You may have thought Barack Obama ended the eligibility debate, and certainly the birth certificate debate, with his release of what purports to be his long-awaited, long-form document.
But it’s not over – not by a long shot.
Beginning today in WND – and extending throughout the week – we will be presenting what I believe is compelling new evidence that Obama is not only ineligible to be president, but that the document released by the White House is fraudulent.
Read More at WND by Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
We here at WJ do care about your wrists and any possible injuries you may incur.
http://www.carpal-tunnel-store.com/
At least I am sympathetic enough.
Meant for Ellen.
The birth debate is not over? it will be over when Obozo our Liar in chief shows his real certificate, and we will set on our hands, having nothing left to fight against him with!! Let It Go!!!! We do not want to be stuck on a sisngle issue!!
Let it go? No, I don't believe we should let it go. That is what they are hoping for.I believe I agree with your intent. What I propose is we place it on a back burner. Continue gathering information to use at a later date.We can't let it "die" in the media. It will be forgotten. We have the proof with the BC, lets move on to the next piece of evidence. You are right though. We are getting stuck on a single issue.
We here at WJ do care about Ellen's wrists and any possible injuries she may incur. http://www.carpal-tunnel-store.com/
At least I am sympathetic enough.
Funny!
Gary funny!
Be careful: the birth certificate is a trap! They are using the birth certificate to distract us from all the other, more important, things going on right now. The economy is sinking fast, the dollar is down 12% in four months, the Fed is still printing money to mortgage our childrens' future, the Wall Street crooks are manipulating the market to keep it from crashing, Obama has made a mess of international affairs, etc. etc. While America is fussing over whether that phony piece of paper is a fake or not, Obama and his crew of crooks have free reign to operate "under the radar" on whatever evil they wish to do. When they are through, or there is a major uproar about the BC, they will admit it was a fake as a "joke on the birthers" and point to the UKLele signature as proof that it was just a joke. No penalty for a stupid college type prank, the joke was on America as the dirty work behind the scenes surfaces….Don't keep your eyes on the garbage they are tossing in front of us, watch your back! I know the birth certificate is important to blow up the hornet's nest that is Obama's story, but be wary, don't fall for the bait.
AND WHY DO YOU NOT THINK HIS BRITH CERTIFICATE is not important? it would mean he is not our president, and we must kick him the hell out of our white house, and elect somene else, and not biden, for he would know the truth to, it was all a faud.
A thousand thumbs up!
I hate to burst your bubble, but the birth certificate is real! BE SURE THAT YOU GO TO amazon.com or wndsuperstore.com and PRE-ORDER "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President", by Dr. Jerome Corsi coming out May 17th. It will help you better understand just whom you're defending!! "The anointed one" (Sean Hannity) is an absolute fraud and that's going to be proven in the not too distant future, I believe. Our Sovereign God is not going let let him laugh at and belittle those who are pressing him for the truth! Can't you see he's not shown any of his records??? In this book, it will probably expose where he might just not have attended Columbia University but 9 months instead of the 2 years he got a degree for. Just hang in there! Listen to what Dr. Corsi and Joseph Farah–both from WorldNetDaily.com or wnd.com and also, WhistleBlower Magazine, and you'll learn lots of the truth!!!
In Crist Jesus, Nellie Austin
You say the BC is real? Then you must have the answers to the questions about it. If you will give me the answers to the questions in the article, or links would suffice, then you might change my and others beliefs. I like facts, not opinions. So far, the facts show it to be a fake.
True!
Seeks_The _ Truth i agree with you on the birth certificate.
NRHA37 i disagree with you on the birth certificate!
Guest your post has merit but i disagree about the birth certificate.
The conspiracy of the news media in this is sickening. No one mainstream news source is exposing the fraud and they think the people are their stooges to control.
I am aware of all the issues happening behind our backs BUT if this birth certificate is fraud and proves he is NOT eligible to be our president, then OUT he goes and all his changes will be null and void. Then they (congress) needs to go down the line and kick out all the corruptive friends of his that he put in offices and advisors and the rest that came with him. I want my country back.
yes, people think it's not important, but it is, i think the ones telling us it's not important are the liberal jack asses, so we, the people forget get about it, but hell no, it's too important.
What a pack of lying snakes… I have doubt that this campaign will dethrone his royal ass while he is in office, but God WILL NOT help him when he is out of office… because Americans will not tolerate this!
God does not involve himself in your measly life because you don't have one!
Ed your comment is uncalled for! You need to get a life!
Thank you Alexia.
What total bullshit!!!!!!!!!!
Ed i agree your comments were just bull shit !!!!!
Farah needs to include Donald Trump in on the sharing of information which he has compiled on Obama's birth certificate. This is one issue which i feel strongly about & i only want the truth good or bad to come out. If this guy Obama is not certified to be president then the public should know & especially those who voted for him.
