Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
I didn’t think to get a copy of it before it became “Fake Kenyan Birth Certificate”. Does anyone have a copy of it when it was darker and more torn?
BP2, I think I love you.
It looks like someone tried to ‘erase’ the stain and took the top of the lower case d off. That’s what it looks like to me.
Maybe because the FBI is involved.
Where is your post about the background material.....Wasn’t there a striped one at one time?
I have it saved from 9:58 a.m. CDT Sunday morning, but I don’t know how to post it.
I thought the burger fell off and took some of the paper with it.
You can open a photobucket account and upload the picture to the website. Then once it’s uploaded (it will ask if you want to add a tag, just click go to album) Roll your cursor over the picture and four little boxes will pop up, copy and paste the “HTML” code and paste in a comment box.
Someone may have a better way, but that’s how I do it.
I would expect that the “Independent Board” would include document experts.
But, even if the authentication process could be circumvented, the law would be on the books and could be enforced if someone submitted a forgery. Right now, we have no recourse, except for the Generals hauling him out of there. Or the DCPD. Or the Park Police?
GregNH wrote: I like the explanation of “If your citizenship is dependent on a law then you are not a NBC”
The question is misleading insofar as it includes one or more false assumptions. So, I’ll start with a little background.
The supreme law of the United States of America is the Constitution and Amendmens thereto. Everything else is subordinated to the Articles of the Constitution, which is why the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is virtually powerless to remove any usurper in unlawful occupation of the Office of the President as the court of original jurisdiction. The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution giving Congress the sole authority to inaugurate and remove a President and Vice President to the Congress. Congress in turn subsequently authorized by Public Law and statute for the Supreme Court to establish an inferior court, the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, to be the only Federal with jurisdiction for the removal of Federal Public Officers, which inludes the President of the United States (POTUS).
With respect to questions about a “citizen” versus a “natural born citizen”, The Articles of the Constitution is superior to and take precedence over anything Congress enacts as a Public Law and statute in the U.S. Code and anything the Supreme Court and inferior courts hold as their decisions. This is what is meant by the impropriety of legislating from the bench. The only lawful means of changing and altering the Constitution is for Congress to lawfully enact an Amendment to the Constitution.
Since the “natural born citizen” phrase is a provision of the Constitution, no Public Law and statute can lawfully change the meaning of the phrase as it was stated in the Constitution without an Amendment doing so. At the time the Constitution was adopted, it did not include any provisions to determine the requirements for being a citizen of the United States, because each State was already responsible for enacting their own State Constitutions and state laws and statutes governing natural born and naturalized citizenship in the State. Whosoever was a citizen of a State was thereby also a citizen of the United States of America.
This circumstance arose as a consequence of the sequence of events occuring during the American Revolutionary War. Upon adoption of the Declaration of Independence by Congress on 4 July 1776, the preceding English or British common-law governing citizenship was abolished. Since the States in the Continental Congress had not yet formed a national government, each State was responsible for the task of replacing the former British legal codes and common-law by enacting its own state Public Laws. The adoption of the Articles of Confederation and later adoption of the Constitution resulted in many important changes, but Congress continued to respect the power of each State to enact its own citizenship laws in the State constitution and/or public laws and statures of the state. As a result, the qualifications for natural born and naturalized citizenship were sometimes different from one State to the next. The statutory laws of some States continued the previous common-law in part before changing it altogether at a later date, while other Sates adopted little or none of the previous common-law in their new statutory law. Uniform national laws and statutes regarding citizenship and naturalization were not established by the federal Government of the United States until the mid-19th Century.
Consequently, the qualifications and methods for determining who was a natural born citizen with allegiance only to the United States was determined by state constitutions and or state laws or statutes governing who was a natural born citizen of the State during the Early Republic. In every circumstance, however, a person could be natural born with one and only one allegiance and attendant citizenship to a sovereign government. Dual citizenship was not recognized.
What created a conflict, however, was the establishemnt of the Federal uniform citizenship and naturalization statutory laws which began to confer U.S. citizenship upon persons who were previously ineliigible due to the dual citizenship. The Founding Fathers included the “natural born citizen” phrase in the Constitution for the stated purpsoe of excluding any person natural born with an allegiance to a foreign sovereign and government from being eligible to the Office of the President and Commander-in-Chief of the American Army resposnsible for protecting the Constitution and Citizens of the Republic from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Dual citizenship was not recognized in the Law of Nations at the time the Constitution was adopted, so a person could be born with allegiance and therefore citizenship to only one sovereign and nation. When the Law of Nations and the Federal staturoty laws were changed to begin recognition of dual and multiple citizenship status, a potential conflict was created with the original “natural born citizen” phrase in the Constitution.
