Recent WND Inquiries Appear To Have Established Obama’s Birth In Hawaii

naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com ^ | 06/09/2011 | Leo Donofrio

[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."

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/recent-wnd-inquiries-appear-to-have-established-obamas-birth-in-hawaii/

[bgill]

what are the chances that SADO went to Kenya on her own during that time? Why would she be there without Sr.?

I don't have my bookmarks on this computer but wasn't it her friend Box who said she'd recieved a letter from Stanley Ann coming back by ship? There's many other countries besides Kenya like, oh, I dunno, maybe that place a hop, skip and a jump from Seattle - Canada.

[little jeremiah]

Yes. Did you hear the Tom FIfe interview?

[tlb]

>>> It’s the simplest of questions : Can the son of a British subject rule the United States of America?

If born in the US, yes. As shown by one being president since 2009, and one will remain so at least until January 2013. You want him out, defeat him in the 2012 election. Cause this ploy sure fell flat. Or is that too mundane a process?

Three years of failed conspiracy theories play in his hand by discrediting the overall opposition. No different then the Truthers, the remaining post-Trump Birthers are nuts.

[DiogenesLamp]

No Donofrio...the so called “immigration investigation” if that’s what you think it was likely was based on the word of a liar who was trying to extend his stay in the United States. It would have been beneficial to his cause if Obama Sr, said Jr was born in the US, by going along with the Dunham family story, than state he was born in Kenya. The immigration official does not state how he derived that Obama was born in the US, but the dubious info very likely came from Obama Sr, during the interview. Your conclusion has a big hole in it.

According to the article, the inquiry took place in 1967. They wouldn't have called Barack Obama Sr. in 1967. I think that by 1967, Barack had some sort of birth document claiming he was born in Hawaii. That doesn't mean that it was the original or even true, but probably it was good enough to fool immigration officials.

[bgill]

Did Stan Ann ever know any men who didnt have visa problems ???

Davis and whomever took those nudie pics. Ok, could have been one and the same.

[little jeremiah]

If the Founders’ original intent of the meaning of NBC is no longer valid because the political winds have shifted, then why be a stickler about born on the soil, either?

In fact, every single jot and tittle of the Constitution is now up for grabs, by that argument.

Which is exactly what leftists say.

We either have a Constitution which is the foundation of the rule of law, or we don’t. If we sort of do and sort of don’t, that means It’s Over.

[danamco]

They won't touch that issue because they know it would be a losing proposition for them. Otherwise, they'd be all over that as well if they thought they could gain from it.

You most likely should include Congress, the court systems as well as FAUX and the likes of talking heads!

Leo is focused on his own ego after he and Pidgeon being slammed by the court!!

He forget to mentioning that Grama Sahrah claims being there when he was born, which Abercommie was NOT. And then all the fake SS#s which been swept under the rug and we all been screwd!!!

[bgill]

So where is this definition in the Constitution?

I tried looking up the meaning of "is" but couldn't find it. Oh, yeah, the US Constitution isn't a dictionary.

[justiceseeker93]

As far as I can tell, Obama didn't become ineligible to be President on this forum until after he was elected President.

I don't have the exact date when Obama's constitutional eligibility was first questioned here on FR, but it had to be sometime in the early summer of 2008, well before the conventions and the presidential election of that year.

In his book, Where's the Birth Certificate?, Jerome Corsi has an appendix where he gives a time sequence of World Net Daily stories on Obama's eligibility. The first such WND story was posted on June 10, 2008. Generally speaking, a WND story would be followed by a post of that story on FR within a day or two. So it would be reasonable to assume that the constitutional eligibility issue was was first discussed here sometime in June 2008.

I recall specifically that there was extensive talk about the Philip Berg lawsuit here starting in August 2008.

[MHGinTN]

Unless Stanley Ann had major reconstructive facial bone surgery, those pictures are not of Stanley Ann Dunham. And as little respect as barry the bastard boy had for his Mother, I wouldn’t doubt he orhcestrated/authorized the ‘exposure’ of those salacious faked pictures. The democrat party is a criminal enterprise, and nothing is beyond their doing for their empowerment. A political party that will support, defend, and promote the slaughtering of alive children partially ripped from their mothers’s body has absolutely no limits to the evil they will do to further their agenda. The current bastard in the White House spent quite a lot of energy defending the killing of completely born children who survived abortion attempt. Such a bankrupt soul has no limit to the evil they will utilize for their agenda.

[MHGinTN]

A little obamanoid taqqiya perhaps?

[bgill]

Could the missing divorce page be an adoption decree?

[Fred Nerks]

Whether or not she supplied a birth certificate of some kind when she filed for divorce and asked for custody, (to which request the named 'father' did not object, apparently,) SURELY the Court would have required SOME identification for the child they gave her custody of?

