Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: edge919

BHO Sr. never acknowledged BHO II (not junior) until the 1964 divorce - at least in any paperwork that has been uncovered.

Key dates:

6/22/1962 BHO Sr. leaves Hawaii. No discussion or record of his ‘marriage’ or child in any reporting in newspapers.

9/17/1962:
Obama Senior writes extension request. In request he indicates his birth date is in 1936 and not 1934. He list ‘Married’ but no spouse name. List child ‘Roy’. At this point in time Obama wants to appear 2 years young than he is. Is 30 a problem for some reason? Indicates Married but no Spouse name listed. List Children as ‘Roy’ (no Obama II) page 26.

9/18/1962:
Lolo Soetoro comes to US.

9/20/1962:
Stanley Ann Dunham returns to Hawaii. Lives with parents.
Source:
http://www.michaelpatrickleahy.com/whatdoessarahpalinbelievechapter1.pdf

Note - interesting chain of events in 3 days in 1962....

6/6/1963:
BHO Senior writes extension request with birth date of 1936 instead of 1934. Form is mostly typed. Fields for Spouse and Child are blank. Hand written admin note and arrow to proper indicates ‘He is married’. Form does not list spouse or Child. Hand written note says - “He is married” with arrow to spouse field. Page 25. No acknowledgment of BHO II again. Indicates ‘he is married’ but is not specific who he is married to.

12/12/1963:
Kenya becomes independent. Obama Sr. (and possibly II) gains right to Kenya citizenship via Kenyan constitution.

1/20/1964:
Date Stanley Ann signs paper swearing to mistreatment - paper is filed in divorce. So after a year and a half of separation she is just now claiming ‘mistreatement’. More like abandonment.

1/23/1964:
Filing of Obama Stanley Ann Divorce

1/30/1964:
Obama signs for divorce papers. Divorce paper is first undisputed and verifiable record of Obama II. Before this time Obama Senior NEVER acknowledged Obama II in any government paperwork discovered so far.

4/21/1964:
Obama files extension request. DOB in own hand indicates he is born in 1936 (2 years different from fact) and form list Obama II as USC son who is 2 years old and list SAD as wife (untrue since divorce was final).

7/6/1964:
BHO Sr. leaves US after attempt for extention fails.

****************************************************************************

So BHO Senior never acknowledged a son until 1964 and he has a reason to - to try to stay in the US to avoid going back to a new country from the one he left.

He lies in the April filing that he is married (not now - he is legally divorced) and for the very first time acknowledges SAD and BHO II. Why?

Other than the dis-proven COLB and BC there is nothing else that validates the story of Obama II up to 1964. No other records, no other history. Nothing. His first legal, verifiable appearance in records that are not in dispute was in the divorce statement.

That divorce was used for something more than a normal divorce. What that is - who knows? But Obama Sr. tried to leverage it to say in the US. And SAD (or the Dunhams) got a verified father for a son (or grandson) at that point. So all the parties got something from it other than just ‘a divorce’.


7 posted on 10/07/2011 10:52:23 AM PDT by bluecat6 ( "A non-denial denial. They doubt our heritage, but they don't say the story is not accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: bluecat6

“BHO Sr. never acknowledged BHO II (not junior) until the 1964 divorce - at least in any paperwork that has been uncovered.”

Obama II is referenced as his son in paperwork dated August 31, 1961. See page 34 here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54015762/Barack-Hussein-Obama-Sr-Immigration-File


22 posted on 10/07/2011 1:49:49 PM PDT by Vickery2010
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: bluecat6
...Other than the dis-proven COLB and BC there is nothing else that validates the story of Obama II up to 1964. No other records, no other history. Nothing. His first legal, verifiable appearance in records that are not in dispute was in the divorce statement...

IMO that is what explains the NEED for what I see as an ADDITION to the text of the memo dated August 31, 1961.

60 posted on 10/07/2011 4:55:22 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson