Replies

So I wish there was some way that you could persuade Obama to release his Hawaii long form birth certificate so that his Hawaii long form birth certificate can easily back up what his parents’ divorce seems to tell us: Obama senior was Obama junior’s birth father.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

He is not hiding his father. Using mathematics terms - that data point is well established.

Now, the implication of a foreign father who never was or intended to be a US Citizen IS being obscured. By focusing on the ‘born’ part of ‘natural born Citizen’ the focus is not on the ‘natural’ part. A ‘natural Citizen’ is one whose father was a Citizen. Obviously that is not the case here. Obama can not be a ‘natural Citizen’ of the United States with a foreign citizen father. At one time Congress made this clear in the first naturalization law. The first naturalization law of the US specifically indicated a ‘natural born Citizen’ was that whose parents were Citizens. Jus soli (where you were born) was not even part of that formalized man-made law at the time. Thus, it is well known and well understood that your parents (plural) and specifically your fathers (since in 1789 the status of your mother followed your father) citizenship was THE factor in determining ‘natural born’ status. The next revision and since then the naturalization law has not included this specific text.

Another issue with the British father is .... that Obama is still legally a British citizen. To this day, he still has rights to British citizenship. Simply google ‘Thai Prime Minister dual’ to see why. The current Thailand Prime Minister is in a political dogfight since he intentionally hid his dual citizenship. The situation is a parallel to that of Obama.

Also, the missing page from the divorce proceeding tell us he was likely adopted. This would explain a logical and legal redaction of birth records. A legal adoption likely occurred - to Lolo Soetoro, before the age of 5. As such his original records, regardless of their content, were likely sealed and the page removed from the divorce records. And we was at that point an Indonesian citizen. Then he may have been adopted by his grandparents in 1971 and may have even had to be re-united legally with Obama Sr. for short time in December of 1971 so that he could give up his Indonesian citizenship legally (Indonesian law allows foreign birth fathers to ‘reclaim’ their children).

And then there is what did he do as an adult. He had until he was 23 or until August of 1984 to reclaim Kenyan, Indonesia or formally assume British Citizenship. Did he? Was that done to allow for foreign student status in college? Impossible to say. But if people are busy looking for original sealed birth records it keeps the attention off the fact that Obama was an Indonesian citizen as a child and possibly a Kenyan, Indonesian or British Citizen as an adult. This then would nullify the ‘born’ part of ‘natural born Citizen’ since ‘born’ means ‘from birth’.

So, why won’t the real long form certificate come out. The logistical answer is - it is likely legally sealed due to adoption(s). But the focus on this services a useful purpose to the administration - it keeps the focus off of the other even more damning elements of his past.

For the record I am not a born-in-Kenya fan. I think that was adopted and embellished story until it became a liability. It gave a connection to a father who was, in reality, only a father in name only. The real birth place could very well be Hawaii. But Washington state and Canada would have to be in the running as well since his mother shows up in Washington in September of 1961.

So there it is. They ‘cloakers’ (using an old Star Trek term) like to keep the focus on the Hawaii BC. It serves a purpose. It is mis-direction away from other equally, if not more, problematic areas of Obama’s history.