Re:"Mal and Val - not Ann and the Old Man" Any evidence Valerie Sarruf is Obama's mom? (vanity)

"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 Obama’s mom. One year later this youtube has only 1,150 views.

In July 2012, two FReepers associated the woman, “Val,” in Polarik’s 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 Obama’s 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 Obama’s 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 Barry’s 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 wouldn’t 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 Barry’s 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 Obama’s mother with or without Malcolm X being his father.

“There isn’t a single document of record that O’traitor hasn’t with held.”

Barry has certainly withheld every document within his power to withhold.

Fortunately he has not been able to withhold numerous documents including passport and INS docs subject to FOIA request for his mom, namesake presumed father, and step-dad. All of the above documents outside Barry's control confirm Stanley Ann as his mom and flesh out all but the missing months of his mom's pregnancy and his nationality or nationalities at birth.

As far as I know, of those records only the missing pre-1966 passport docs for his mom appear to have been illegally interfered with by political appointees. Somehow, his political appointees under Clinton in the State Dept. failed to suppress the damaging FOIA INS docs on BHO Sr. which destroyed both the "Dreams" narrative and the Mal-Val narrative. Barry's political appointees did cause part of SADO's passport file to (ahem) go missing, but they let out the cross-out of "Soebarkah" dropping a huge lead pointing to a change of identity, possible nationality in Indonesia.

As all can see, there is a pile of verifiable evidence (evidence that could be subjected to court-ordered discovery if necessary)

Except all Courts evade discovery

supporting only Stanley Ann

Stop. Stanley is not a girls name, it's silly, it's ridiculous, it's insulting to the USA

as Barry's mom and ZERO evidence of any kind available to support the Mal-Val narrative.

How about their faces?

Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”

She never went anywhere near a WA University.

A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.

Any authentic document would be nice.

It is entirely reasonable for getting the particular WA university wrong to have been an honest mistake or it is possible that at the time she WAS intending to attend WA State, not U of WA. People get the “U. of (fill in the state)” vs. “(fill in the state U.” wrong all of the time in the numerous states where such confusion can arise. I went to one such university myself.

Mistakes by the boatload

Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”

IMO, SAD’s passport file is complete except for the “missing” pre-1966 record of either a renewal and/or initial application. Yes there are wrong dates and the mystery Soebarkah cross-out, but absolutely nothing that indicates ANY forgery of the FIOA passport records which are verifiable and available to anyone...except the “destroyed” ones, of course.

All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.

Ha Ha, the information they left supports their lie? How stupid you are.

As all can see, there is a pile of verifiable evidence (evidence that could be subjected to court-ordered discovery if necessary)

Except all Courts evade discovery

supporting only Stanley Ann

Stop. Stanley is not a girls name, it's silly, it's ridiculous, it's insulting to the USA

as Barry's mom and ZERO evidence of any kind available to support the Mal-Val narrative.

How about their faces?

She never went anywhere near a WA University.

Any authentic document would be nice.

Mistakes by the boatload

Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”

All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.

Ha Ha, the information they left supports their lie? How stupid you are.

Enjoy it while you can. You have 8 years left before you lose your mind to “age-related cognitive” confusion.

You must be kidding. A person might forget someone’s name for a split second, but an normally aging person doesn’t “forget” that a relative is NOT a relative and that this non-relative DIED when the person is supposedly a relative and is still very much alive.

Have you ever noticed how people change their stories or clam up completely, once they come to the attention of Obama’s minions? She hadn’t got the talking points yet, obviously.

SAD’s high school friends were actually contacted and told to shut up, by Obama’s campaign. Given what we’ve seen the past few years (for example, with Bauer threatening opposing lawyers for daring to file an appeal), is it any wonder that people might not make any future “corroborating” statements?

The same “journalist” wrote the completing contradictory stories. I believe the “Ann died in 1970” version was the first published. Shortly afterward, followed by the second version, pushing the “official” narrative, with NO mention of any “correction”. Most serious journalists would at least mention that they had critical facts wrong and that the second story was correcting the previous errors.

