Posted on 06/09/2011 1:51:48 PM PDT by rxsid
"Recent WND Inquiries Appear To Have Established Obama’s Birth In Hawaii.
I don’t know how this slipped below my radar, but back on May 9, 2011, World Net Daily published an investigative report entitled, “Bombshell: U.S. government questioned Obama citizenship“, which – in my opinion – conclusively established that Obama was born in Hawaii. In that report, Aaron Klein revealed official documents stored in US immigration files which chronicle the troubles faced by Obama’s mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, when he petitioned the US Government for a visa extension.
The WND report correctly notes that US officials expressed an interest in determining whether Soetoro’s step-son, President Obama, was actually a US citizen. The US officials who were handling Soetoro’s Visa extension application made copious notes in the file and the official comments therein illustrate that these officials doubted some of Soetoro’s statements. So, they decided to investigate the relationships listed in his application.
Below is the text of the relevant portion of the WND report:
One critical exchange is dated August 21, 1967, from Sam Benson, an officer at the Southwest Immigration and Naturalization Service office in San Pedro, Calif.Benson’s query stated, “There is nothing in the file to document the status of the spouse’s son. Please inquire into his citizenship and residence status and determine whether or not he is the applicant’s child within the meaning of Section 101(b)(1)(B) of the Act, who may suffer exceptional hardship within the meaning of Section 212(a).”
The reference is to the Immigration and Naturalization Act, which defined a “child” as an unmarried person under 21 years of age who, among other qualifiers, could be a “stepchild,” whether or not born out of wedlock, provided the child had not reached the “age of eighteen years at the time the marriage creating the status of stepchild occurred.”
A response to Benson’s inquiry came from one “W.L. Mix” of the central immigration office, who determined Obama was a U.S. citizen.
Mix replied: “Pursuant to inquiry from central office regarding the status of the applicants’ spouse’s child by a former marriage.”
“The person in question is a United States citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii, Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicant’s step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the child’s mother on March 5, 1965.”The files do not state how the office determined Obama was born in Honolulu.
So here we see the US Government looking into an application for Visa extension by Soetoro. Further review of those documents reveal that the officials did not trust everything in Soetoro’s application. Therefore, the Government officials wanted to establish whether Obama Jr. was truly a US citizen. They made a direct inquiry on this very issue. And they concluded that Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Again, this was established by “W.L. Mix” of the central immigration office.
Having taken such an exhaustive look into Soetoro’s application, and especially considering the government’s examination of Obama’s citizenship, I don’t see how the government officials involved would have overlooked the fact that Stanley Ann Dunham would have been out of the US and far away in Kenya on the date W.L. Mix established as DOB for Obama – if Obama had been born in Kenya.
Furthermore, a report today by WND, “Documents show marriage of Obama’s parents a sham“, illustrates that a similar investigation as to Obama, Sr. was conducted when he was also applying for a Visa extension. Those official documents include a handwritten memo from the file, written by (presumed) INS official William Wood, which states that Obama Sr.’s son, “Barack Obama II”, was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961.
Moreover, in today’s WND article, Jerome Corsi concludes, as a result of reviewing all of the relevant INS documents, that if President Obama was born in Kenya, Dunham must have traveled there without Obama Sr., who was definitely in the US on August 4, 1961, according to these US Government records. This analysis by Corsi is correct. Obama Sr.’s presence in the US at the time of Obama’s birth is now sufficiently documented. This fact alone adds very heavy weight to President Obama having been born in the US.
I don’t see how two sets of US government officials, independently investigating the relationships between Soetoro and Dunham on one hand, and Obama Sr. and Dunham on the other, could both fail to reveal that Dunham would have been in Kenya at the time of Obama Jr.’s birth. The government officials would’ve had access to Dunham’s passport files. The contents thereof were relevant to the investigations since she was married to both men, and the marriages were relevant to immigration status, as was the issue of children.
Those who persist in accusing Obama of not being born in Hawaii do so in light of official government investigations, between 1961 and 1966, which established his birth, to the satisfaction of inquisitive government immigration officials, as having taken place on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
As far as I’m concerned, the issue is settled with a massive presumption of authenticity. I do not see how the information published by WND regarding US immigration official W.L. Mix’s investigation into Obama’s US citizenship flew so far below the radar. That is the single most important fact I have come across that establishes Obama’s birth in Hawaii.
CLOSURE IS POSSIBLE WITH REGARD TO BC ISSUE.
