Posted on 07/19/2012 5:28:21 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
It now appears the worst fears of the U.S. Constitution’s framers were well founded as investigators working on behalf of the ongoing investigation into the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama have found yet another lead in a growing mountain of evidence within the public records section of the British National Archives indicating the occurrence of at least four vital events registered to the name of Barack Obama, taking place in the British Protectorate of East Africa (Kenya) between 1953 and 1963, including the birth of two sons before 1963.
The record of birth of a second son prior to Kenyan independence is significant because biographical information about Obama’s family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to Obama II’s birth.
The books containing hand written line records of vital events attributed to Obama are contained in Series RG36 of the Family Records section in the Kew branch of the BNA. The hand written line records first discovered in 2009, indicate several events were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be handwritten and spelled “Burack” and “Biraq”) beginning in 1953 and include two births recorded in 1958 and 1960, a marriage license registration in 1954 and a birth in 1961. Barack Obama is said to have died in 1982 and had married at least once more in Kenya and had at least one more child in 1968, but no record of these were found in the BNA because, according to the Archives’ desk reference, the events occurred after Kenya achieved independence from British colonial rule in 1963.
To date, Barack Obama II is the only known alleged son of Obama Sr. born after 1960 and before the independence of Kenya became official in 1963.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailypen.blogspot.com ...
Yeah, if I were in the middle of the biggest power play of my life and my precious grandmother needed me a half a world away, I'd drop everything for the next flight out so I could be by her bedside for.... 35 minutes from the time I stepped out of my black SUV to the time I stepped back into it to make tee time with my old choom buddy. Yep, that proves just how close that relationship was not just with granny but with Maya who was in typical white granny's apt at the time.
Good point, but somewhere there is a statement up thread IIRC where signature of parent-S is required...That’s parents with an s...both parents. If he had not had parental rights withdrawn Sr would still be father of record and his signature would be required....Been out in the heat/garden either wait till I’ve cooled down or see if you can find it in my comments.
Correct. BHO II was in the legal custody Catholic Social Services of Connecticut from late 1971, early 1972 until he reached the age of majority Aug. 4, 1979. Madelyn Payne was appointed BHO’s II guardian, commonly referred to as his foster mother.
Neither SAD Soetoro or Madelyn Payne Dunham could claim BHO II as a dependent on their tax return from 1972 until 1979 because BHO II was a ward of the U.S. Federal Foster care system. Madelyn Payne Dunham, BHO’s II foster mother and grandmother, received monthly stipends and food stamps to provide for the basic needs of BHO II through HI Dept of Children’s and Families Services, commonly referred to as the welfare office.
Only children with foreign nationality are accepted by the U.S. Federal Foster care system. BHO II returned to Hawaii in 1971 as an Indonesian National and an unaccompanied minor arriving at a U.S. Port of Entry. Unaccompanied Minors with foreign nationality are taken into Federal protective custody by INS and are not waved through Customs to the awaiting arms of some old white lady. Any conversation about Obama’s birthplace or his birth certificate is a distraction to take the emphasis off Obama’s nationality in 1971 to 1979. Obama naturalized as a U.S. Citizen in 1983 and that is why he is ineligible to be POTUS.
All words from a book.
Big freaking deal.
and on the 17th the posse made Hawaii complicit in the crime of fraud on America’s citizens with premedation...
therein is the “rest of the story “
Agree totally.
I do know a former federal judge who was an orphan. Not until he was in his 40s did he finally find the actual facts of his past with specific names and dates. The actual facts were buried deep as was normal for orphans but they where still there - if you knew where to look.
Here - since the child was 10 and the parties all knew each other there would not be the usual need to seal everything everything up to protect or hide birth mothers, etc. But would they still seal the case or cases? Especially if it involved names changes and identity changes? Isn’t one of the purposes of sealing cases of adopted children to keep multiple identities of of the same one person from floating around in the legal, government world?
So could it be that even though the Dunhams did everything mentioned the case might be sealed?
I always remember Gov. Lingle saying or maybe the media implying that SHE had sealed Obamas BC. I have always thought that they maybe sealed but it was not done by Lingle. Instead the records are sealed by a judge with a legitimate reason to do so - like legal name changes.
Something happened in 1971 and some newspaper clippings are not going to explain it away.
Would you agree or more importantly would the political machines and courts agree that the status of ‘naturalized citizen’ and ‘natural born citizen’ are non-intersecting for a person at any point in time.
Hence if a person did have to naturalize to obtain or re-obtain US citizenship they would have previously lost the actual status of natural born citizen.