Absent an Amendment to the Constitution which specifically changes the “natural born citizen” phrase and its purpose as stated by the Founding Fathers, previous Supreme Court decisions demand that the phrase and its intended purpose take precedence as superior law over any Federal statutory law, state constitution, state law, or Supreme Court case law.
Consequently, who was and was not a natural born citizen was and still may be determined by state constitutional law, state statutory law, Federal statutory law, and Federal case law as determined by Congress; but it may only do so to the extent it gives effect to the Founding Fathers’ intent and Constitutional phrase to make a person eligible to the Office of the President who is a natural born citizen as it existed at the adoption of the Constitution, which did not admit any possible allegiance to a foreign sovereign and government at birth.
Let’s see if anyone else responds to you first. If not, I’ll try that.
Honestly, I’ve compared what I saved early Sunday to what’s at the link now and really don’t see a difference. I believe that the phantom “6” and “K” probably really are just a result of jpeg anomalies. I’m counting on the right folks having hard copies in safe keeping to be examined at the right time.
I DO see differences between what is posted at the link with this thread and the “punked” document.
Why would a person create a fake birth certificate with a clod of whatever stuck to it....?
The newspaper birth announcement
If he was born in Kenya, and spotted by Susan Blake in Seattle 3 weeks earlier, Obama and his momma likely flew through Hawaii en route to Seattle. It would have been quite convenient for Ann Dunham or her mother to have registered Obama via a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" or "Certificate of Late Birth"
Letter from Obama saying he was born in Kapiolani Medical Center
His spokesman Gibbs dances around the subject everytime he's asked at the daily press briefing. Kapiolani won't confirm it's authenticity either. And there's still that article where his own sister said he was born at Queens Medical Center. Yet others in his family, before knowing that NBC was an important issue, slipped up and said he was born in Kenya.
Marriage in Hawaii
It may have been shown for the 1964 divorce. Oddly, investigators searching have not discovered a header for it in any Hawaiian database or microfiche index. Just like a Kenyan birth certificate, the archives in Hawaii today probably wouldn't contain a Marriage Certificate from Kenya. For that matter, the marriage certificate from Ann Dunham's Indonesian marriage with Lolo Soetoro, filed for divorce in 1980 in Hawaii, has never been found either...
Because the “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii says so
Hawaiian birth certificate law, codified in HRS §338, can allow for a:
“Certificate of Hawaiian Birth”, terminated in 1972 after Obama’s 1961 birth, to be substituted for a ...Even the punk'd birth certificate that floated up yesterday has more plausibility than the birth certificate he's shown from Hawaii thus far.
“Certificate of Late Birth”, thence a ...
“Certificate of Live Birth”, thence a shortened, abstracted ...
“Certification of Live Birth”, which wasn't first issued until Nov 2001.
ALL PREVIOUS & ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES ARE MASKED
If you’ve ever kept old documents, as I have
boxes of them ;), many of mine have similar
deterioration or brownish/rust stains, etc.
on them, especially when the old staples,
paper clips were used, which weren’t made of
the more rust free used now.
Plus any drops of anything on the paper could
oxidize over the years and show up, and
non-acidic paper definitely ages noticeably.
The Amendments to the Constitution are not inferior in status to the Articles of the Constitution, they are one and the same.
The term “Natural Born Citizen” with respect to its usage in Article 2 Section One has never been tested in court for further definition.
The current US Supreme Court has rejected hearing any and all cases (thus far) that seek to test the meaning of the term natural born citizen with reference to the eligibilty of Barack Obama to be the 44th President of the United States.
The high court has denied a hearing to several law suits due to “lack of standing” by plaintiffs.
The 14th Amendment says that “All persons BORN or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside...” Thus far in American history, including the election of Barack Obama, it is the 14th Amendment’s definition that has prevailed. In effect, without further clarification, a BORN citizen is identical to a Natural Born Citizen and is distinguished from a “naturalized citizen.”
Notice if there is a tear at the top on the right. Like where a fold is. The original I saw, but didn’t download, had a tear at the top.
CYMRAEG
This account has been banned or suspended.
~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you ..!! You guys must have 20 monitors
and 10 arms working simultaneously to fumigate
all these intruding alien critters.
I don’t see a tear on the top edge, but there is an apparent tear where it was folded several inches down, on the vertical fold that runs between R and T in “BIRTH” and horizontally just below and to the right of “Stanley Ann OBAMA.”
For that matter, there appear to be small tears where most of the vertical and horizontal folds meet, as you would expect with old paper.
If you’re looking for a tear on the edge, I may not have saved the earliest copy.
No don’t need to be hopeful or disappointed about the Obama Kenyan BC. Just one more thing in a long line of issues surrounding his birth that has not been authenticated or tossed out at this point.
No, it’s not on the edge, it’s on the fold.
That’s what made me start to go “huh?” and think I was losing my mind because the first one I saw looked much more aged, yellowed and some tearing on the folds, like something that had been folded for quite some time.
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.