Posted on 12/31/2008 6:25:00 AM PST by mlizzy
Permission to copy and post this article's text is granted.
A private investigator in Hawaii has uncovered the divorce decree for Barack Obama's father and mother, which indicates they had "one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya." That is the report of Ed Hale of PlainsRadio.com, an Internet radio site which has focused upon the natural born Citizen challenges to Obama's presidential eligibility.
Hale announced this during his evening Internet broadcast on PlainsRadio.com, Tuesday, 12/30 and confirmed it with I.O. in an online interview, later that night. He reported that certified copies of this documentation have been sent from Hawaii by the investigator to himself and four others. Hale is to receive his copy today, Wednesday, 12/31 and plans to post it graphically on the site, during the day. He will also discuss this on a special Internet broadcast, between 6 pm and 10 pm Central Time, tonight. The site streams audio as soon as it is accessed via Web browser.
Link to PlainsRadio and their message forum
Link to PlainsRadio and chat window
The Texan Internet entrepreneur relates he got fed up with the lack of documentation on Obama and decided to discuss ideas with his radio audience. His offer to hire an investigator was met with piecemeal sums of money from listeners to his broadcasts. Hale said some of the information one would expect to find was not available. For example, documentation from Obama's mother Stanley Ann's divorce to her second husband, Lolo Soetoro, had vanished. Hale speculates, the reason this forthcoming 1964 divorce decree had not also been "scrubbed" could be that the divorce had been filed not by Obama's mother, but by Barack H. Obama, Sr. Thus, it may have been overlooked by any plumbers for Obama.
Hale does admit to incomplete certainty of his investigator's work until he receives it, partially due to the PI's accent, the telephone connection, and his slight hearing impediment. However, he is very confident of what he will receive during the day. Mark S. McGrew, who writes about Obama's natural born Citizen problems for Pravda.ru, accompanied Hale in his broadcast and also expressed confidence. McGrew had sought publication in numerous American news outlets, but they turned down his articles referring to Obama's apparent ineligibility. Russia's Pravda however, decided his effort to find and report the truth was not to be redlined.
As often related, Barack Obama, due simply to his U.K. citizenship at birth via his Kenyan father, is not a natural born Citizen of America, by definition and the original intent of that term. The Supreme Court has turned down cases which make this point, but according to a September decision in a lower federal court (regarding John McCain's eligibility problem), this would be due to a question of jurisdiction, until Congress is to certify the Electoral College vote on January 8. Further action is to occur, after this date. You may read about this in previous I.O. articles and the sites linked in its sidebar.
Meanwhile, on the question of Obama's place of birth, professionals dealing with documents and forensic evidence have testified that the online "certificate of live birth" provided by Obama is not identifiable evidence of American birth. Now, if Obama's parents' divorce decree states that he was born in Kenya (as his Kenyan grandmother has repeatedly stated), the second epistemological wheel is coming off his vehicle to the White House.
Will Congress pay attention and do its Constitutional duty?
© Arlen Williams
The traveler debates the BC issue nearly 24/7.
Maybe the ‘star traveler’ is actually a ‘fellow traveler’ working for the cause.
lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-lol-ad nauseum
Someone should ask the Time reporter(s) if they’ve actually seen any divorce records, or if Time was just transcribing what someone from the Obama camp (Maya would be my guess) told them about “divorce records.”
I don’t believe this Ed Hale at all, about anything. He is just a con man.
That would make more sense, jellybean, thanks.
I wouldn’t have known that by reading the Time article.
One more thing, if Time appears to already have seen the Obama, Sr v. Dunham divorce papers, and they sure hinted they did when they wrote “according to divorce papers”, I would hope Time wouldn’t have been so careless as to not pick up on anything suspicious.
The Soetoro v. Dunham divorce papers are on internet and the only thing they say is that there were 2 children, 1 a minor and 1 over 18 still in school. That’s it.
http://decalogosintl.org/documents/Soetoro_Divorce.pdf
The reporter was in Honolulu, so it's hard to say if she actually looked at the divorce records or not. The article implies that she did, but it's not completely clear.
The “official” story is that the papers were sent to MA, where Obama Sr. was attending Harvard, he signed the papers and they were sent back to HI. Time didn’t report using the divorce papers, they simply went along with the timeline Jr used in his book never checking for veracity before doing so. That is how the majority of the presstitutes vetted Jr, they read his book!
Please note also that Ann’s last name was Dunham not Durham.
You said — “I don’t believe this Ed Hale at all, about anything. He is just a con man.”
Well, from the way he acted with Chief Editor Korir (at API, African Press International), you had to wonder about him, that’s for sure. Sure, the ole “chief” was on a big hoax with everyone — but then — Ed Hale threatens Korir and says that he had a contract with him and was going to sue Korir for breach of contract...
Now, that was funny... (I guess you could say that was one con man to another con man... ).