For those who insist on keeping the birther circus alive and kickin’ (despite the info listed above), I believe there is a simple way to settle the issue once and for all. I have found two references to the fact that the US Government keeps passport “issuance” records for all passports issued. The most recent is from Congressional testimony on the House floor from March 10, 1998:
“In addition, the committee on conference is aware that on weekends there is no Departmental procedure or mechanism to access the passport issuance records maintained by the Consular Affairs Bureau. The result is that when a foreign law enforcement authority inquires about the status of a person or passport on the weekend, the State Department does not or cannot respond. This is a clear deficiency in border security procedures.” (See pg. 41/53 in the PDF counter.)
The second reference is to a US Government GAO report – written for the Secretary of State – that argued for the destruction of passport application materials. The destruction of such materials was the basis of more conspiracy theories as to Dunham’s various passport applications and renewals requested in a previous FOIA by Christopher Strunk.
Unfortunately, the FOIA request by Strunk, which has been well documented online, failed to request passport “issuance” records for Stanley Ann Dunham. Strunk only requested passport “application” materials. And the government’s reply to his FOIA request was specifically limited to passport “application” materials. Since Strunk didn’t specifically ask for passport “issuance” records, the government was not obligated to search for those records… but they do exist and they can be found.
The GAO report – which refers to passport issue cards – documents the destruction of passport application materials, but it notes that the Government retains all “old passport issue cards”:
“During numerous discussions with GSA about document retention periods, Department officials have presented many reasons for the continued storage of original passport applications. They have placed great emphasis in pointing out that old passport applications can be used to derive the citizenship of others…But other ways are just as reliable and effective… Should the Department need to verify if a parent was ever issued a passport, old passport issue cards have been microfilmed and can be referenced by the Department.“ (See pg. 44/70 in the PDF counter.)
Therefore, if Stanley Ann Dunham had been issued a passport prior to President Obama’s birth, there will be a passport issue card available with that information. If no such card exists, Dunham did not have a passport prior to August 4, 1961, and Obama could not have been born in Kenya. She would have needed a passport to be in Kenya.
It is my opinion that a proper FOIA request for passport issue cards (or copies thereof) will establish that Stanley Ann Dunham did not have a passport prior to August 4, 1961. Such a request must be SPECIFICALLY designed to eliminate all wiggle room. I suggest the following wording:
Please forward all passport issue cards and/or microfilm or microfiche copies, or any other copies thereof – or any other documents – which reference the issuance of any passport for Stanley Ann Dunham. To be perfectly clear in my FOIA request, please understand that I am NOT interested in passport application materials. Please limit your response and documents to passport issue cards or copies thereof – as well as any other documents – which the government possesses for Stanley Ann Dunham that refer to her being issued a US passport.
Any FOIA request should NOT ask for more than the passport issuance materials. I cannot stress enough how important it is that the FOIA be strictly limited as suggested above. Such a FOIA should end this conspiracy theory with authority and finality.
I should note that I have come across a certain rabid Obama eligibility supporter who alleges to have done a proper FOIA request as to passport issuance materials. I do not trust this source and I do not have access to the EXACT wording of the alleged FOIA request. Suffice to say that anyone who wants true closure on the place of birth issue should do a FOIA – strictly worded as I have suggested above – requesting passport issuance documents for Stanley Ann Dunham.
I nominate the folks at WND to take this on and make all aspects public since they are the main news resource for this issue. They are invited to take the suggested FOIA request as written above (in red) and to run with it.
The fourth estate has the power and responsibility to see this through. They should thoroughly document the exact wording of the FOIA request, and they should also document the stages of compliance by the government to such a request as is required by law. Definitive documentation regarding whether Stanley Ann Dunham held a passport prior to August 4, 1961 is readily available to the public.
The Government is required to respond to the EXACT request made. No mention of passport application materials should be forwarded by the government in response to a properly worded FOIA request for passport issuance cards (or other issuance documents). We know the cards/documents exist and that they are necessary to the government as is proved by the GAO report and Congressional testimony.
The GAO notes in their report from 1981 that while passport application materials may be destroyed, “passport issue cards” are kept. This is beyond dispute.
If no passport issuance documents can be found for Obama’s mother prior to his date of birth, then he could not have been born in Kenya.
I am not a person who needs to see anymore proof. I believe now and have always believed President Obama was born in Hawaii. But if you still have doubts, this line of inquiry is crucially necessary.
The BC issue and the birther circus surrounding it have served Obama well. Like Chester Arthur before him, the nation was thoroughly distracted by the place of birth faux conspiracy whilst the true legal question concerning his dual national status – despite place of birth – was obscured.
