Skip to comments.Re:"Mal and Val - not Ann and the Old Man" Any evidence Valerie Sarruf is Obama's mom? (vanity)
Posted on 08/01/2012 11:18:33 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
"Meet The Parents....of alias Barack Obama. Black Sunni Muslim father and White Lebanese Christian mother. Born in the ME, raised in Indonesia, became BHO II in 1982." Dr. Ron J. Polland
The Mal-Val youtube video at the link was posted by FReeper Polarik (Dr. Ron Polland) in August of 2011 and while morphing the image of a woman named Val into an image of Obama, he insinuates that Val is Obamas mom. One year later this youtube has only 1,150 views.
In July 2012, two FReepers associated the woman, Val, in Polariks Youtube with Lebanese actress Valerie Sarruf and have posted multiple images of her at various ages on FR eligibility threads. I am opening this thread to invite discussion of and links to any evidence that either supports or refutes a claim that Valerie Sarruf is Barack Obamas mother, with or without Malcolm X being his father.
Where could Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf have been in 1960 when baby Barry would have been conceived? Is there any evidence that Sarruf could have been pregnant and delivered a baby in 1961? In what country could the baby have been delivered? How and when could the alleged Mal-Val baby have been inserted into the identity and life narrative of the person we have come to know as Barack Hussein Obama?
Full disclosure: I refute categorically all of the Mal-Val narrative as wildly speculative and unsupported by any evidence that I have seen so far.
For several years now a shadowy coterie of FReepers styling themselves as researchers has gone onto nearly every FR eligibility thread to aggressively refute all evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham was Barack Obamas mother. They have actually declared flat out that she was never in Hawaii before 1963, contrary to the voluminous evidence including INS FOIA documents!
Requests for links or any evidence that Stanley Ann is NOT the mom have been frequently met with abusive ad hominem attacks and accompanied by claims that ALL documentary evidence showing her to have been in Hawaii in 1960 and 1961 is forged, but no credible evidence of forgery has offered. I make this observation as a retired Certified Fraud Examiner and CPA.
For years the researchers had claimed mysteriously to have conclusive evidence that a different woman is Barrys mom, but refused to reveal her name or any evidence other than her picture because the researchers claimed it would disappear from the net and/or from hard copy archives of the records. But this month, the researchers appear to have slipped up and revealed that Valerie Sarruf has been the woman whose identity they have been protecting. They have since attempted to walk back the revelation, but it is clear, IMO.
The researchers claim that they earnestly want to remove Obama from office. But wouldnt revealing ALL EVIDENCE of a foreign mother and foreign birth (which they also claim) be the most logical approach to removing Obama rather than hiding the identity of this alternative mother for years while attacking FR threads that sincerely attempt to find out where Stanley Ann Dunham was when she gave birth to Barry?
In my opinion, the best evidence that Valerie Sarruf is NOT Barrys mother is the mountain of evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham IS his mother, which the researchers have totally failed to refute.
Again, please use this thread for discussion of and links to any evidence that either supports or refutes a claim that Valerie Sarruf IS Barack Obamas mother with or without Malcolm X being his father.
Your claim that marriage vital records for BHO and SADO are PUBLIC records is FALSE. They are vital records protected by privacy from all but a narrow list of persons with “a direct and tangible interest” in the record in HI for 75 years.
What may be true in your own state is not necessarily true in HI, FReepers and other patriots found when they actually took the trouble to personally try to obtain vital records in HI. IIRC, this isn't the first time you have tried to generalize from your personal experience in your state to the state of HI.
So you have spammed the thread with nonsense, yet another form of trolling by Mal-Val supporters.
§338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.
(b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:
(1) The registrant;
(2) The spouse of the registrant;
(3) A parent of the registrant;
(4) A descendant of the registrant;
(5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;
(6) A legal guardian of the registrant;
(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
(8) A personal representative of the registrant's estate;
(9) A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
(10) Adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and who need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child's natural or legal parents;
(11) A person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
(12) A person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
(13) A person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.
(c) The department may permit the use [of] the data contained in public health statistical records for research purposes only, but no identifying use thereof shall be made.
(d) Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public.
(e) The department may permit persons working on genealogy projects access to microfilm or other copies of vital records of events that occurred more than seventy-five years prior to the current year.
Don't pull that stunt again.
She’ll either respond to your reply or not.
It's just me, all alone, here on this side of the monitor, not more than one person.
No offense, but you could've worded that much better.
OH SHEESH....it was a GENERIC “you guys” as in anyone reading this thread...I put the person I was talking about in the reply..and I was replying to the last post in my browser.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANYONE.
What month do you live in???
This is AUGUST in the real world..not April.
I don’t care whether she responds or not.
I am looking to see if anyone has figured out if her dad went to school with Obama, Sr.
This is AUGUST in the real world..not April.
Much like dog years, that is a few days ago in terms of "posting history".
Don't your "years" here seem just like days at times. Mine do.
If I confused you then my apologies. I should have been more explanatory.
Good God, get off my back.
I ask if any of you guys had figured out if she was a plant. I posted a link.
Since you don’t know...GET OFF MY BACK.
One FReepers poorly worded comment, in particular, drew an especially defensive and revealing reaction.
I'm glad you gave me the keyword "father" to look for or I wouldn't have bothered even reading the link as the article is rather long.
No, I have no info on her father or her family.
Don't get snippy with me because of your laziness in not removing my name from the "To" box!
You should've removed my name when you placed her name in the "To" box and placed "All" there instead if your reply was meant to go to anybody who might be reading this thread.
It's just easier to lash out at "the big bad ogre", isn't it.
You are real piece of work. You keep dragging this on and on and on.
I made a generic post. Yours was the post I responded to because it was in my browswer...and you are throwing a HISSY fit because you don’t like the way I worded a post.
he can’t help himself...
Are you the site owner?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.