If you read further down in the Times article, it says this:
Ann filed for divorce in Honolulu in January 1964, citing "grievous mental suffering"—the reason given in most divorces at the time. Obama Sr. signed for the papers in Cambridge, Mass., and did not contest the divorce.I would hope Time wouldn’t have been so careless as to not pick up on anything suspicious.
Well, to give them the benefit of the doubt, their article was written in April before the birth certificate became a big issue. They may have been only looking for marriage/divorce dates. If the papers list a child born in Kenya it may not have set off any alarm bells at the time.
You said — “I have never had to wait for a doc to be mailed if I was personally present at the office.”
That’s the kind of stuff that always ended up tripping up Chief Editor Korir over at API (African Press International). He would say something that just wasn’t right (in a procedure or how something normally happens) and it would cause all sorts of questions from others. The posters would start to wonder and make accusations. Korir would become incensed and say that he was doing all that he could — but — eventually something would not work out and things would be delayed or the information wasn’t correct or “whatever”...
What a game!
I’ve seen this Time link. But I believe this document has more info than is currently known. If it could have been found by normal means, we would have already seen it.
Like this: http://www.obamacrimes.info/SOETORO%20DIVORCE%20P%201-5.pdf
I’m beginning to sense, more and more, that documents are being hidden via court order or some other manipulation.
For example, JUST TWO WEEKS AGO, anyone could find THIS docket info online (http://www.obamacrimes.info/Stanley%20Ann%20Soetoro%20HI%20Divorce%20Docket.pdf),
by searching Court Records here: http://hoohiki1.courts.state.hi.us/jud/Hoohiki/main.htm?spawn=1.
You could go search the Court Records over the internet back to 1978, which would cover the date of Ann Soetoro’s divorce filing in 1980. I did it myself.
IF you try to search for records there NOW, the Year Field on the Court Records Search Page NOW only goes back to 1983. This was done AFTER Berg made the print-out available on his website, on Dec. 22 — I noticed this about 5 days ago; so have others.
It could be a COMPLETE coincidence... But in light of all of the other info Obama has not been releasing, I doubt it.
That is why you hear things like “A Good Samaritan pulled 9 babies, 4 cats and parakeet from a burning house, just moments before the house was completely engulfed in flames. All would have perished were it not for this Good Samaritan and there are many who wish to thank this brave person. However, the Good Samaritan left the scene before anyone could ask his name and thank him.
“So from all of us here on Channel 7, everyone sends their heartfelt thanks and they would like to thank you personally.”
Now notice in the Bible the Good Samaritan is nameless. The reason for this is demonstrate that man can help man for no reason other than in that moment it was the most necessary and expedient thing to do and help a man because you are a man. To help with no expectation of adulation, award or thank you. Your kindness is an act of love and the Good Samaritan is nameless as the parable exhorts all of us to act in this manner. The parable is an example of love your neighbor as thyself and so we are all the Good Samaritan. Therefore no name is given in this story.
We are exhorted by God to help another human because we are human and should act with kindness when needed and with no fuss. Your reward is in the deed.
This why we have hospitals and organizations called Good Samaritan Hospital.
BTW, how could a “Good Samaritan”, a helper in time of need and desperation, be considered an enemy? It is true they were at odds with the Jews but the point of the story is that a person from a group that agitates against another can still show compassion and help a fellow man, loving his neighbor as he would himself.
It is just plain dumb and inconsistent with the story and intent to assert the Good Samaritan as the one needing help. It is possibly a wholly inarticulate statement or willfully ignorant.
Be a Good Samaritan and help someone today.
[For reference, the deceit in question: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2156382/posts?page=227#227]
IF you try to search for records there NOW, the Year Field on the Court Records Search Page NOW only goes back to 1983. This was done AFTER Berg made the print-out available on his website, on Dec. 22 — I noticed this about 5 days ago; so have others.
Hmmmmm...coincidence that Obama is in Hawaii at the same time?
At least we'll know everything including the secret code to launch nukes. Biden can't keep his mouth shut to save his life. I wouldn't be surprised if they told Biden there would be a "generated crisis" just so he would slip.
You would introduce place of birth to establish that Mr. Brady brought three boys into the marriage from a previous marriage and therefor the boys would live with the “Natural Parent/Father as Mrs. Brady has no “Natural Claim of Parentage”.
If Maya, Barry's sister, were of another nationality it would be spelled out so the courts could deal with foreign sovereign claims by the parents.
I could go on but you get the gist.
I think it is likely a team effort. Sprinkle the lols around to make it look like one person, copy/paste long posts that sort of/sort of don’t make sense, repeat the same crap ad nauseum, etc.
“If anyone hated 0bama more than I do they would spontaneous burst into flame. ;-)”
Funniest thing I’ve heard in 2009 and it could last the whole year as such!
Hilarious.
Prestidigitator - that’s a word I haven’t read in a long time. ‘Bout sums it up, I agree.
“That’s the “magic date” for me..., because then the rules change...”
What do you mean when you say the rules change?
For someone to use religion a lot on his/her posts as justification for this and that, and to pose as a religious person, yet get one of the most famous parables Jesus taught completely wrong, is - odd.
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.