Everyone loves a big green juicy salacious conspiracy theory. That’s much more fun than a certified boring legal question, the answer to which was never in the hands of Obama, whereas the BC always was. He who controls the game, controls the outcome. (“Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?” – Johnny Rotten)
I am writing this to clear your attention spans for what will be the most authoritative and well documented analysis I have to offer on the dual national issue concerning Obama’s perpetual POTUS eligibility dilemma. I do not want the circus to obstruct the law. If you understand the importance of this post, you will pass it on far and wide so the attention of the nation can focus on the true Constitutional crisis.
Leo Donofrio, Esq."
Whether barry the bastard was born in Kenya or Canada, the state of Hawaii appears to have allowed him to be registered at some point since his birth as a native born Hawaiian. Because the corrupt state of Hawaii--which issues a genuine registry of Hawaiian birth cert for Sun Yat Sen, completely Chinese, both parents chinese citizens, he born in China--has issued the bastard a state backed registry of Hawaiian birth, only proving little barry Dunham was born somewhere other than Hawaii is going to put a kink in that corrupted registry, if it is corrupted on Barry's behalf. There isn't a pirate Roberts court judge who would touch the ineligibility due to not NBC issue, so the affirmative action lying sonofabitch is more than teflon coated. Even fraudulent behavior on Barry's behalf is dismissed. Are you starting to get the picture that this sonofabitch in the White House is there because powers greater than his unqualified ass have chosen to put him there while the Republic is aborted? We birthers are ridiculed for questioning his eligibility, or his location of birth, or his criminal past, or his hidden records. Isn't it yet reaching the level of some sort of conspiracy that so much is being ignored so this affirmative action fraud can remain where he has been placed atop that fence post?
Sorry, Gena. There exist witnesses to Obama’s birth in Mombassa, Kenya (place name was changed to Mombasa).
No witnesses to his ‘birth’ in Hawaii have ever come forward.
Nope. These "witness" stories have been convincingly debunked.
No witnesses to his ‘birth’ in Hawaii have ever come forward.
Obama's family is dead so why would there be any witnesses? Do you think some nurse is going to remember? Nonetheless, Hawaiian officials say he was born there and their words are going to carry a lot more weight than some distant step-relative who never really said they witnessed his Kenyan birth in the first place.
Fact is, nobody has offered any credible evidence that Obama was born in Kenya. Only a few redacted newspaper articles, bogus "birth certificates" cobbled together by known scam artists and the deliberately mistranslated statements from supposed witnesses. No real evidence whatsoever. Why? because it didn't happen. Obama was not born in Kenya. This has to be one of the most far-fetched and, frankly, retarded conspiracies ever.
Sorry, Gena, what it means to be a "natural born Citizen," as that phrase appears in the Constitution, is pretty darn clear. The Framers of the Constitution understood "natural born Citizen" to mean a person born on the soil of the country (and under its jurisdiction) to parents both of whom were citizens of the country at the time of that person's birth. This is the Vattel definition of "natural born Citizen" which was definitively understood by the Framers.
There is absolutely no room for debate in a circumstance, such as this, where the person's father was unequivocally never an American citizen. By claiming that there is "something of an intellectual debate" and "this argument will "[n]ever bear fruit," you are nothing but a historical revisionist trying desperately to obtain the incorrect legal result. I don't know what your motive to do so is, but you are showing your ignorance of the issue.
So where is this definition in the Constitution?
you are nothing but a historical revisionist trying desperately to obtain the incorrect legal result.
Trying desperately to obtain a legal result? Really? As far as I can tell, it is the folks arguing the Vattel definition who are trying desperately to obtain a legal result --and losing every step of the way. Nobody seems to be buying it. Nobody with any authority to do anything.
You've been posting here since 2004. This forum has been the premiere conservative forum since when? 1997? 1998? Why is it that there isn't, as far as I can tell, a single post on this forum arguing that Obama is ineligible to be President until December of 2008?
If this was such a well-known fact, where are all the posts pointing this out during the primary? Again, as far as I can tell, Obama didn't become ineligible to be President on this forum until after he was elected President and this Vattel definition was together in a desperate and so far fruitless attempt to nullify an election.
thanks for that explanation, I do understand all that...but what I was trying to convey is that both the birthdate and the name of the child were established as a result of the divorce document...during the course of which Stanley Ann Dunham was given custody - of a child for whom no birth certificate is evident.
Think about it. She has custody officially, of a child named as Barack Hussein Obama 11, born 4 August, 1961. Without a birth certificate that names BOTH his parents and place of birth, YOU STILL DON’T KNOW WHO HE IS.
But the immigration authorities are satisfied. They have established nothing but THEIR END of responsibility, right?
If the divorce document is the foundation of his indentity, which it appears to be, what did ‘the parents’ supply to the Court to validate the name and the date of birth of the child?
