Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
I don't see how they can. Obama/Biden was a package deal. You couldn't vote for one without the other.
On the other hand, if Biden were to be declared ineligible, I don't think it would invalidate Obama's presidency.
It would be a tough call. Personally, I think the presidency goes to Pelosi.
I am not certain, because I would have to check what the requirements are for Senator.
Maybe someone else can chime in on this?
I do know that the State of Illinois doesn't require a Senator candidate to prove their citizenship. But, past that, I have bad memory or ignorance to plead.
Official government business was done in English, even after Kenya’s independence.
Aye, but the path is much clearer than it was even yesterday.
(This may be addressed upthread, havent read all 1700 posts yet.)
So maybe there never was a BC in Hawaii and when the divorce happened, she needed the Kenyan BC to get the Hawaiian COLB.
My theory has been 18yr old Stanley left Kenya without a BC, and as you said her divorce attorney recommended she obtain one. The fastest most economical way would have been to have Sr. obtain it.
What if this is found to be legitimate?
That assumes Rahm was not completely effective in any attempt to sanitize the records. The logs of any government escorts accompanying Rahm would be an interesting read.
What if the officials in Mombasa confirm this? Then what?
If a U.S. court rules the document is authentic it will put Congress on notice that it has a duty to correct a Constitutional duty that it overlooked on January 8, 2009.
It will either correct that defect or the American public will realize its in the bag.
(See my About Page.)
I can't answer that question but it looks a little too consistent to me. I have a 1964 document printed by the City of Boston and the printed text has darker and lighter portions within the same font. This is particularly true nearer the sides and edges of my document. I don't see that on the photograph of the document in this thread. I have to agree with bvw in post 1848 so far. But my analysis is woefully inadequate and anecdotal so I will stay agnostic and hope someone does a better job.
Here is a summary of Hawaiis state policies and procedures in 1961.
In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an original birth certificate on record. They varied greatly in their reliability as evidence. For convenience, Ill call them BC1, BC2, BC3, and BC4.
BC1. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before the local registrar of the district. It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parents signature to a form and mail it in. In addition, if a claim was made that neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate. (Section 57-8&9) I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parents claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a drivers license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a drivers license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the 60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.
BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a Delayed Certificate could be filed, which required that a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates, which evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file. The statute provided that the probative value of a delayed or altered certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
[In other words, this form of vault birth certificate, the Delayed Certificate, required no more than a statement before a government bureaucrat by one of the parents or (the law does not seem to me clear on this) one of Barack Obamas grandparents. If the latter is true, Ann Dunham did not have to be present for this statement or even in the country.]
BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.) In 1955 the secretary of the Territory was in charge of this procedure. In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor (the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office §338-41 [in 1961]).
One reason for a 1964 issue may just be Africans no longer wanted to be British citizens and wanted BCs reflecting that, just a stray thought
I guess its just must funner to listen to the echo's in the chamber...
I think most non-birther freepers like myself are just waiting for a smoking gun.
If the book and page referrenced in this document exist in GB (Kenya was still a colony at BHO's birth), it may not be that easy to refute. I think that is why Taitz is in/on her way to GB now.
thugs are at it again
August 1st, 2009
Until today if you were to type orly taitz on yahoo, you would get nearly 800,000 articles. Now there are only 178,000. Some thugs scrubbed 600,000 articles.
Suddenly Google shows that there is malawere on my site, when in reality there isnt.
I must be really hitting a nerve if smbd spents so much time and effort to attack me.
Either that or the records have been altered. You do know who the prime minister of kenya is don't you?
We can't just pop over and check the Library of Congress' (ack whatever) theobamafile.com since it suddently shut down so conveniently during the biggest week of coverage. I wondered about the timing the other day but then maybe my tin-foil hat is too tight.
I have to wonder hw cooperative she’ll find the Labour operatives in London. But then, Hussein was pretty rude to Brown, wasn’t he?
*****
I wonder if the Supreme Court is looking at this Kenyan birth certificate issue, if they are looking at it at all.
It could be having a few chuckles as their first personal response is it must be an April's Fool Joke, and so it must be a fake.
On the other hand, if I were a member of the Supreme Court, I wouldn't dismiss the Kenyan birth certificate issue so quickly.
I would wait until an expert declared it a fake or not a fake.
If it is NOT a fake, then the Supreme Court---the one with a newly appointed Supreme Court justice---will have to make some very difficult and soul-searching decisions as the justices enter uncharted areas of the law and decide what to do with Obama.
1) The copy of the birth certificate was generated February 17th, 1964.
2) Obama’s mother filed for divorce in January, 1964. Divorce was granted March 20th, 1964.
3) The father never contested nor responded to the divorce, the available ruling explicitly states this. His known address was in Cambridge, MA at the time, he was at Harvard.
Theory: Obama’s mother asked Kenya to generate the birth certificate copy to aid a divorce filing, perhaps so she could be granted custody of Barack. (she was)
Other than the final ruling issued by the court (available on internet), I believe the rest of the documents are still under seal.
I posted strong concerns about the document because it says Republic of Kenya before Kenya became a Republic. (It only became one a year after independence)
But if the document is real, then it could be among the sealed records in the divorce proceedings.
From Article I, Section 3 of the US Constitution:
“No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.”
I suppose this is why Taitz is going to London. I have a question, How can Ron Polarik determine the validity of a Document from of SCANS of Documents. No one can tell if a given document is real or not from a Picture. All you can tell is if the picture has been tampered with, not the document.
So, given that fact and his false and inaccurate accusation of Fraud on my part, and given the fact that you say pursuing this one will backfire... give us YOUR reasons that this will backfire.
What is wrong with the Kenyan COLB that we see pictured in this thread?
I am kind of tired of the innuendo, and the lack of Backup. It seems to me that your statements do more to muddy the waters than anything else.
Be specific.
There is ample evidence that the document proving Obama registered for the draft in 1980 is a forgery.
I would put nothing past these people to create a false past - nothing!
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.