Posted on 11/28/2008 2:37:01 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
The announcement in the paper does not indicate WHERE he was born, and it probabbly coincides with the application for a COLB.
I hope he is tossed as being unqualified, but if he isnt, and there is no proof forthcoming that CONCLUSIVELY establishes he is a natural born citizen, then we here will know we have an imposter in The White house.
He gets NO CRED in my little corner of the world.
Since the announcement was originally uncovered by the TexasDarlin website that is extremely skeptical about Obama's birth certificate, this is one thing you don't need to worry about..
And? That proves what?
That someone (perhaps DEAR LEADER'S MOM) placed an ad in the local paper after finally winging her way to Hawaii?
MOREOVER, what it does NOT address is The Messiah possibly having forfeiting his US citizenship when he moved to Indonesia.
These announcements look like the ones supplied by the hospitals, not the ones folks buy. Births and deaths are recorded by them and are a matter of limited public record, so the newspapers simply ask for them and print them for free.
How could BC be public record? That could lead to a lot of ID theft, no?
Yes, I have, and it does look legit. Even so, a birth announcement placed by the mother or maternal grandparents in the newspaper does not imply that he was born in Hawaii. A birth announcement is not a birth certificate. In fact, in this case, the birth announcement did not indicate where the baby was born.
Please see my post # 46.
Why would she take the effort to file a false newspaper announcement?
However:
At the risk of generating more conspiracies, I found it interesting that the father is not referred to as SR. when the other fathers are referenced as SR.
Further, I checked the C of live birth and noted that the Dad is not listed as SR. but the child is listed as “II”.
I never noticed this before but I believe it is odd to use the “II” when one is actually a Jr.
I did find this on the subject:
From Behind the Name - “Junior is used to distinguish a son with the same name as his father. The following conditions apply:
1. The Junior must be a son of the father, not a grandson.
2. The names must be exactly the same, including the middle name.
3. The father must still be living.
‘II’ is used whenever any close relative, including for example a grandfather or a great-uncle, shares the same name as the child.”
http://genealogy.about.com/b/2006/06/19/jr-or-ii.htm
Would this use of II, indicate that Obama is not the biological of the father on the BC, his real dad is someone else and he is named after the man his mother married?
Would this explain his reluctance to disclose?
Please see my post # 46. It is surely within the realm of possibility that the birth notice was called into the newspaper after the baby was born abroad in Kenya. After all, the newspaper in which the announcement appeared came out nine days after the DOB, allowing ample time for mother and child to return home from Kenya. Or the maternal grandparents could have called in the announcement after receiving word of the birth from abroad or from the continental US, even if mother and child hadn’t returned home by the time the announcement was printed.
Stanley Ann Dunham was a slipper customer, as well as a communist, and was perfectly capable of sending in a false announcement, which no one would have checked.Exactly! No one ever suspected that it was just the beginning of a masterfully orchestrated plot to sneak a communist mole, born for that very purpose, into the U.S. Presidency 47 years later!
Second source which indicates the man on the BC is not the father of the Obama child:
In cases where a child is given the same name as a relative who is not the child’s mother or father, it is considered correct to give the child a numerical suffix. For example, a child named John William Scott, after his uncle John William Scott, would properly be considered John William Scott II, as opposed to “Junior.” Junior is not used because, in this example, John William Scott is not the child of John William Scott, senior. If John William Scott II were to have a son, he could then be named, John William Scott III or John William Scott, Jr., depending upon the family. While it is not technically the social norm to use “II” in place of “junior” for children born directly to a same named parent, there is no social rule against the usage of “II” instead of “junior” for a same named child. Often, II is used by families who want to avoid having their children referred to as “junior” as a nickname.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_(name)
Ah, the PUMAs. I think it is time someone go to the archives - local libraries? - and independently verify the actual records.
Could be that Stanley Ann, or mom Madelyn, placed the announcement as an anticipatory rebuttal of any future whispers that little Barack's parents weren't married (at least not to each other) when he made his debut.
I said “for practical purposes.”
I may not be able to take or make a copy of your birth certificate, but in many states I have a right, either through a FOIA request or other state mechanisms to look at or review the birth documents. Genealogical researches use these rules all the time, as do private investigators and the like.
HI seems to be very unusual in that they don’t allow access to the information at all, except by the individual, there legal guardian or representative or a direct genealogical decedent. This is standard is, I believe, unique in the US.
Mr and Mrs.?? was the marriage valid.
beginning of a masterfully orchestrated plot to
And also maybe so grandma’s banking and .gov friends would assume they really were married?
Possibly even grandma intended to forcibly extract Obama from his mother, and couldn’t do that with a Kenyan birth easily.
Never underestimate the wily-ness of a grandmother.
Bottom line is that they are fighting the disclosure of something. Let’s be inquisitive and find out what it is. History will be well served to put this puppy to rest.
>(Can you imagine anything more rude and selfish than voting Democrat?)
Voting RINO, `cause then you’re deluding yourself, too. [/cynic]
Not necessarily. I dated a boy who went by II, just because his dad did not want to use the Jr. after his son’s name. My dad was technically a Jr., but it’s completely dropped on his birth certificate for the nickname “Jackie”.
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.