This is exactly what happens with the biographies. It’s as if the writers get amnesia about what they wrote previously. They blithely change facts and don’t even point out that their previous stories had different “facts”.

Exactly, and yet you use these “documents” as “evidence” that you say supports that she’s the mother and yet you ignore anything they say that doesn’t fit.

I was pointing out what the records said instead of how you inaccurately characterized what they said. Why would you say “a university in Washington” instead of accurately quoting what the records said?

Why do you infer that what I say is intended to “question the authenticity” of the documents? I’m talking about what these digital images say and what they do not say. You use them as evidence to prove that SAD is the mother, but because there are so many discrepancies, what they do say shows that there are very many problems with the official narrative that Obama wants people to believe.

So welcome to the club, now you see what we have been up against. Someone who tells you that the birth announcements are proof that Stanley Ann Dunham had a baby, although the announcement doesn’t name the mother or the child, and the daughter of the Pratt family with whom the Dunhams shared the house doesn’t remember her nor a child. She went to the U of WA, althought the directory listing is for Anna Obama, for whom the baby-sitter said she baby-sat when her own daughter, who was born in July 1959, was eighteen months of age...and Susan Blake, whom Stanley Ann Dunham visited with a newborn (in early August, she so carefully says) describes a newborn that SAD didn’t know how to care for.
So if you do the math, he’s a baby In January 1961 and again in August 1961. (Does that give you a hint this is not the same child?)

I would love to have been a fly on the wall on that day. Tell me Susan, did Stanley Ann Dunham breast feed the child while she was there for the afternnon, as you say she was? I bet she didn’t, I bet she fed it out of a bottle. Spontaneous lactation is a rarity...more common amongst dogs and cats than human beings...

But what would be the use asking her anything? She would only answer to a script according to what serves the CAUSE.

SAD probably did visit Susan with a child, it wasn’t hers. Someone maybe attended the U of WA, but it wasn’t Stanley Ann Dunham. And the person who attended the U of HI would have been the ANN S OBAMA (student) shown in the Polk. And she wasn’t Stanley Ann Dunham either.

But I repeat myself again and again...

Methinks I've had a teensy-weensy epiphany. You may have mentioned this possibility once before. Thinking about the dates:

In this article we are told he went to Indonesia at the age of two.

On this document dated 27 days after the birthdate we are given for zero, he has crossed out the name of his wife and replaced the name with another...ANN S DUNHAM. There are no children.

I take ANN S DUNHAM is meant to be the student who was shown as living at the birth announcement address with the Dunhams ( and the Pratt family.) She was listed as ANN S OBAMA in the Polk. Clever little bit of footwork there...

And then we have the famous 'wife from whom he is separated living in the Philippines, may get a divorce' DATED APRIL 1964.

The divorce was finalized in March, 1964.

He KNEW the wife from whom he was separated had ALREADY gone to INDONESIA, he KNEW because that was the arrangement all along, he SAID PHILIPPINES because it wasn't to be known where she took that child. And there is no child mentioned on the document, because the child she took to Indonesia WASN'T HIS.

That's why you can't see her passport records prior to 1965, methinks. The divorce gave her custody, and off they went, she may have returned, zero didn't.

"Stop. Stanley is not a girls name, it's silly, it's ridiculous, it's insulting to the USA"

IIRC, Barry's biographers dug up a narrative that Madelyn Dunham was a big fan of Bette Davis. In a 1942 movie, Bette Davis played a strong female character named Stanley who had a sister character name Roy (go figure). Madelyn named her baby girl born late that same year Stanley Ann Dunham in part for Bette Davis's character and in part after her husband, Stanley Armour Dunham, who was goig off to the meat-grinder of WWII with no assurance he could return to have a son to name after himself.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034890/plotsummary