NOTHING? Or something like this:
http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv47/MissieBessie/orlystamped-1.jpg
Filed for divorce in January. Document dated February. Divorce granted March. How would the Hawaii Court know if the document supplied was genuine or not?
Did the Kenyan Obama say that Stanley was in the PI? Or just that “his wife” was in the PI?
I see you posting something like that every day or so and I had resolved to ignore you but you keep doing it.
If you are talking about a result from the Supreme Court, you are most likely wrong. If you did an opinion survey among knowledgeable Supreme Court lawyers, you would get maybe 80 or 90 percent that view you as out of touch.
The Supreme Court is a political institution. That's not how the framers intended it--if you want to be the essential defect in our Constitution, it was failure to insulate the third branch from the political system; but that is just the real world.
If you want to keep preaching the dream world, be my guest but if we ever get to a legal test, there is no doubt that if Zero proves he was born in the USA, he will prevail on the Natural Born test.
Yes, your reading of the history of the provision is correct. But the lawyers will say that by adoption of the 14th Amendment, we eliminated a "quality of citizenship" test for the Natural Born Citizen clause for any quality other than place of birth.
Your expressed view is misleading.
Thanks for the ping. Convoluted story.
It has been comjectured that the missing page (page 11 IIRC) of the divorce decree has the proof of child for whom the court authorized custody to the then to be single Satnely Ann Dunham Obama. That the opage is missing lends credence ot the notion that the name is very different from ‘barack hussein obama’, but we just don’t know wihtout that removed page. But of course there’s no conspiracy, the page was probably only coincidentally misslaid somewhere. And of course the college records from Occidental and Columbia have merely been carelessly missplaced. And of course the birth cert accompanying the kindergarten app may never have been there in the first place. No conspiracy here. It’s incredible to believe there’s a conspiracy to cover this lying sonofabitch’s hitory from review.
http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv47/MissieBessie/21-ea011ad90c-1.jpg
“The wife in the Philippines from whom he is separated...”
NOT NAMED.
Unfortunately, these "80 to 90 percent" of "Supreme Court lawyers" are merely products of currently left-leaning elitist American law schools who are are historical revisionists themselves. They conveniently neglect the real history of both the "natural born Citizen" clause in Article II and the Fourteenth Amendment, and read them, because of political pandering, in weird conjunction to get the absurd result that a child of unnaturalized aliens, born in the US, qualifies to be President. This defies both history and logic. Advocates of this theory are just taking the Constitution and torching it! (Of course, torching the Constitution is nothing new, it's been pretty much SOP for the federal courts since the second term of Franklin D. Roosevelt.)
BTW, my guess is that same bunch of "Supreme Court lawyers" to which you refer are probably cheerleading the wacky arguments used by Big Brother to defend the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision in ObamaCare..
No conspiracy involved at all in his birth in Mombassa.
As to having been convincingly debunked, only in “Dummie land”, and its inmates imagination.
Yes, some of the witnesses were his step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, and a couple of Obama cousins. They’re safe; their relatives will make sure nothing happens to them. The whole family knows the truth and have given interviews as long ago as the early 1990s. Those interviews had been widely published in magazines, newspapers and journals all across Africa.
Witnesses outside his family were not so lucky. There was a reason Obama, who is a cheapskate when it comes to spending his own money, sent $1Million to Raila Odinga in Kenya. The cover term used was “campaign donation”, to support Raila’s run for President of Kenya. But is wasn’t really for his cousin’s campaign.
The money was meant to terrorize the missionaries in Kenya and ultimately commit the murder of the Christian woman who helped Stanley Ann and her newborn leave Kenya way back in August, 1961.
Keep that in mind, Gena. Obama uses people, and when YOU are no longer of use, you too, will be tossed aside. He has no conscience - none at all.
That’s what I remembered.
Thanks.
“Wife in the PI” - no name.
THEN WHY THE HELL DID HE SUBMIT A FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE???
IIRC, passports are good for 5 years and in '65 Stanley Ann renewed hers. She couldn't have renewed it if it never existed before.
And is the "fraud" the END of the story according to you???
Hahahahahahahahaha!!!! Ohhh, that's a knee slapper!!!!!
It's been a while since I took a biology class but I don't recall that a baby couldn't be born outside the presence of the father. If the kid was born in Honolulu, Sr.'s INS records show he wasn't aware of the event until much later. Did "they" find these handwritten Lolo notes somewhere in the archives near the bc post-it note? Guess the term "natural born" took up too much space on the post-it note. Sorry, too many loose ends not connecting.
Which is exactly what most of us have been saying for three years on these threads and Leo ought to know that as well!!!
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.