The apparently incorrect point that has been pronounced over the last few years is that ‘natural born Citizen’ is only a point in time - at the moment of birth and if you have it then you have it forever.
But you stop being a citizen all together do you not also stop being a ‘natural born’ citizen. If you are not citizen then you can not be a special subclass of citizen - correct?
Hence if you have to naturalize - for any reason - you are not a ‘natural born citizen’. Do you agree?
And on the 8th day God asked Sven Magnussen to post the same few paragraphs he has posted a hundred times without any links, references, proof, or substantiation, and Sven did and God saw that is was good.
“Would you agree or more importantly would the political machines and courts agree that the status of ‘naturalized citizen’ and ‘natural born citizen’ are non-intersecting for a person at any point in time.
Hence if a person did have to naturalize to obtain or re-obtain US citizenship they would have previously lost the actual status of natural born citizen.”
Yes.
Craig v. U.S., 10th Circuit Court of Appeals commentary reaffirming Schneider v. Rusk, 1964, there is no right to be classified with the status Natural born citizen. A naturalized U.S. citizen is afforded all the rights and privileges of a Natural Born Citizen; except, a naturalized U.S. Citizen is ineligible to be POTUS or VP.
Actual case wording:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=377&invol=163
“We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the “natural born” citizen is eligible to be President. Art. II, 1. [377 U.S. 163, 166]
While the rights of citizenship of the native born derive from 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment and the rights of the naturalized citizen derive from satisfying, free of fraud, the requirements set by Congress, the latter, apart from the exception noted, “becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the constitution, on the footing of a native. The constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national Legislature, is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise of this power exhausts it, so far as respects the individual.” Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 827. And see Luria v. United States, 231 U.S. 9, 22 ; United States v. MacIntosh, 283 U.S. 605, 624 ; Knauer v. United States, 328 U.S. 654, 658 . “
This case also heavily brings in ‘native born’.
It is interesting that this case has been used to equivocate ‘native born’ (that Obama claims) and natural born (that he has not claimed) by the Obama representatives.
But the case makes it clear only ‘natural born’ is eligible to be President.
And the case goes on to clarify what ‘native born’ is - i.e. 14th amendment anchor babies and naturalized (as always a person who receives their citizenship through an act of Congress).
So the ruling does provide 3 classes but it does NOT make native = natural born. It just uses native as a superset of all born in the US.
Again, for all reading. Much has been made of natural born Citizen and how it is received ‘at birth’. That is mischaracterization. It is not a one time thing.
If you lose your citizenship - then you quit being a ‘natural born citizen’. You can not be an nbC when you are not even a C. ‘natural’ and ‘born’ are just adjectives that narrow the class of the noun - Citizen. If you are no longer a Citizen - you are also no longer a natural born Citizen.
When you gain or regain citizenship via naturalization you are then and forever a ‘naturalized’ citizen. Even if you were an nbC you can never be an nbC again.
Schnieder v. Rusk points out that you can only be one of the 3 classes at any point in time.
The abusive comments above directed at me (I corrected misinformation about Obama’s mom's tax return) and all of the comments by Fred Nerks on this thread (that I started) exemplifies the relentless stalking, trolling, thread hijacking, spamming and spreading of disinformation and ad hominem attacks on all eligibility threads by Fred Nerks in a way that suspiciously helps the Obama team. Fred Nerks helps Obama by cleverly diverting all eligibility threads away from productive sharing of new knowledge and towards a delusional alternative narrative that can only subject FReepers who fall for it to derision and mockery.
Fred Nerks is a genius with photos of Obama and his family and this ability has been a great contribution to Free Republic, but....
The Fred Nerks pattern is to jump in to any thread that posts links to new evidence that may shed light on where Stanley Ann Dunham was when she gave birth and who the father might be. This investigation, closely followed by FReepers, could be very damaging to Obama. Attempts to cripple these investigations helps Obama.
Fred Nerks asserts the following delusional claims over and over again throwing the threads off track, but won't start his/her own thread asserting these claims:
According to Fred Nerks:
1. Obama is the son of Malcolm X and a Lebanese actress (not a shred of evidence offered, but only speculation).
2. Stanley Ann is NOT Obama’s mom but only his nanny beginning in 1964 when Obama was left in her care when Barry first appears in pictures at age 2 or 3 with Stanley Ann.
3. Stanley Ann was never in Hawaii before 1964 and never attended U of HI or U of WA. despite Registrar confirmation from U of HI and transcripts from U of WA and FOIA INS documents recording her pregnancy and alleged marriage to BHO Sr. inn 1961 as well as her intention to go to school in WA in Fall of 1961. All these documents are forged, according to Fred Nerks.
