Just noticed that the girls in the top row have their elbows bent but SAD doesn't. If that's been addressed before I missed it. Almost all the pictures I've seen of her look like they're a cardboard cut-out of herself.
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 ...
SAD has light on the R side of the fact ut it seems to be a slightly different angle of light, a bit more in the front than the other girls in the top row; the top row girls all have light on the tops of their heads and SAD doesn’t. Of course she is shorter than all the other girls. How tall was she at that time, btw??? Wasn’t she five feet six? That’s fairly tall, those other girls must have been very tall. And what grade is this supposed to be? The girls look to be at least 16 years old, and most girls have attained their adult height by then. Another anomaly that strikes me looking at this photo again is that SAD’s face is quite small in comparison to most of the other girls’ faces. The only two that have faces as small as hers are the bottom very R and L faces. In photos with SAD and other people that I recall, her face is rather large.
The French Club photo - SAD’s dark hair and shirt are “darker” than other dark haired people. More density or whatever it’s called, saturation? Looks strange.
As I have pointed out before you DO NOT have to provide a BC of your children to get a divorce.”
That is not correct.
The issue of requirement for a birth certificate in a divorce proceeding involving children; particularly children where the parties are purported to be both parents; and particularly when the children are under twelve or fourteen; depends on the local jurisdiction; and further depends on when the issue came up.
In the modern world, most of this stuff is now handled by a separate court division, Family Court; which usually, in most jurisdictions has it own local rules. And in the modern world, generally, for the child of the parties under twelve, the most common rule would require a birth certificate.
In 1964, seldom were there Family Courts; most local rules didn't address family law specifics. The local judge or judges would have decided on a basic pattern which would have been communicated the lawyers who did divorce work in their courts--actually, would be surprising to me to find, even in 64, a judge who didn't make the parties produce a birth certificate at a minimum. And I suppose I wouldn't be surprised to find that the judge didn't force the parties to prove the identity of the child at issue to the birth certificate. Matter of fact, I doubt today a court would do that.
Apart from this classic fraud of SAD, mother or NOT, we are growing traitorous people in the establishment of RNC, selling out our country sweeping the Constitution under the rug!!!
http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams200.htm
Just noticed that the girls in the top row have their elbows bent but SAD doesn't. If that's been addressed before I missed it. Almost all the pictures I've seen of her look like they're a cardboard cut-out of herself.
Good catch with unbent elbow on SAD and SAD alone, azishot.Just noticed that the girls in the top row have their elbows bent but SAD doesn't. If that's been addressed before I missed it. Almost all the pictures I've seen of her look like they're a cardboard cut-out of herself.
Only one without a sweater.
Only one not looking at camera.
Facial sunlight anomaly.
Only one with unbent elbow.
Last item could be explained by falling barometer exacerbating her incipient rheumatoid arthritis.
Or perhaps she's holding up a skirt borrowed from a larger friend.
Everyone remarked she looked distracted that day worrying about future researchers doubting her presence.
SAD has light on the R side of the fact ut it seems to be a slightly different angle of light, a bit more in the front than the other girls in the top row; the top row girls all have light on the tops of their heads and SAD doesn’t. Of course she is shorter than all the other girls. How tall was she at that time, btw??? Wasn’t she five feet six? That’s fairly tall, those other girls must have been very tall. And what grade is this supposed to be? The girls look to be at least 16 years old, and most girls have attained their adult height by then. Another anomaly that strikes me looking at this photo again is that SAD’s face is quite small in comparison to most of the other girls’ faces. The only two that have faces as small as hers are the bottom very R and L faces. In photos with SAD and other people that I recall, her face is rather large.little jeremiah, you've made a cogent, credible argument the image of SAD was sized to cover a shorter person, a matching of outline to minimize the complexity of the task.
Add the too-short, small-faced SAD to the only one without sweater, not looking at camera, not bending elbow, the lighting anomalies mentioned by you and The Cajun and others, and we wonder if we can just go out on ebay and buy these SAD movie lobby promotional cutouts.
"Everyone remarked she looked so much smaller that day. And it was really peculiar, as she was so distracted she forgot her sweater, didn't bend her arm, and DIDN'T ATTEMPT TO SMILE. It was as though she were a hologram from a future where people knew what that word meant."