The Kenyan did receive, sign and return the divorce documents:

And as you can see below, EXHIBIT A was numbered 7:

But there was the second item, also identified as EXHIBIT A. Also shown as number 7.

And it seems that the two numbered items above relate to PAGE 7 of the divorce documents:

So may we take it that the missing page 11 was also a request for identification of the child for which custody was requested? And what is missing, is not only the PAGE, but the EXHIBIT...? And what might that EXHIBIT have been, BUT a birth certificate...removed from the documentation released?

Why was that 'Bomford' fake so quickly tampered with and 'punked' - was it because THAT WAS the document presented to the Court, between January and March, 1964? A fake it certainly was, but how was the Court to know?

Please note, the number I quote is the PENCILLED number.

[MHGinTN]

I have no idea. I am not familiar with what a court would require in order to grant sole custody of a child to a woman seeking a divorce for which there doesn’t appear to be documentation of a marriage! I would think some documentation of birth to that woman would be required, but who knows with HAwaii. They issued there certification for people not even born in Hawaii and never even American citizens! But of course it is incredible to believe there are actually any nefarious doings with regard to the one.

[DiogenesLamp]

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.

Yup, a conspiracy going back to 1758!

Nobody bothered discussing it because Obama was a long shot in early 2008. Hillary was a shoe in. Hillary didn't bring it up because she knew it would upset the Democrat's black constituency who would regard it as a dirty trick. Besides, she had this in the Bag. Then the Media Shift from being passive to all out support for Obama. Hillary ends up losing, but not before her team quietly points out "Hey, this guy ain't qualified because he has a foreign father."

Most Americans have been educated by the Public School system, so are completely ignorant about subjects such as Civics and U.S. History. The VAST MAJORITY of the public has been taught 14th Amendment "Jus Soli" citizenship all their lives, so as far as they are concerned, if you are born here, you are a citizen.

Nobody every explained to them that a "Citizen" is not the same thing as a "Natural Born Citizen." Most people think they mean the same thing.

Anyways, a lot of people thought McCain would point out that Barry wasn't eligible, But most people (including me.) didn't know that John McCain wasn't born in the United States, so by the standards of Most American's understanding, HE wasn't a natural born citizen. Those of us who expected McCain to bring it up were somewhat surprised when he didn't. At the time we didn't know why, but now we do.

We managed to pick the ONLY candidate who could not raise the issue with his opponent. For Awhile, it looked like McCain was going to beat Obama like a drum, but McCain blundered with his "Campaign Suspension" and the Media pounced on him.

Don't you remember any of this?

Anyways, since the election, I have spent time educating myself as to the origins, meaning and purpose of Article II, and I have discovered that the 14th Amendment did not repeal Article II. (Among other things.) Indeed, if the 14th Amendment is followed in accordance with what it's Author and sponsors said about it, It re-iterates the requirement of Parents who hold obedience to American Laws before citizenship can be granted. ("And Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof")

A lot of stuff Americans believe regarding this issue is simply wrong. The only way to find out what is the truth is to research it.

[danamco]

Nope. These "witness" stories have been convincingly debunked.

By WHOM???

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.

You are misleading again newcomer!

Numerous African newspapers claimed it when he ran for the Senate seat out of Illinois!!

Even the Kenyan Parliament has alluded him as being a Kenyan!!!

[MHGinTN]

Perhaps there are two pages for "Exhibit A" because a certified delivery has a front and back page which must both be placed in evidence?

I cannot believe a court would grant custody to a female seeking a divorce for a marriage that is undocumented to the court records, and grant that custody without any evidence of birth to that parent. In my mother's divorce from my father in the fifties, me and my two brothers had our birth certificates as part of the divorce 'package' when she was granted custody of us. We were all under 14. I did not know this until recently since we have been dealing with her estate following her death the day before Valentine's day this year. In my divorce from my first wife, our son was graduated from college, so no custody was involved and no BC for him is in the divorce papers. In fact, he is not even mentioned in the divorce documents other than to note 'no minor children'.

[Red Steel]

The first such WND story was posted on June 10, 2008. Generally speaking, a WND story would be followed by a post of that story on FR within a day or two. So it would be reasonable to assume that the constitutional eligibility issue was was first discussed here sometime in June 2008.

"Is Obama's candidacy even constitutional?
WorldNetDaily ^ | 10 June 2008

Posted on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 10:15:05 AM by Hal1950"

And as I recall, there is an Obama eligibility article story or two before this one too.

[danamco]

How about “Harrison J. Bounell”???

[charlene4]

Here is another one to back you up!
Seems it wasn’t just the US who could not quite figure out who this boy was, Kenya sure had some questions too, and behold! The birth records in Kenya for the year in question was “criminally tampered” just a nudder one of dem pesky coincidences!
I could have never quessed that one family could have such difficulties with legal records gone missing, all over the world!
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=303053