4. BHO Sr. fathered a different BHO II with a Filippina wife in HI named Ann S. Obama (based only on a picture of BHO Sr. sitting next to an Asian woman named Ann(e) at a party) who Fred Nerks claims was with the child in WA in 1960 getting babysat by Mary Toutongi. This child's name was changed to Roman Obama in 1964 when he was shuttled to Kenya to be cared for by BHO’s new wife Ruth who briefly cared for both Roman Obama and Barry Obama (who is mysteriously transferred from his Lebanese momma to Kenya to the care of Ruth and BHO Sr.) and can be seen in a 1964 picture posted up-thread with the two boys, according to Fred Nerks. The picture is actually a circa 1970 picture of BHO Sr.and Ruth Baker Obama with her own two boys, Barry's half-brothers Mark (5) and David (2). The picture of the family came from Mark's photo album. Yet Fred Nerks insists over and over again on every eligibility thread that he/she can hijack that the “dark boy” (Mark) is actually this “Roman Obama” from Ghana (black as ink and not appearing to be a half-Filippino in the least) who ended up studying in the USSR. Pulitzer prize winning author Maraniss documents that in 1964 and early 1965 in Kenya, Ruth Baker was not mothering any baby boys but partying up a storm in the bars of Nairobi at night with BHO Sr. and working full-time during the day.
5. David Obama does not exist. All of the pictures of baby David in Kenya are actually baby Barry Obama who in Ruth's care in Kenya in 1964. These deranged ravings Fred Nerks posts over and over again repeatedly ad nauseum, and dishonestly posting pictures of Barry Obama and David Obama side telling old and new FReepers that they are one and the same baby when he knows that the David picture came from Mark's collection. Mark's collection also has him sitting next to baby David, but Fred Nerks says that it is actually a shot of baby Barry Obama with older brother Roman Obama, the “dark baby” (referred to up-thead).
Please take a hard look at Fred Nerks’ posting history. I would very much appreciate it if Fred Nerks stopped stalking, trolling, spamming all eligibility threads with delusional speculation, especially the ones that I start!
Yes, one of the purposes of sealing records IS to keep multiple identities of the same person. Early on numbers were assigned to CHIN children when parental rites were terminated and the court/state took over...Dad says that in IN they started using SS#s and he thinks that started in the late 60 early 70s and was nationwide. DOn’t know how this information could be confirmed.....Maybe the reason for the number...was it assigned by a child protective service like Catholic Services from their out of state national office?
That's more breadcrumbs. There are either records that prove this or there are gaping holes that proves the records disappeared. For a country he hates, he sure has been living off it his entire life.
Keep this conversation moving forward even if the entire thread is pulled...
I am so disgusted with your accusations about Fred Nerks and your desire to shut FN up that I cannot remain silent.
Is FR your personal site that you want to shut others up you don’t like? That’s crazy. FN never tries to shut you up, just criticizes your content and now, your attitude. But FN never, ever tries to get you banned or shut you up.
This is insanity.
Trying to stop others from posting is the most counter productive thing anyone could do, if truth is the objective.
I can’t even stand to read your entire diatribe - but baldly stating that FN is an 0bomba operative is so beyond sanity and rational thinking that - basically, I’m speechless.
I’m not going to try to defeat your other assertions, but they are in total - untrue! I’ve been reading just about every single eligibility thread since the summer of 2008 and your accusations miss the mark by 180 degrees.
Take a deep breath and step back...Seize is just one of a few who has documentation of material in his post..You may want to rethink your undying support of him.
There is enough specifically known and not know about Obama that needs investigation.
Missing marriage certificate (marriage license) and missing Passport application for SAD, missing entry (one week’s) from overseas, plus Inspector Smith’s copy w/footprint, hmmm!!!
Could it be SAD got married in Kenya and stayed there until Barry was born yet the sperm donor FMD???
I wouldnt have the time to go- but i would donate money to a good investigator to do it- i was suggesting that maybe FR could start somthing like that— someone with a pocket full of money might could get some documents of importance.. I was thinking if he was born in kenya, someone in Britian would have solid records somewhere and could do some good research.. I think someone should research Madelyn dunham more because O was rasied by her from the age 10.. I dont believe in theory, just factual evidence..His marriage license could have good info to.. It seems we just go over old stuff that goes nowhere— We need to go futher with this with some new documents somehow, and i willing to help do that is what im tring to say
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.