Posted on 02/27/2010 5:02:33 PM PST by spacejunkie01
The reality is that is doesn’t make any difference where he was born, his father was not a US Citizen but a subject of the British Crown. That makes BO a British Subject.
I posted this on another thread but am looking for answeres or clarification to it.
You know the thing that has always amazed me is that so little attention is given to the words he supposedly wrote in one of his books back in the 90’s. In that he says that he has his birth certificate in a box or file of some sort. That is the birth certificate I want to see. maybe someone with more knowledge can provide the details of that line in whichever book it was.
Thanks
The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says different.
Also, President Chester A. Arthur’s father was born in Ireland.
I’m willing to set aside the whole natural-born issue (for now) but it really comes down to one single point:
If he has nothing to hide, then show us the damned birth certificate and PROVE there is nothing to hide.
Continued refusal suggests that he DOES have something to hide and that stinks to high heaven.
I mean who really knows? Obama’s earliest memory is as a muslin in Indonesia.
I found this from earlier. Where is that birth certificate???
Saturday, September 12, 2009 11:21:55 AM · 70 of 126
Wild Irish Rogue to landerwy
” Maybe someone can help me out here but I recall during the election where someone posted a quote from one of his books referring to a birth certificate of his in a shoebox or something like that. Was i up in the night? “
Dreams From My Father Page 26
Obama is discussing an interview that his father..well, that BO1 gave to the Honolulu Star-Bulletin upon his graduation from the University of Hawaii.
Barry describes how his father was angry and although his father did not personally experience segregation -
he “ detected “ discrimination and self segregation and scolded the university and society in the interview.
His father did note “ with amusement “ that Caucasians in Hawaii were often at the receiving end of discrimination.
BO1 seemed to have a big, old chip on his shoulder.
And BO2 was upset that in the long interview-he never mentioned that he had a wife or baby son.
Which was odd.
Barry blamed this omission on a fight between the parents or an editorial decision.
Anyway-Barry wrote on page 26
” I discovered the article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school.”
Neither his grandparents nor his mother had ever shown him the article
( which was odd ) and it seems Barry was snooping.
I wonder if whatever was on the BC sent Barry into his high school tailspin of smoking crack , pot, booze ,
poor grades and generally not giving a damn.
He wrote in his book that he came to realize that his grandfather was a typical white liar who
made up stories about the family and it’s history.
And his grandmother was only slightly more believeable.
He no longer trusted their version of events.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies
There are libraries in many large cities that have archived copies of Hawaii newspapers. I remember back in the mid 70’s doing research in New Orleans using such a method.
Very hard to edit thousands of stored microfiched copies all across the country. Ones that have not been edited...at all.
I'm also not one to push too hard on the "natural born/father was a British Subject" issue (although it's legit) but I do want to know what the man is hiding. The longer and more forcefully he continues to hide those details, the more strongly I feel the need to know what it is that's so important.
The Birth Certificate Number Mystery
| 1. August 4, 1961: Obama born in Hawaii 2. August 5, 1961: Nordyke twins born in Hawaii 3. Nordyke birth certificate number on top of birth certificate: 4. One twin: 61 10637 5. Other twin: 61 10638 6. Obama birth certificate number: 61 10641 7. The information above has been displayed on the Internet, so it is part of the public record. 8. If the above information is displayed all over the internet for anyone to see, then why can't the Hawaii government be forced to legally explain the following controversy: 9. That is, if Obama was born one day BEFORE the Nordyke twins -- Aug. 4 vs. Aug, 5 -- then why is Obama's birth certificate number 3 numbers higher -- 10638 vs. Obama's 10641 -- than the Nordyke's number? 10. So why can't Hawaii officials, like Dr. Fukino, be forced to legally explain why Obama's birth certificate number is higher than the Nordyke twins' number, if the numbers are already part of the public record? |
One wonders what happened tot he child who had the number before Barry took it/got it/ was given it later? I mean, he’s using a SS# from a man who lived more than a hundred years ago, so how can anyone know?
I believe that it was researchers working for the Hillary Clinton campaign who went to Hawaii and found the microfiche of Obama’s birth announcements from both local Honolulu newspapers. The first mention of the birth announcements that I saw was on a pro-Hillary/Anti-Obama blog called “Texas Darlin;”
The announcements are still available at the State Library in Honolulu.
The following is excerpted from WorldNetDaily.com which looked into the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and Honolulu Advertiser birth announcements.
“The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, for example, according to its website, now reprints birth information it receives from Hawaii’s Department of Health.
“We don’t have an editor who handles birth and marriage announcements; we print what we receive from the Department of Health Vital Statistics System,” a Star-Bulletin newsroom operator explained to WND.
The operator said, “This is how we’ve always done it.”
Likewise, the Honolulu Advertiser, which ran a Barack Obama birth announcement in the Aug. 13, 1961, Sunday Advertiser, relies on the state-issued certification, rather than reporting from hospitals.
The Advertiser’s Marsha McFadden told WND at the time of Obama’s birth announcement, the newspaper got all of its information from the state Department of Health. That would include the address.
“If we published it, it came from the state,” she said.
She said today’s rules are different. Anyone can submit information for announcements but the newspaper requires a birth document to verify. It also no longer uses addresses.
Hawaii State Registrar Dr. Alvin Onaka has told WND that most birth records stem from a hospital report. Documentation for children not born in hospitals depends on other records, such as the pregnant mother’s prenatal exams, the statement of an attending midwife and a verification of the birth of a live child.
