Posted on 01/20/2012 4:15:12 PM PST by usar91B
New Obama 2012 Campaign Flyer: "I was born in Hawaii to a Single Mother..."
This flyer is currently being shared / "re-shared" on Facebook. I am curious as to where it originated and thought it might interest my fellow freepers. I have only posted once or twice.. long ago, so 'bare' with me. ;) The text reads:
"I was born in Hawaii to a single mother.
I was raised in Kansas by my two loving grandparents.
I went to Harvard Law School and became a community organizer in Chicago.
My story is one told a million times over in this country; from sea to shining sea. It is a dream shared by all who come to this country seeking opportunity and prosperity.
I am NOT RADICAL.
I am NOT SOCIALIST.
I am NOT A MUSLIM TERRORIST.
I am NOT THE ANTI-CHRIST.
I am Barack Hussein Obama and I am the American Dream."
2012 BARACKOBAMA.COM
“He wasn't born on August 4, 1961; there is no real evidence that Stanley ever even met him prior to December of 1970 (although to be fair there is a suggestion that may support a December 1969 date).”
From Seize:
To believe your totally undocumented speculations claiming an alternate mom for Barry, you must assert that the following DOCUMENTS were FORGED...documents in the case of the INS absolutely screw up Barry's early family narrative and show BHO Sr. to be a loathsome character:
1. U of HI transcripts confirmed by U of WA transfer credit confirm that SADO was in Russian class with BHO Sr. in the fall of 1960.
2. INS files showing that INS totally believed U of Hi explicit reports of the marriage on Feb 2, 1961 and SADO’s intent to leave HI and study in WA in the fall of 1961..and also report of Baby Barry.
3. The HI newspaper announcements of Barry's birth to BHO Sr and Stanley Ann (wherever that may have occurred). There is no "real" evidence that any of these pieces of evidence were forged. Then there is the photograph of Barry's Gramps, Stanley Dunham on the dock with BHO Sr at Srs departure from HI.
All three of your points are incorrect on the record. I am going to address the transcript record point in part for the reason that I have always recognized the issue and have what I view as a response.
I do not think you need to reject the academic story in order to understand that there were two women. You could in fact see Stanley in Seattle in this role without much damage to the fairy tale and I have elsewhere set out an analysis for how that would have happened. However since I have now come to the conclusion that is probably not the actual Seattle story, I am going to point out some of the deficiencies in the record.
The first document to address is the actual “original entry” U of W transcript. That document in the WND publication is a photocopy of the academic record showing two holes at the top on which someone has written “deceased 11-7-95".
What Corsi and WND originally published was a computer printout of the information on the original entry transcript. However in 1961-62, these records were maintained manually and not by computer and we are told that the computer printout is the current system and that the original entry was simply transcribed. Since I have seen original entry transcripts for the period recently in the original format, I am a little skeptical about that story–which ones were converted? When? Why were some converted and not others? Who decided what to convert?
But I think we are now well beyond this particular phase of the analysis so I have not addressed the issue.
However looking at the original entry transcript, I believe there are deficiencies in it that call its validity into doubt.
What this document purports to reflect is that Stanley enrolled in Night School Fall Quarter, 1961 (and Winter Quarter 1962) and took classes with the results specified, and having achieved a satisfactory academic record in those classes, transferred into the regular University at the beginning of Spring Quarter, 1962. So Administration would have prepared a document that looked like this transcript in March of 1962.
As indicated by the holes at the top, the original document was designed for insertion into a Binder and the procedure then had the document remain in the Binder throughout the student’s attendance at the U.
The first issue arose when Corsi published an article attributing this record as evidence that Stanley had enrolled at the U and was in class on August 19, 1961. We know that is not correct because the U was closed and in Lock Down on August 19, 1961. We pointed that out and although the U responded by saying “no” the record reflects the August 19 events, we see from Corsi’s recent articles and book that he now knows that the event actually happened on September 19 when the student registered for Night School which started classes the following week.
The purported record on that issue is in the typewritten entry material in the lower right hand corner of the transcript and is set out as 8-19-61. At the time we originally looked at that transcript, we looked at the 8-19 and as you can see, the 8 would be on a fold and on a line on the form and we assumed that when the original entry document was transcribed into the computer system, the typist looked at the 8 and didn’t see that the bottom loop in the 8 was not closed so that it was in fact a 9.
However now, having studied the actual document, that doesn’t appear to be correct. In fact, the original entry appears to be an 8. So what they are asking you to believe is that the typist, having herself been on vacation on 8-19; personally knowing that the school had been locked down from the 19th of August until the second week in September, wrote it that way and both of the reviewers (who were also on vacation on August 19) who looked at the document passed it with the incorrect entry. Possible. Typo’s happen and are overlooked.
But then, as we look at the original entry transcript, we see other defects.
The form in use in 1962 had lines in the two columns intended for entry of the academic record. The system may have had the student information and prior record typed but it was designed so that the original entry transcript was not removed from the binder–the academic record was entered by hand. On this document, the information from “Spring QTR 62" on down would have been handwritten. This form, contemplating typed entry was not in use until later periods.
Further, the typed entries were all made with the same typewriter.
I do not view the transcript as regular on its face.
Further, the woman living on Capital Hill would have had the original name of Anna (Maryanna or Adrianna) Toutinghi (Obama). So when we see Anna Toutinghi, living in a dwelling managed by Joseph and Mary Toutinghi, we assume she didn’t get there by looking in the Classified Ads for rentals.
Capital Hill would not have been the location of choice for her either. Students at the U would have lived in this kind of dwelling North of the University where this kind of residences were abundant and cheaper. There were students living on Capital Hill in this area but they were students at Seattle University which was much closer and more convenient. And, Seattle University was the school at which the Toutinghi’s had continuing relationships.
Then, we proceed to the U of Hawaii record. You reference a U of H transcript. I don’t know of any U of H transcript–all I have seen is a letter purporting to describe Stanley’s attendance. There are a couple of problems with the letter.
It tells us that Stanley attended U of H beginning Spring Quarter, 1963 and attended straight through to a BA degree. If she had a year of academic credits from the U, she would not have needed to attend for that long a period which suggests to me that in March of 1963 when she entered Hawaii, those credits were not on her record.
Further, the Russian class in the fall of 1960 is suspect for two reasons. It appears that Hawaii didn’t teach that class until 1962. Further, an entering Freshman (Stanley, fall 60) would not have just walked in signing up for upper division classes and not for Freshman English and other Freshman topics. At best, the letter suggests the student at Hawaii in 1960 was not Stanley.
There are other reasons to be suspicious of Mary’s recounting of events of that period that are not on the record at this point.
Contrary to your assertion, the INS record indicates that INS was very suspicious of the story of the marriage and wanted to see confirmation it was an actual good faith marriage before relying on it for Visa purposes.
And there is an extensive analysis which has been posted on Free Republic showing that the announcement was almost certainly a fraudulent document. Further, it does not reflect a substantive record of events even if it were real.
Thanks for taking the time to provide a detailed reply, including the identity of the “Anna” in the alternate mom narrative.
I note that you do not, yet, question the INS documents for BHO Sr.
I am having “brain issues” today from my ME/CFS and will try to respond properly later.
LucyT:
I hope you will ping the list with this information.
. . . . Check out # 221 for important post of the day/week/year.
Thanks David.
bbl
Were the the Russian classes taught at the East-West Center?
Is this where Obama and Stanley met in 1960?
May 9, 1961 VP Johnson gave a dedication speech during a ground breaking ceremony for the East West center.
Located a photo the ceremony. Not sure the pic has been previously posted.
“His parents met while both were attending the East-West Center of the University of Hawaii at Manoa, where his father was enrolled as a foreign student”
http://genealogy.about.com/od/aframertrees/p/barack_obama.htm
The ground breaking ceremony for the EW center was May 1961.
Were the classes in satellite rooms?
I checked out the East West Centre ages ago...wiki has it that it opened in 1962. And numerous searches have not been able to find any teachers of Russian at the University of Hawaii at that time.
Presumably that would be where the events in the Dreams legend would have taken place. But there is a dispute about when the Russian classes would have commenced and there is argument that they did not start until 62.
And when you look at the aggregate record of the academic activities purporting to be Stanley, it has too many disconnects. As an entering Freshman, she isn't going to have been in those classes in the fall quarter of 1960.
Futher, for that matter, under what theory would Senior, as a student adding an econ major to an existing degree and an MA in econ, all in three years, be studying Russian?
All you know about the record is a letter from someone at the U of H. As far as I know, no one has ever seen any kind of real evidentary record such as a transcript for Senior, Anna, or Stanley.
At the time the purported U of W transcript was prepared, there was no longer a supply of the correct older transcript form available (with lines for handwritten entry of grades and classes) and a typewriter was quicker and easier; so that was what was used. Who would know? Only someone who had seen and recalled what the correct form and procedure in use in 1961-62 would have been.
The U of W record looks a lot more professional but when you look at it with the knowledge of when particular forms were in use and how they originated, they are not correct either.
Remember also, the U of W and Seattle interval for Stanley is not in Dreams. This was a significant period. If zero had been there with her, it would have been particularly significant. Yet it is just not anywhere to be found.
How could they possibly have missed it? How would even Ayers writing Dreams for zero have failed to provide cover for that period? The best answer is that it didn't happen.
"Is this where Obama and Stanley met in 1960?" Only in Dreams. Dreams is a fairy tale. There is no credible evidence Stanley ever even met Senior until the late 60's.
Seems I may have seen the grounding breaking pic before..the dorm for the students was named Hale Manor.
There’s too many things on my plate...bouncing from Hawaii to natural born citizen.
Have you seen the GB’n pic with Johnson?
Typical Obama...issuing another strongly worded letter this time regarding his summons to Atlanta on Thursday!
Obama’s Private Attorney Refusing To Show Up At
Obama’s Georgia Ballot Access Challenge Hearings
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/01/obamas-attorney-refusing-to-show-up-at.html
thanks, starts on page 77, glanced through it, seems that’s where the wiki entry came from, wiki is easier to read.
On May 9, 1961, then U.S. Vice President Lyndon Johnson was a guest at groundbreaking ceremonies for the East–West Center’s first six buildings.[13] Five of the new buildings, designed by architect I. M. Pei, were built along the new East–West Road where a new 21-acre (85,000 m2) East–West Center campus just west of Manoa Stream on the east side of the university campus replaced chicken coops, temporary wooden buildings for faculty housing, and the Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station.[14] A sixth building built under the federal grant for the East–West Center was Edmondson Hall, designed by architect Albin Kubala and built on McCarthy Mall.[15]
Four of the six buildings were completed and opened in September 1962:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Center
TICKS ME OFF that that web site no longer allows its articles to be printed out.
What part of the book is the relevant part?
pg 77-80
The enigma?
We can spend days contemplating the time lines and still not resolve them. Like a wilderness of mirrors. None of the pieces fit, because the entire identity was conjured.
In the past I found Jack Cashill’s analysis more powerful than Corsi or others. He did not dwell on details but focused on eliminating things that did not seem plausible.
What we know:
1. Obama has never shown proof of his eligibility.
2. We do not know where he was born or who his father actually is.
3. Nancy Pelosi stepped in during the certification phase and acted where the HI state officials refused to certify his eligibility.
4. Nancy Pelosi did not give all states the standard certification document. (she knew she falsely certified him)
5. His purported parents never lived together.
6. He uses a fake SSN that has been in use at least since his draft registration was forged.
7. No one who honestly looks at the 1st or 2nd COLB that he released believes them to be anything other than a forgery. The last one is clearly made from several document sources.
Now, if we can determine these to be valid statement, why will none in Congress or the Senate touch this. They would not from the first.
The real question is who put this post turtle where he is. (He did not get there by himself, he does not know what to do where he is, he cannot get down by himself, but the real question is what fool put him there?)
Frightening thought, has the entire government been bought off? Or threatened with their life?
Does not compute.
Thanks for the link.
The wording of the letter is no surprise.
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.