.
This name snafu entailed Ann Dunham to return to Hawaii from Indonesia along with Obama Sr. from Kenya in Dec 1971. Obama Jr. was already entered into the school. This when the name “Barack Hussein Obama II” was entered into the birth certificate as a legal name change.
Again this is my tin-foil hat take on the situation — and nothing can be proved since no birth certificate is available and all Indonesian records were sealed to the press after Obama Jr. became President-elect.
Sorry, it’s just that my frustration runneth over with the Obama inauguration.
Sorry, Phil, I got this divorce mixed up with the Soetero divorce where Obama’s name is not mentioned.
Ladyhawkke,
I’m not sure to what you’re referring, as I’ve not only included the link to the PDF with BHOII’s name on it, but I’ve also verbatim copied the very paragraph.
Perhaps reading the posting a second time will show this to you (and remember that the President-Elect’s name is “Barack Hussein Obama II”, just as his dad’s name is “Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.”).
Thanks for the comment,
-Phil
The complaint for divorce and Final Judgment NEVER mentioned Barak Obama’s name. It said there is one child under the age of 18, Maya Soetero; there is one child over the age of 18….. . This is how rumors get started. Have you looked at the documents? If so, please post a link where you see Barak Obama’s name mentioned. You can’t do it because it isn’t there. If it were, it would have been all over the web.
AXJ is studying this matter. http://www.axjus.com
My handwriting and signature have changed since high school, too. Haven’t yours?…
All Ann Dunham Obama signatures in the Obama divorce papers do not match the Ann Dunham handwriting samples circa high school days. View the handwriting samples with source links:
http://home.att.net/~south.tower/Annwriting1.htm
A legitimate signature is the prime requirement for a legal document.
Kalani,
It doesn’t matter whether Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama I ever actually got married or not, since there’s a LEGAL DIVORCE DECREE stating they WERE indeed married, and are now divorced. Ed Hale’s investigator in Hawaii told him that MANY public records concerning Dunham and Obama, records he fully expected to find, are GONE….have disappeared without a trace, thanks to Obama’s handlers.
Ann Dunham was unmarried and pregnant (possibly upon her high school graduation in June 1960–if Obama’s birth date was actually earlier than stated), and in need of a negro husband to bring legitimacy to her unborn mulatto child (legitimacy demanded by almost ANY parents 50 years ago). If she was pregnant in June 1960, it would explain the family’s sudden, unannounced move to Hawaii, in which her mother gave up a hard-earned Seattle bank vice president job to start over from scratch in a new state. (It’s also POSSIBLE Ann’s mother is Obama’s birth mother, but who knows?)
In any case, NO ONE believes Ann and Barack I were ‘in love’ and had anything but a marriage of convenience. She got a needed negro husband/legal father for her child, and he got more scholarship money PLUS a white American wife, pregnant with ‘his’ child, to prove his virility, stature and prestige to everyone he knew in Kenya. [His first marriage, in Kenya, was 'tribal', not legal, leaving him free to marry someone else.]
The usual paternity laws state that, if the parents were married at any time within 300 days before child’s birth, the husband is LEGALLY ASSUMED to be the child’s father, regardless whether he actually IS the child’s BIOLOGICAL father. DNA is irrelevant.
So Obama I, because he was married to Stanley Ann Dunham, is LEGALLY Obama II’s father, though Malcolm X is a better physical match. Ironically, Obama II’s BIOLOGICAL father could very well be Malcolm X, and had Stanley Ann Dunham been married to Malcolm X (who was a U.S. citizen) instead of to Barack Obama I, then Obama II would not have inherited British citizenship at birth.
Understand that I am a fringe tin-foil hat wearing fanatic that is absolutely convinced that Obama’s “family” (Obama-Dunham) is a complete myth — a sham to gain financial reward for Obama to complete his education at the UH (via married stipend from the East-West Center via US government) and “respectability” for Ann Dunham.
People are saying the divorce paperwork is “proof” of the marriage. It is — IF Ann Dunham was telling the truth and did not perjure herself. As Obama Sr. did not object the paperwork simply went through unchallenged.
