Posted on 01/02/2009 1:16:10 PM PST by patriot08
Ed Hale of Plains Radio has secured a copy of the Dunham/Obama divorce decree as promised. He has registered this at the courthouse and has turned the document over to lawyers who are reported to be happy and enthused over the contents.
This is the first page. This is all that can be divulged at this time as those who have seen the decree are sworn to silence. You may hear information about it tonight on Ed's plainsradio show.
What I found more interesting was something I posted a few pages back. Maya Soetoro Ng had an interview with Deborah Solomon of the NYT and Deborah asked her point blank about her mother’s death. Here is the question and Maya’s answer:
“She died at only 52, from ovarian cancer ? Today, more than anything, I wish all the women in Barack’s life — our mother, his wife and daughters, my daughter, our grandmother, his Kenyan half-sister — I wish we could all sit together and gaze at the moon.”
I had known about the two names with the one SSN and I had discovered an original story about the days leading to Ann’s death had suddenly been pulled. Because I had the exact title of the story I was able to locate it again and posted the multiple part story on the long thread.
Thanks. I’ve never been to Hawaii. But for someone who is there, that knowledge about the address would raise eyebrows. Thanks for adding more information to the puzzle — information that make me rethink my belief that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Glancing backward ..
~~~~
Friday, October 24, 2008
HOW COULD STANLEY ANN DUNHAM HAVE DELIVERED BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA JR. IN AUGUST OF 1961 IN HONOLULU, WHEN OFFICIAL UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON RECORDS SHOW HER 2680 MILES AWAY IN SEATTLE ATTENDING CLASSES THAT SAME MONTH?
UPDATE: NEW EMAIL FORM UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII (SEE BELOW!)
When public record information from the University of Washington was added to Wikipedia’s biography of Stanley Ann Dunham (Barack Hussein Obama Jr’s mother), it was removed in 35 minutes the first time and 34 minutes the second time.
Read what Obama’s team of internet thugs doesn’t want you to know.
See official emails from U of Hawaii and U (see below)
I’m concerned with the unlikely dates:
Sept 26 1960 First day at U of Hawaii for Ann (Why did she start 6 weeks late?)
One month later - conception
Two months later - drops out of University of Hawaii
Three months later - married
10 months later - back in Washington attending classes at University of Washington
These are implausible dates, and may imply that Ann got pregnant in Seattle and THAT is why her family moved to Hawaii.
University of Washington records place Stanley Ann Dunham in Washington State in Aug 1961 so how could she be in Honolulu 2680 miles away birthing Barack the same month.
EMAIL:
“The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 - Summer 1966
Fall 1972 - Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 - Summer 1992
Degrees awarded:
BA - Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA - Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD - Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)
Sincerely,
Stuart Lau”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/10/how-could-stanl.html
The attorney on Ed's show said the U.S. didn't recognize dual citizenship at that time. If true that argument doesn't fly.
“Yes, the question does come down to “can you prove it” — and — if you can’t (i.e., everyone that is trying) then it’s like President Arthur, who became President under those doubts.
It’s still a few days away from January 20th, so he’s not quite like President Arthur yet... There’s still time to come up with some definite proof, if there is any (and that’s a real good question...).
So, in any case, you’re saying that if it’s not proven that Obama is not eligible, then it will be like Arthur, because it was never proven for him either — right?
Or, maybe in a more limited sense — as long as it’s “not proven at the present” that Obama is not qualified, then he can go on and be President in the same way President Arthur was (*again* given that no proof has come up “yet”)...”
I wouldn’t take Jan. 20th as being a deadline as to how it would effect us. This is a different time and a differnt culture. If it gets proven even after Jan. 20th the consequences will be different than the Arthu case.
The media was much smaller during Arthur’s days and the alternative media was smaller even still. No interent. How was it being reported during Arhtur’s preidency.
The other major difference in this case is the “Natural Born” Constitutional issue. That will not die. Both Arthur’s case and Obama’s case contain the “born on foreign soil” argument but Obama is admittingly a duel citizen at birth and that is a rather large distinction already.
I really think that you are off-base in thinking that the case involving Arthur will teach us very much at all in regards to what will happen here.
Thanx. I read another post on that since I asked the question.
I still didn’t find out if the Constitutional requirements changed at that time. Did they?
Stop using Google.
Ann D Sutoro 320 E 43rd St New York, NY 10017 (212) 573-5000 Job title: Program Officer for Women & Employment Company: Ford Foundation
Say goodnight, Dick... :-D
-PJ
Thanks. I saw this name from another FR thread about plains radio.
IIRC, in those days college students maintained the residency in their "home" state while attending college. Thus, if she was attending college in WA State, which I believe is how you've placed here there, this would not be a lie. I'm sure her attorney told her not to lie to the court, and perhaps this time she did not.
This document did give a place of marriage, which I believe had not previously been confirmed. Although why some knocked up pre-flower child would go to Maui to get married to a rather uninspiring foreign exchange student is beyond me, and doesn't really fit with the "persona" we've built up of her.
WOuldn’t have to have the actual bc. Only a note that the infant entered the US with a valid BC from sight of birth.
What’s your point?
Don’t forget that Malcom X also saw the irony in blacks and unions supporting the Dems. As he himself put it, “You always support the Dems first, but they will always put you last.”
Why is that quote from Maya significant?
You have to walk me through the stuff. :) I don’t see why that’s interesting.
No. He did not need to because he never ran for President. He ran for Vice-President with James Garfield in the top slot.
Garfield was shot by Charles J. Guiteau on July 2, 1881, he died until September 19, at which time Arthur was sworn in as president, serving until March 4, 1885.
He did not actively campaign for nomination for a second term, he just submitted his name for consideration. The rumors regarding his lack of natural born status made Arthur the last incumbent President to submit for renomination and not win it.
Do research or folks are gonna play you like a cheap fiddle.
We found other relatives of Obama up north maybe the Dunhams changed there name sometime before the grandfather I never went back past the grandfather.
This was not uncommon when immigrants came to America. Freep Mail the name to me I forgot:)
Goodnight Dick!
Well not really on the birthday. Whoever filed the paperwork on the BC could have put the same date on the divorce decree. I don't think many thought that BHO was not his *oringinal* birth name. But they do wonder what the long form BC would show, since he was apparently adopted by his stepfather Lolo Soertoro, as indicated in Stanley Ann's divorce papers from Lolo.
Ok, someone else here said that COLB said 8th. I’d prefer that the dates were different. At least we have a new document. And that D. thing is huge supposedly?
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.