Well, he’s definitely a foreigner. And it shows.
posted on Thursday, April 21, 2011 11:52:19 AM by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
Posted on 05/09/2011 8:35:43 PM PDT by RobinMasters
Evidence continues to mount that President Obama was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, raising concerns over his presidential eligibility.
Obama's American mother, Ann Dunham, separated from her first husband, Barack Obama Sr., in 1963 when the president was 2 years old. Dunham and Obama Sr. are reported to have later divorced.
In Hawaii, Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian, in 1965 and moved to Indonesia in October 1967.
Divorce documents filed in Hawaii on Aug. 20, 1980, refer to Obama as the "child" of both Soetoro and Dunham, indicating a possible adoption in the U.S.
Jerome Corsi’s new book, "Where’s the Birth Certificate?", is now available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore
The divorce records state: "The parties have 1 child(ren) below age 18 and 1 child(ren) above 18 but still dependent on the parties for education."
The records further identify the "oldest child" as "in university."
"Mother resides with youngest child in 4-bedroom house provided by mother's employer," continues the divorce documents.
The documents identify the minor as Obama's stepsister, Maya Soetoro.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Your kidding right? Ok it’s a fact.
It’s also a FACT there is a entry in the official Hawaiian index of marriages.
It’s a FACT they were granted a divorce.
NEXT!!!
Are you on drugs? I told you there is no marriage certificate. WHF is your point?
Nana: INS didnt believe Obama SR...
ODH: Says a gut (sic) who’s trying to sell a book. Imagine that.
_______________________________________________
1. I guess you were trying to say “guy”
2. I’m not a guy...I’m a girl..
3. I’m not trying to sell a book
4. The INS questioned the info SR had given them
5. SR had not provided any proof of a marriage or a child
6. The INS said they were going to check on his statements about a marriage in Hawaii and a child in Hawaii.
7. I imagine you have quite an imagination
Something of interest maybe.
Obama is not on record as every acknowledging “Obama Jr.” until AFTER the divorce is done. Specifically in April of 1964 when he filed an I-539. He had to file these to stay in the US annually. In 1961, 62 and 63 he never acknowledged “Obama Jr” at in these forms. He did indicate he was married to “Anna S. Dunham” on the form he filled out August 31, 1961 (27 days after the supposed birth).
The 1964 form list “Ann Obama” as ‘separated wife’ - a lie since the divorce was final....or was it a lie? He never signed anything in the divorce papers...he may not have been aware it was complete. Also in his April 1964 I-539 filing he does list “Barack Obama Jr.” as a child.
The divorce granted full rights of “Barack H. Obama II” to Duhnam and only visitation rights to Obama Sr. This was finalized on March 20, 1064.
The writer of the article is somewhat behind when he indicates they ‘separated two years later’. The were never together as husband and wife. This is all now settled history.
Obama Sr. probably knocked up SAD. Mom and dad (Dunhams) likely threw a fit. Shipped SAD off to Washington. The February may or may not be ‘real’ but it was not one of love - history is now clear on that.
SAD is stays in Seattle until Obama Sr. leaves. This is also historically confirmed. And then, maybe because there was no real marriage in Feburary of 1961 something is needed to create it and to lock in Obama Sr. as the father - the divorce. Only THEN does Obama Sr. even acknowledge his son in any paperwork - the April 1964 I-539.
Given the known paper trails and the gaps it would seem this is a plausible timeline:
- Obama and SAD do what college students do in late 1960.
- SAD becomes with child and it is obvious by February 1961.
- Some sort of wedding to try to legitimize everything is done somehow, someway...maybe a ‘tribal wedding’. But since no official records exist if it did happen it was not registered with the State. And maybe Obama senior does not know what or why it is happening (if it really happened of course) - see below.
- Parents ship her her back to family in Seattle shortly their after. After all Madilynn is officer at bank. This is a potential career killer for her.
- Obama goes on with this life. I knows he did a wedding to SAD. Maybe he does even know why...since he fails to list supposed new son on August 31, 1961 I-539 form.
- Birth on August 4, 1961. Betting odds - Washington or Canada. Grandma registers non-Hawaii birth in Hawaii.
- SAD and child are “kept” in Seattle until Obama Sr. leave Hawaii for good so that he can not and does not lay claim of any type to child. Again, he may not even know of the child - nothing of substance indicates he does (until 1964).
- SAD and child go to Hawaii in 1962 AFTER BHO Sr. is gone.