The fact that shifting our focus to Osama's death instead of Obama's treason could be the most classic hoax ever pulled off in American history. Wag the dog, smoke and mirrors, bait and switch, whatever…. Obama has no birth certificate, not a legitimate one anyway. British father, crony grandparents, communist influences..the man is a stringless pinocchio (using Sharia law to tell lies with no strings attached), the next lie could be damaging enough to really hurt our economy. The Nazi high command only took two years to counterfeit the $20 bill, what makes you think a law firm couldn't find an adobe expert who could recreat a birth certificate in three ?
When I am constantly saddened about this abuse of our Constitution, I think of the soldiers on the bank of the Delaware. Who gets in this boat in freezing weather and risks their life to support Gen. Washington ? Why aren't any Americans willing to get in the boat and defend our Constitution ? Has apathy killed us ? Are we too afraid to question Congress over and over again until we get the truth ? I will not give up or I will die trying.
Remembering the tree of liberty, etc,etc. Not too far off it seems. Preparedness is key.
Well said.
I thank you very much Mr. Farah for keeping us informed. I'm trying to finish all my other books now so that I can focus on Dr. Corsi's new book. I advertise on absolutely everything that I write or put on the Internet. We're going to win with you guys help!!! Thanks heaps!!! I'm loving your WorldNetWeekly!! I come down every Sunday morning early to see what's next!! All of you are doing a really great service and job publishing such an awesome "magazine". In Christ Jesus.
Joseph Farah, I know that you know that America is Israel by the seed of Joseph(Gen. 48:16) and that we have placed the "forbidden foreigner"(Deuteronomy 17:15) or non-Israelite over u.s, as well as, a self-professed Marxist(Anti-Christ by defintion, as Islam), as were the Israelites Teddy R, Wilson, FDR, Carter, ec., etc., etc.! No? Hopefully, you'll hang around long enough to find out. Watch!
Men with dark eyebrows and mustache and white hair have diabetes.
Duh Otay DUMB-ASS
Excuse me people of low IQ, but you must know that idiots like this guy only incite anger and hatred to bilk you and become rich like Russ Limberger!
Donny what rock did you come out from under? May i ask are you just mentally challenged or just plain stupid?
Alexia, snakes come out from under rocks and they arent that stupid.
Ern Donny sounds like another alias of James McPherson's possibly?
NO MATTER WHAT EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED, NO ONE IN THE D.O.J. WILL TAKE THIS ON. THE B.C. DOCUMENT MAY NEVER BE PROVEN. THE ONLY WAY WE REMOVE THIS P.O.S. IS IN THE VOTING BOOTH… PERIOD. THE MARXIST-SOCIALISTS POTUS HAS STACKED THE DECK… AND WE LET HIM. SHAME ON US. VOTE THEM ALL OUT, WITHOUT EXCEPTION IN 2012.
IF WE CAN ELIMINATE POLITICAL CORRUPTION… AMERICA WILL FIX HERSELF.
NOT UNTIL THEN.
I've NEVER thought that what he tried to fob off on us was REAL. It's just the same old, same old as he tried 4 years ago! It also breaks down as a true document by exactly forensic analysis that showed up the "Certificate of Live Birth"! I love what he's now being referred to by a really good editorial source in ANOTHER country (try Canada) as the ROTUS. That's Resident of the United States. I won't argue with that. He IS a resident, but his has STILL not proven that he's eligible beyond being merely the "resident".
I've NEVER been fooled by what he's using to insult our intelligence again! It even breaks down to analysis (computer forensics) the same way as what he used to try to fool all the idiots back in 2008! P.T. Barnum was right about a fool being born every minute, but I can only hope that there are enough of us about whom P.T. wasn't referrring to, to REALLY yell – HARD!
Yeah this next thread is really getting thin at the end. I think that 178 is the max replies per thread.
First, it should be obvious even to the dumbest birther that a child born outside of the USA requires either a US visa on a foreign passport or to be entered on the mother’s US passport to get to the USA. Those documents or the applications for them would still exist and would have been found easily IF Obama was born outside of the USA. But no such document has been found.
Second, there were notices of Obama’s birth in the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961. And these were not ads placed by relatives. They could not have been ads because the Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice ads in 1961. They only took the official notices sent to them by the government of Hawaii, which only sent out the notices for births IN Hawaii. And, the government could not have been fooled by a claim of a birth at home because in those cases it demanded witness statements.
So Obama's parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya); (2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother's US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed; (3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one); (4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital; (5) got three Republican officials in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama's files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
ALL of that would have had to have happened for Obama to have been born outside of the USA. No wonder the mainstream media dismissed the idea out of hand.
"it should be obvious even to the dumbest birther"
There you go again, Ellen, with that silly optimism.
James McPherson & your dumb bott Ellen! The fact is James that if you believe we are buying your bs & bott not to mention all of your aliases which you use here then i would say the joke is on you!
James you are the dumbest & silliest Obama believer on this site. How can any one seriously believe you when you continue to do these things yet you accuse others of being fakes or anonymous?