Plot Summary for "In This Our Life" (1942)

A young woman (Stanley Timberlake) dumps her fiancée (Craig Fleming) and runs off with her sister's (Roy Timberlake) husband (Peter Kingsmill). They marry, settle in Baltimore, and Stanley ultimately drives Peter to drink and suicide. Stanley returns home to Richmond only to learn that her sister Roy and old flame Craig have fallen in love and plan to marry. The jealous and selfish Stanley attempts to win back Craig's affections, but her true character is revealed when, rather than take the rap herself, she attempts to pin a hit and run accident on the young black clerk (Parry Clay) who works in Craig's law office. Written by Bonnie Barber

Adult sisters Roy Kingsmill and Stanley Timberlake are the daughters of Asa and Lavinia Timberlake. Roy takes after her father's side of the family - compassionate and thoughtful if somewhat "soft" - whereas Stanley takes after her mother's side of the family - cutthroat and selfish. The differences between these two sides of the family can also be seen in the former business dealing between Asa and Lavinia's brother, William Fitzroy, who went onto wealth at the expense of Asa's side of the business. William dotes on his niece Stanley, who adds some excitement into his life. Stanley is about to get married to Craig Fleming, a lawyer without much professional aspiration. Roy is already married to surgeon Peter Kingsmill, the two who live in the Timberlake family home. Just before Stanley and Craig's wedding, Stanley and Peter run off together, the two who have been having an affair. Peter felt stifled in the marriage due to living in the Timberlake house and Roy allowing her family to control their lives. After Stanley and Peter run off, Roy and Craig try to get on with their respective lives. Just as Roy and Craig feel they have left this dark part of the lives behind them, Stanley re-enters their lives, bringing with her her selfish desires at the cost of anyone who gets in her way. Written by Huggo

I was thinking the very same thing. Bottle or breast feeding? Blake would have seen which way the baby was fed. Of course she will say "breast fed" now if she was asked, just as she would say and did say "August".

Another question that came to my mind is this - if SAD was given the baby to raise when he was an infant, then why aren't there any photos of SAD and said child until the chain link fence photo when he is no younger than 2 1/2 and IMHO almost 3? You'd think if the parentage fiction was in play they would have tried to get a few photos at least of "mother and baby" or "mother and one year old" or "mother and two year old" etc. But nada. And then of course one wonders - if she was taking care of the child until she surfaced in HI in 1963, WHERE WAS SHE? And who was she with? All by her lonesome?

And then, as is often the case, one question begets another, so here's yet another:

If she had raised or cared for the child since he was a baby, I would think that a bond of attachment would have formed, and it would not have been natural or easy to shunt him off to "grandparents" at such a young age. That is very odd. Even more odd and rather cold blooded if he had been her real son.

If the fake marriage for custody was also for using the Kenyan parentage (I would assume both reaons), why didn't BHO the Kenyan add a name under "children"? Hmm, he already did have an actual son, so... getting confused here.

So you think that perhaps mentioning the PI had nothing to do with Anna Obama's origins, or anything else, just to get others off the scent. Hmm. What about SAD's passport wherein it is mentioned something about going to the PI? Does that have anything to do with anything in this regard?

Well, you could try looking at it this way, if that photograph out of ‘Muhammad Speaks’ is her and zero, then she was the nanny, and she was paid to take him to Indonesia as soon as she could achieve custody, for which she needed a divorce, after FMD had married her off to the kenyan on paper so that he had a better chance of getting to Harvard, the money for which he came into rather suddenly, after working at the pine-apple cannery for a buck-something an hour...for a WHOLE MONTH!

It seems possible she took him to Indonesia when he was two years old, just as he said. And then she left him there and returned to Hawaii.

You’re not looking at an ordinary situation, but the child of a man who would have been ruined had an affair and an extra-marital child been exposed, and possibly a mother who was an arab and a Maronite from a very elite middle eastern family.

You need to empty that cup again...

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.