However, explain why no record of a marriage in the Maui County seat of Wailuku, Maui has ever been found despite everyone knowing the exact date and location? Wailuku was not a bustling metropolis or anything like that. It was a hick-town with very few tourists in 1961 — and the people of Maui liked it that way. This was before the big boom days of the Lahaina Whaling festivals and all the mass of tourists streaming in. This was the days when the first jet liner had just landed at Honolulu airport. This was the pre-tourist hoopla days.
Why can’t anyone find a marriage record when we KNOW that there were few marriages on that day in a town with a population then of about 5,000. GIVE ME A BREAK!!! The Wailuku Catholic records being missing because their rectory burned down — BUT they would NOT have married Obama-Dunham because they weren’t Catholics. Did the Maui records burn down too? Nope — just no entries in PUBLIC records!!!
Now understand that the facts are that Ann Dunham was registered at the University of Washington for the Autumn term in 1961 — just after Obama Jr. was born — and returned after Obama Sr. hoped on the plane for Harvard on 22 Jun 1962. She reentered the University of Hawaii for the Spring semester of 1963. The marriage was a sham and it is certain that Madelyn and Stanley Dunham were complicit in this whole affair — they supplied the funds for Ann Dunham to live on.
The records in Honolulu show at the time of Obama’s birth, Obama Sr. was living at an address in Kaimuki, but the birth notice of 13 Aug shows the residence at 6085 Kalaniana’ole. Remember that Obama stated in a 1959 newpaper article that he only had enough for two semesters unless he got a scholarship. This dude needed money. He didn’t have money, but he could afford expensive (even back in 1961 downtown rent rates were sky-high) for a residence in Kaimuki. GIVE ME A BREAK!!! THESE ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AND THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS BLIND!!!
This whole arranged marriage with a divorce at the end was set up from the start. This was never to be a lasting marriage…in fact, there never was a marriage in the sense of a family. The timelines are all screwed up.
Now we have the divorce, but anyone here going through a divorce ever remember having to produce your marriage certificate? But Ann Dunham would have all the paperwork that would have been submitted to the East-West Center to justify Obama Sr. being married to receive the married stipend. All she has to do is say she is had a legal marriage and sign her name. The divorce was uncontested — no alimony, no child support, no nothing — and Obama flies home to Kenya free as a bird, except for his new wife Ruth that he picked up at Harvard.
Yes, this divorce paperwork is “proof” that there was a marriage. But it is only proof as long as you believe that Ann Dunham did not perjure herself when she signed the document.
I just had a thought. Perhaps Obama is not producing the original vault copy because he was adopted by Soetoro, and does not have legal access to his own vault copy. I recall reading that in HI, the original vault copy is sealed upon adoption, and is not even available to the child without extraordinary circumstances. (i.e. hereditary medical issues).
Can any confirm or disprove this thought about Hawaii sealing it due to adoption?
Watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymeQ3ZoMuhc
Natural Born citizen is a requirement, not a suggestion and for the courts to turn their backs on the citizens of this country, is a blatant disregard for the law and a call to arms.
refer to “Laws of Nations” and the CLEAR definition of “Natural Born” is self evident.
Book 1 Chpt. 19
§ 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.
§ 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country.
It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights (§ 212); the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say “of itself,” for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise. But I suppose that the father has not entirely quitted his country in order to settle elsewhere. If he has fixed his abode in a foreign country, he is become a member of another society, at least as a perpetual inhabitant; and his children will be members of it also.
Used by John Jay – First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, when they were not afaid to stand up for the Constitution.
eview and compare the following to get an understanding of what the Framers of the Constitution understood as “Natural Born” citizen.
-1758 Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” –The Framers relied on many of the principles to write the Constitution
-1787-1788-The Federalist Papers, including Justice John Jay’s letter to George Washington
-Article II, Section I, United States Constitution
-The Naturalization Act of 1790-repeal of “Natural Born” from the 1790 Act in 1795
-The Framers of the 14th Amendment-(citizenship granted, not Natural Born Citizenship); Rep. John Bingham and Sen. Lyman Trumball define Natural Born Citizen
-Congressional Hearing on Dual Citizenship, 2005, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” discussion
It would be trying to explain a Boeing 747 technical manual to someone born 200 years ago. But we can understand their meaning by referencing other documents and explainations they used.