- In 1964 the ‘marriage’ now needs to be ‘cleaned up’ for whatever reason - Obama Sr is on his last leg at Harvard, or SAD meets Lolo at U of H, start of a new year, who knows. But in January of 1964 the divorce action starts. Obama II is cleared documented as being born on August 4, 1961 and being SAD and BHO Sr’s child. The divorce is the most official record of Obama II’s birth for the next 46 years. It became ‘the anchor’ to solidify the past into a nice, neat package. As it was done in the early 60s in the US with ‘illegitimate births’.
- Obama Senior then tries to leverage his marriage to SAD and his now firmly established child to stay in the US one more year by documenting both in his April 1964 I-539 form. It does not work. He is shipped back to Kenya in August of 1964.
The Kenya story is BS. When she got knocked up - mom and dad ‘fixed it’. They shipped he back ‘home’ to family and kept her away from the trouble maker until he was gone. Could she have been knocked up by someone else? Possibly but Obama Sr. now know MO fits this. Was the February 1961 marriage a sham? Possibly, maybe Obama agreed to it without knowing SAD was pregnant. Then he could leverage (which he appeared to do in August 1961) in his I-539 filing. But that same filing failed to list Obama Jr. Did he not know of the child? Maybe not.
There is nothing with Obama Senior signature on any document showing he knew ANYTHING about a child until 1964. I am guessing he may not have. So parental rights???? You have to acknowledge the child to have those!
If you're going to assert that someone is "simply wrong", you had better make sure that you're (first) "simply right". In this case, you aren't.
Don't believe me? I would recommend reading the Supreme Court case KAWAKITA V. UNITED STATES, 343 U. S. 717 (1952). In it, the Court holds that "A US citizen owes allegiance to the United States and can be punished for treasonable acts voluntarily committed regardless of dual nationality or citizenship.".
In this case, defendant was arguing that he was no longer a US citizen and subject to trial for treason, because when he fought for the Japanese during WWII, that was a de facto renunciation of his American citizenship.
There are other cases, like Perkins v. Elg and Mandoli v. Acheson that directly refute your claim. There are tens-of-thousands of US citizens that have both US and foreign passports, most of which were obtained either through dual-citizenship at birth, or acquired via naturalization in a foreign country as a minor child - like Obama.
Hey, don't take my word for it, read the relevant US statute, 8 USC § 1481 for yourself. It is VERY difficult to expatriate yourself from America without the express intent of expatriation.
Have you ever seen a marriage certificate ???
Who performed the ceremony ???
At what church or place was the ceremony performed ???
Who were the witnesses ???
How do you know this? I've seen birthers claim it all the time, but I have yet to see any evidence of this claim. Got any?
His signature is on the birth certificate. How can it be reasonably argued that isn't an "acknowledgement" of the child's birth?
Given all the things birhers claimed to have "heard" that has turned out to be not true, that leads me to believe you never really heard it, or that whoever you heard it from just made it up.
Wrong.
The "guy" is Jerome Corsi - it's his claim and he's selling a book.
Why are you persisting in your questions?
It's pretty unlikely anyone applying for a job 20-30 years after graduating from college would be required to show a transcript.
I didn't have to show mine for my current job, and I'm a professor!
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDRENParents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
It's possible. Question is...did Barry?
Are senile? (sic)
____________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I’m not the one who imagined that third time
I only asked your twice
But heres a third time...
Have you ever seen a marriage certificate ???
You keep on posting as though you have...
as though you are one of the thread “experts”
So pony up, kid...
Have you ever seen a marriage certificate for Stan Ann and Obama SR ???
Oh that was FOUR TIMES...
It is inconceivable - literally beyond even imagining - that a court would a) adopt the Vattel definition and then b) impose it retroactively on a person who was elected President with 69 million votes.
It won't happen, it never could happen, and if it happened to MY guy I would say it was wrong, beyond the scope of the court's power, and a cause for armed resistance.
Now, I think it would be wise for Congress to write a definition of NBC into the US Code, but if Congress wrote a law adopting Vattel going forward, I think it could never be made to apply to Obama, both on ex post facto and Bill of Attainder grounds.
Posted on 05/01/2010 1:22:30 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
One of the constitutional requirements for the office of the presidency is that he be a "natural born citizen." This was put into place by the founders to keep foreigners or persons who do not bear a non-questionable allegiance to the US Constitution out. Obviously, and admittedly Barack Hussein Obama was born to a foreign citizen and is not 100% American. He's half-American, half-African and all Marxist. He obviously bears no allegiance whatsoever to the US Constitution and is working overtime to destroy it. He's a usurper and should be removed from office. He is exactly the kind of fraud/usurper the founders feared.
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.