Onaka did not cite any independent investigative procedures for a report that would be submitted by a midwife.
In Hawaii, WND was able to locate at the Honolulu public library microfilm of a notice placed in the Sunday Advertiser Aug. 13, 1961. The announcement in the “Births, Marriages, Death” section read: “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug. 4.”
Please don't get me wrong, I am with the real truth all the way and know we have not got it. The residences of the Dunhams/Obamas have all been shown. Now on that highway of 6085 Kalianole (sp) is certainly a very fine house. There is a small cottage also there and looks like a trailer with a roof. It is beautifully landscaped.
Irrespective of that, a good woman who lived at 6075, mantains she absolutely never saw a young black student type with a young white girl and child. FWIW.
Why do I feel more and more like I’m actually living through George Orwell’s 1984? Isn’t this exactly the kind of work the book’s main character did?
FYI:
“Obama’s Hawaii boyhood homes drawing gawkers”
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/SPECIALOBAMA08
"Ayn Rand and George Orwell were not just ordinary novelists they were prophets who wrote in novel format."
Here is the birth announcement story.
In the spring of 2008, we asked several Hawaii posters to check with the historical archives of the newspapers to see if a birth announcement could be found. The answer we got is that there had been mergers and the archives were disposed of and not available in any format.
We then suggested to all researchers nationally to go to their local libraries and attempt to locate microfiche copies of the Hawaii papers. One microfiche announcement was located; later a second microfiche announcement was located. Two and two only.
There is nothing about the announcement that is probative. It says exactly what it would say if he were born in Kenya which he was. No hospital, no doctor, no one remembers or knows anything about it; today, no hospital identified.
Although the address seems inappropriate, there was a second residence on the back of the property and there is some evidence that Stanley Ann's mother and father lived there. The evidence is thin but not refuted.
The micro fiche copy is capable of being viewed as altered--there is a line just above the Obama notice; the type face size changes; the Nordyke twins should have appeared in that location. Maybe the announcement is valid--maybe it is not.
My own thesis is that there was a filing with vital statistics on August 8, 1991--under the statute, Madeline could have gone to Public Health and filed out the form stating that Stanley Ann had been a Hawaii resident for over a year and it would have been accepted and a COLB showing Hawaii would have been issued even though everyone knew he was born in Mombasa. And the announcement would have been published in exactly the form we have it.
So my attitude about the announcement has been "who cares"--it doesn't address the issue of where he was born. A real legal inquiry would ignore the announcement on the question of birth location.
This issue about whether or not it makes a difference where he was born has been addressed. I know that many disagree with my view. I have argued Appellate cases; I know the DC Constitutional Law Bar; I am directly involved in the politics--I can tell you that the ultimate bottom line is that if he gets by the Born in Hawaii issue, he wins. If the Court concludes he was born in Hawaii, he wins. Simple as that.
I love all these locker room lawyer arguments about his parent's citizenship; his Indonesia conversion; whatever. And they have some merit. But in the political environment in which we are operating today, if this argument ever got to the Supreme Court, the Court would hold that subsequent adoption of the 14th Amendment resolved the natural born issue as to anyone who was born in the US.
In fact, as I have pointed out, there is risk in this position--if it gets to the Supreme Court on facts based on his birth in Hawaii, the Court will not only resolve the case against you, the result will probably bind state election officials who might otherwise be able to kick him off the ballot in 2012. You don't want to be before the Court with this argument unless your factual argument is based on his birth in Mombasa--believe it.
“tacit admission”: acquiescence and endurance, when acts are done by another, which if wrongfully done, are encroachments, and call for resistance and opposition, are evidence, as a tacit admission that such acts could not be legally resisted.
We, Obama’s political enemies, have accused him of being a liar and a fraud. He remains silent.
By making no response, he has made a tacit admission. As long as he remains silent, when he could say, “Here is the proof” he continues to admit our allegations of lawlessness and oath breaking on his part.
If he ever does respond, with or without proof, he can supply an apology as well for wasting millions of tax dollars, with or without his resignation.
I am aware of your beliefs on this subject and find your rebuttals quite reasoned and food for thought. I did mention the good woman though and we will keep on agreeing to disagree. I find this the most fascinating, yet frustrating thing, in genealogical research. Superseding the search for Howard Hughes Jr. The public has an absolute right to a fair explanation of the birth of their President.
They ain't got it! (chuckle).
Ok, I can’t believe I am going to sound like I am defending OB here. But here is my understanding of how births are entered into the town or city record. The births are entered by the town or city clerk by the order in which they are received or by whichever one is on top of the pile. So baby B born the day after baby A could have a birth certificate number which is lower because the record for baby b was received first and entered into the town or city records. So the birth certificate number only tells that the clerk received OB’s birth information first or his info was on the top of the pile so it was entered first. His info could have been recorded before someone born several days earlier whose info was received later. My understanding is that the birth certficate number does not show an exact timeline of every birth, but shows the order a birth was entered into the record. Reasons a record was received later rather then sooner could be misplacement, indecisive parents (can’t choose a name or decide to keep the child), etc.
As far as I know death & marriage records are also entered when received not necessarily by date or time of event. So a death or marriage which happened today could have a higher record number then one which happens tomorrow.
Regarding OB’s eligibility, I think it is more relative that OB was born a dual citizen. Dual citizenship of any kind should automatically disallow someone from the presidency. I feel like we are living in the age of lunacy.
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.