Then you might understand why even as late as 2006,
SARAH P. HERLIHY authored the following,
AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE
Clearly stating the following qoute;
The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution,1 “undecidedly un-American,”2 “blatantly discriminatory,”3 and the “Consti-tution’s worst provision.”4 Since Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory in the California gubernatorial recall election of 2003, commentators and policy-makers have once again started to discuss whether Article II of the United States Constitution should be amended to render naturalized citizens eligi-ble for the presidency.5 Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution defines the eligibility requirements for an individual to become president. Article II provides:
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 Of-fice who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.6
Although these sixty-two words are far from extraordinary, the natural born citizen provision is controversial because it prevents over 12.8 million Americans from being eligible for the presidency.
Now please note, SARAH P. HERLIHY is employed by Kirkland &
Ellis LLP This law firm is based in Chicago, is member of finance committees of U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin.
Therefore back in 2006 Obama and company have known that Obama was not, qualified and they are getting ready to lock battle over this. Talk about trample the Constitution!
They have known it, and have shown blatant disregard for the Constitution.
Remeber this. Obama himself has stated that HE believes the Constitution to be fundamentally flawed. Hence IF he takes the oath of office, he’s already purjured himself, because he doesn’t believe in the Constitution.
Phil,
PLEASE, FOLLOW-up , with this statement, that Obama knew that he was not qualified to be President, to Allen Keys, This is very important for Public to be aware of!
Publicity of this, Helps with legal cases, and Congress, and most important PUBLIC OPINION!
Thankyou in advanced for your help.
With Liberals in control of all three branches, don’t expect it to happen.
buck stops with we united,
My opinion is that the Supreme Court will not be doing anything until after Congress counts and subsequently certifies the Electoral votes for President. Once that has been complete, and if a case — such as Berg v. Obama, already slated for Conference after this event — can successfully demonstrate that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen, that would certainly go a long way in validating the presidency.
Nevertheless, Gary Kreep, lead counsel in Keyes v. Obama, has already promised to file suit against every executive action that then-President Obama would make if everything were to fall through.
Remember that all Supreme Court cases, to date, have asked the Court to stay the Electoral College vote. In 20/20 hindsight, it makes sense that the Court would not do this, as the Electoral College voting, per se, is perfectly legitimate. What would not be legitimate is if an ineligible candidate made it through the Electoral College process and was not objected to by Congress, in my view.
Thanks for the commentary,
-Phil
As Biden and DNC premeditated these “HIGH CRIMES AND MISTAMEANORS” , HOW DO WE GET A EMERGENCY LAW, OR congressional BILL, OR SUPREME COURT RULLING THAT BOTH BIDEN / OBAMA, with CONSPIRING DNC LEADERS (PELOSI, ETC) BE INJUNCTED, STAYED FROM ASSUMMING POUS BEFORE JAN 20??
ESSPECIALLY, WHICH THRUTH ORGANIZATIONS WILL PUBLISH MASSIVE IMMEIDIATE POLLS THAT 99% OF DEMS AND CONSERVATIVES DEPISE. THE CON»ARTISTRY OF OBAMA,BIDEN, AND DNC!
WHICH ORGANIZATION CAN HELP GET THRUTH OUT AND CONFIRM ALL AMERICANS DO NOT ENJOY BEING TAKING FOR STUPID?
ENJIONING OBAMA ETC WITHOUT PUBLIC AWARENSS-TRUTH IS TOO DANGEROUS FOR AVIODABLE RIOTS & COUNTRY DESTRUCTION!!!!!
PLEASE COMMITS &REPLY
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2141519/posts
Charles,
Your instincts are right. That exchange never happened. It was the invention of somebody on the internet, one which seems to have sort of taken on a life of its own.
Thanks for your diligence in getting at the truth.
Tom Hoefling
Chairman, America’s Independent Party
Chairman, Alan Keyes for President 2008
http://www.selfgovernment.us
http://www.AIPNEWS.com
http://www.AlanKeyes.com
to NBC: can you provide a link to that debate? Thanks.
The information is all over the place that Obama’s not a “natural born citizen”. What the question that needs to be answered is do you not see the cover up played by several key government people. This has deep and heavy people behind such a cover up to take the rights of the people and make us prisoner’s of the Democracy.
THE OLD BELL NOW IS SILENT
AND HUSHED ITS IRON TONGUE
BUT THE SPIRIT IT AWAKENED
STILL LIVES—-FOREVER YOUNG…………
MAY THE CONSTITUTION BE OUR GUIDING LIGHT..
GOD BLESS AMERICA
Mike A.
Just caught what NBC said above. Fascinating. If true, then Obama, a professor of constitutional law, was well aware of the “natural born citizenship” requirement for president AND that he didn’t meet that requirement. Will have to check it out.
Decent summary, Phil. For me anyway, Obama is clearly ineligible simply on the grounds of his having been born of dual citizenship thru his father, a British citizen at the time of his birth.
ALso, having been adopted by Lolo and, presumably, therefore, assuming Indonesian citizenship, then he would have needed to have been naturalized to retain his US citizenship. (Question: I thought a kid who may have been born a US citizen, who is then taken overseas where he assumes another citizenship, can, before he reaches the age of majority, or 21, whichever, may then restore his original citizenship merely by making an oath of allegiance upon his return to US soil or before a US counsel somewhere? This is the part of the puzzle which is murky to me.) But, of course, had Barry not formally restored (my word) his US citizenship, then he is not a US citizen. A kid can’t be responsible for what his parents have done, but he must still formally restore US citizenship at some point after majority. Do you know?
If Hale’s PI can procure the port-of-entry birth certificate showing Obama’s birth place as being in Kenya, then it’s really all over. Or, one would think so anyway, but I have my doubts in this permissive political climate.
Jasper James,
Like folks who still think that BHOII’s daddy is someone other than BHO Sr., and while you’re entitled to your opinion, I think this is really grasping at straws.
Thanks for the commentary,
-Phil
buck stops with we united,
While I’ll allow your posting, it should be pretty obvious that a court record disclosing BHOII’s dad is sufficient at this time for most concerns over paternity.
Thanks for the comment,
-Phil
Even Rick Warren, the fake mega-pastor, said on Christmas Eve to his congregation that the fact that a “first-generation immigrant” has been elected to be the next president, so anything is possible. Source: The LA Times, December 24, 2008.
Bill Richardson, now under investigation himself for a pay-to-play scheme in New Mexico, has also stated on camera that Obama is “an immigrant.”
How shameful that even these public figures know that Obama is not a natural-born citizen and they are going along with the charade. This obfuscation will be brought to an end soon. Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, cannot hide the truth forever.
He knows he is not a natural born citizen, because he addmited as much in the debate with Alan Keyes, uncut version, C-span rebroad cast in April of 2005, when Keyes said to him, “You are not even a natural born citizen”, to which he replied “So what, I am running for the Senate, not the Presidency!”
What is obvious is that Barack Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen as layed out in the Constitution. The fact that he has hidden the vault copy of his Birth Certificate shows what a dishonest con man he really is. I hope when the truth comes out (and it will) that he is punished to the full extent of the law.
I am really surprised that Obama Sr. Married her. However is this a legal marriage if he was already married? If it is not a legal marriage, then does that affect Obama’s legal name? The issues of his legal name interest me. Since later he appears to have been adopted, does that also alter his legal name? So if the current name he is using is not his real legal name – then does that affect the legitimacy of the associated documentation for his eligibility? I would think – not using your legal name would put into question much of the legal documentation assoicated with his law-degree, his passport(s), his marriage, etc.