In today's propaganda report, anomalies are running slightly ahead of explanations. Experts explained explanations are typically a lagging indicator."
So what you are saying is you really don't know.
I know what happened in the cases I am familiar with. Divorce in WA in 1959 (my mothers) no birth certificates since she didn't have them for us kids. Divorces in CA in 78 and 83. More Divorces in WA in the 90's. In none of these were childrens birth certificates required.
In the divorce packets they go STEP BY STEP, telling you exactly what papers to fill out and what papers to bring for filing. Never are you asked to bring a copy (certified or otherwise) of Childrens BC to have put on file.
The point I am making is don't get hung up on the fact that there APPEARED to be a missing paper (some think BC) in Stanley Ann Dunhams (supposedly) divorce papers. Besides how do we know that, that, divorce paper is even real. It has been proven that date stamps have been forged on other legal documents surrounding Obama.
See the photo on 1407.. THAT IS A TWIN MY FRIEND.. I just asked three older women that came over to my house, that had no clue who they were lookin at— They said that is a twin and almost identical, but not quite identical. Is it? I dont know but it could be..they sure do look close
There ARE images of SAD with students from Mercer Island, there are some screencaps from videos that I had and lost, (btw, there’s nothing to stop anyone from watching the two videos I posted the link to...and taking screencaps, I just don’t know how to do it myself)
It’s impossible to tell when and where she was, or when those photographs we are shown - were taken. Because WE NEVER get to see an entire page, the images are cropped and UNDATED.
That she might have been there is very likely, but WHEN?
It’s super-important TO THE MYTH that she was a Class of 1960 graduate. Was she?
There are directory entries, which if they are genuine, (cropped from a page) that show Stanley Armour Dunham in Seattle 1956-1957.
She is, as you have observed, not holding the same pose as the others, she doesn't look like she belongs there, and there have been comments that without her sweater, she would not have been part of that group at all.
Now please do keep in mind, that photograph is not only cropped, there must have been a number of more girls there, but the image appears courtesy of THE DAUGHTER of one of the students.
You might consider it a prank image. It's not been used or shown in articles that I am aware of, the tinted images I have shown here belong to the webpages of the DAUGHTER. But what does it tell you?
It tells us that Maxine Box, standing on the left in the top row, who has been identified in THREE class groups and as an adult in previous comments on this thread, who calls herself 'best friend' DIDN'T HAVE A CLASS OF 1960 IMAGE TO SHOW US. The image of SAD that Maxine supplied to Getty Images shows Stanley Ann Dunham at the age of FIFTEEN!
Doesn’t look like a twin to me. But then we can’t see the whole face. Once again, we’re only seeing part of a whole. If you were to see the entire thing, it may look completely different.
chicken - I think you can safely give the idea of twin Stanley Anns a miss, or at least go and try to find any evidence there were two of them. A theory such as that needs to at least indicate some advantage to hiding an individual throughout their life. It’s easier to add someone to the narrative than wipe them out.
Well, it does look like a twin to me... A school yearbook would probally do the trick with the names listed. There is no census records in the archives to prove— i have no idea if stanley anns BC would be labeled as a twin— not sure—( i cant find it anywhere) I dont know how to prove it.
Well Fred, you cant prove chit eather, its all theory, or you would be in court with your evidence..
I just learned how to do screen shots or whatever they’re called. Even an idiot like me can do it. On your keyboard up on the top row, on the right, there is a key/button whatever they’re called, that may say “prtscn”. Apparently such buttons may say something else similar, mine says “prtscn” on the top and “sysRq” under it. If I hit that button (no upper case needed), and then open a Word doc, and hit “paste”, whatever was on my desk top is pasted. I’ll try it now.
Yes, it worked. This window and the surrounded edges of my desktop picture (a beautiful scene in the Himalayas) is now on a Word document.
The girl identified as her mother...supposed to be standing next to SAD, cannot be who the daughter wants us to think she is...because in the Grade Ten group, 'mother' is taller than Maxine Box.
It's possible the girl identified as MOTHER is this girl, from Grade Nine -in the centre:
Who was removed to make way for SAD in that image is going to be impossible to ascertain...it's possible the reason the left of the image was cropped is because there were LESS numbers of girls in the back row, and a full image would have revealed the imbalance. Maybe.
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.