Another bizzare twist to the NBC issue is that following: Even if Obama was born in Hawaii – he still is not a Natural Born Citizen. Hawaii is not a legal state of the United States! See the following website: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/HAWAII/hawaii.html In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii’s statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations’ charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding. On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty. The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact. United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people. So even if Obama was born in Hawaii – he was not born in a legal U.S. State and is not a NBC.
Caution, where is D N A, DO U THINK THAT BARACK RESEMBLES ANY OF HIS ALLEGED KENYAN FAMILY? NONE. AND BARAACK ABANDONED ALL HIS KENYAN ALLEGED FAMILY LIKE THEY AINT BLOOD, EXCEPT
WHEN HE WANTED TO USE THEM, RIGHT ?
We now know that Obama Sr. and Obama’s mother were actually married and that Obama Jr. is their son. Most people thought this was true but Obama’s cloak and dagger people had so successfully obscured his records that we didn’t find documents to prove his legal status until now.
We now also know that his real name is Barrack Hussein Obama, Jr. This is important because we now have documented proof that he was born a citizen of Britain and therefore not eligible to be President of the United States. (at least that is what the constitutional lawyers are saying)
Ed Hale claims that he has discovered a Kenyan Birth Certificate for BHO, Jr. He says that this document was part of the paperwork presented by Obama’s mother when she returned from Kenya shortly after Obama’s birth.
Mr. Hale says that the BC is at a Port of Entry document file somewhere in the United States, not Hawaii. This could make sense that a BC was required for an infant entering the US.
Mr. Hale would not say which of the 336 Port of Entry locations had the BC on file. He says he will reveal the BC and the location of the Port of Entry on Monday’s show. That ought to give Obama’s people plenty of work over the weak end.
Ed Hale has a mixed history of being right on and being over enthusiastic about what he thinks he has found. So, we wait.
I guess the Chickens have come home to roost.
Well done, Phil! I heard Ed’s interview of Stephen Pidgeon. Although Pidgeon states that “there IS some wiggle room”, if this b/c doc somewhere in the U.S. is made public, there is no way BO can be President.
You failed to mention that next week, the Republican House and Senate members are meeting on Tuesday to we assume discuss strategy before the all-important Thurday Cert. Mtg. I know you were skeptical that this meeting on Tuesday by the Repubs in the House and Senate is separate from the RNC Chair Mtg, but one Congressman and one Senator (who wish to remain nameless) have stated to Wiley S. Drake that it is a separate meeting.
Has anyone ever mentioned checking the U.S. Consulate or Embassy in Kenya? Or is that where things were forbidden to investigators?:
“Foreign or high-seas, or Panama Canal Zone births and deaths and certificates of citizenship
Where to Write for Vital Records”
Birth records of persons born in foreign countries who are U.S. citizens at birth
The birth of a child abroad to U.S. citizen parent(s) should be reported to the nearest U.S. Consulate or Embassy as soon after the birth as possible. To do this, the child’s parent or legal guardian should file an Application for Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America (Form FS-579/SS-5). This form may also be used to apply for a Social Security Number for the child. A $65.00 fee is charged for reporting the birth.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/howto/w2w/wtow4.htm
None of this matters one wit if no one in authority will kick his a– out.
[edited for language]
Somehow Ed also was able to state that someone had seen this alleged “port of entry” birth certificate since he said that its registry occurred (I can’t remember exactly) either 4 days or 4 weeks after the birth. He also said that it was not a Hawaii port of entry. Now if he got that kind of info from some witness it makes one assume that this particular BC should be easily attained. Then one also assumes that it is this info that was later also entered into Hawaii records of birth.
MESSAGE TO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:
When counting the electoral votes, either Congress finds by 1/8/09 that Obama, not being an Article II “natural born citizen”, fails to qualify as President whereupon Biden becomes the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) or thereafter defers to the Supreme Court to enjoin Obama’s inauguration with Biden becoming only Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President is duly determined.
The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, should seem obvious.
I think all that actually matters in Obama’s case is proven by his father not being an American citizen. So in essence, Obama is not a natural born citizen and never was.
Maybe this is why he calls himself a citizen of the world!