Loser!
I suspect your fellow birthers are more sick of your comments, since you keep lying and making them look bad. But how about if we both keep if up? If they get sick of either of us, maybe they'll leave.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/palin-media-trea…
replying to james mc joke WHY DON'T YOU ASK THE PEOPLE ON THIS SITE HOW MANY THINK YOU ARE A TOTAL JACKASS AND A WANNA BE OBAMA LOVER AND A TOTAL SHIT HEAD. I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THE GUTS.
Why? Because obviously many of the people who hang out here are idiots, and I couldn't possibly care less about what they–or even those who agree with me–happen to think about me.
I'd have thought my answer would be obvious, but then, many of the people who hang out here are … well, you know … so thanks for asking. In short, though, why would I care?
And the fact that you apparently do care so much about what anonymous commenters think of you strikes me as sad.. I now pity you, Jimbo.
I must really be dumb! It's not obvious to me. lol Can you explain why for years Obama attempted to convince us that a certificate of live birth was a legal birth certificate only to magically produce a "long form" BC. Now all of a sudden, THIS is his BC and we are to take it at face value. It's not so much the actual form that has me concerned as it is his attempt to convince us of facts we know are not true.
The correct name is the Certification of Live Birth, and it is the official birth certificate of Hawaii. Thousands of people use it every year to get their US passports. The long form was in addition to the Certification.
There would be no point in forging either of the two birth certificates unless Obama was born outside of Hawaii. But for that to have happened, all these things would have had to have happened:
Obama's parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya); (2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother's US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed; (3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one); (4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital; (5) got three Republican officials in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama's files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
Your first argument is not a valid one. We are talking about 1960's and possibly unmarried white 18 year old pregnant by a black man. Expense could also not be an issue. She had the funds to transport herself and her son to Indonesia only a few years later. (2) This is one of the questions. Since Obama was removed from his mothers passport in 1965, what citizenship did he use? (3) Again, we are talking about early 1960's. A woman who has either a child out of wedlock, or is on a 2nd marriage would be very private. Especially, again, a white woman with a black child.(4+5) Why would Tim Adams swear in an affidavit there was no long form birth certificate? Why would Obama's own grandmother swear she witnessed his birth in Kenya? Why would Hawaii Gov. Neil Ambercromie suggest there is no long form birth certificate for Obama? Why did he have problems finding it?Why would a Kenyan Official claim Obama was born there? Why would these individuals lie especially his grandmother?
And again, how did Obama enter Pakistan in 1981 when it was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list as a U.S. citizen?
I would love valid and factual answers to these questions.
Re: "We are talking about 1960's and possibly unmarried white 18 year old pregnant by a black man."
Are you seriously saying that a possibly unmarried white girl could take a mixed race child from Kenya to the USA without either a US visa or having him entered on a US passport? Yes, it was in the 1960s. The rules on having to have visas or US passports were the same then.
Re: "Expense could also not be an issue. She had the funds to transport herself and her son to Indonesia only a few years later. "
A few years can make a lot of difference and Indonesia is A LOT closer to Hawaii than is Kenya. To go to Kenya from Hawaii requires a trip that would stop in Los Angeles, New York, London, Rome, Cairo and Nairobi (or the other way, in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Bangkok, New Delhi, Teheran, Cairo, Nairobi). It was a tremendously long, difficult and expensive trip.
The reason that Obama was removed from his mother's US passport was that he got his own US passport. And in fact it can be proven that he USED that US passport to return to the Hawaii from Indonesia because otherwise he would have needed a US visa on the foreign passport, and there is no evidence that he applied for a US visa in Jakarta.
Re: "woman who has either a child out of wedlock, or is on a 2nd marriage would be very private.." But she would not have to be private about the PLACE of birth. In marriage or out of marriage, black or white, there is no reason to say Hawaii if he were really born in Kenya. No reason at all. In fact, it makes sense to say Kenya because that makes you look rich enough to have taken the trip. Also, it would be risky to lie about something like that. After all, if a child WERE born in Kenya, you would probably have been seen carrying him out of Kenya, and the people who saw it could testify against you.
Tim Adams is a white supremacist. He is lying. He did not have access to the Hawaii birth certificate records. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/0…
Obama's own grandmother never swore nor even said that Obama had been born in Kenya or that she had witnessed his birth. Birther sites manufactured this myth by cutting off the tape just before she was asked the obvious question: "Where was he born?" She answered that question "America, Hawaii," and kept repeating it. And, in another interview (one that birther sites never mention) she said that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama's birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
Abercrombie did not suggest that there was no long-form birth certificate. Birther sites said that he had said it. BUT HE DIDN'T SAY IT. Moreover, it was an overwhelmingly blatant lie because the birther sites did not even have access to a transcript of what Abercrombie said. TWO Republican officials stated in writing (at a time when there was a CONSERVATIVE Republican attorney general in office in Hawaii) that there was an original birth certificate in the files and that they had seen it, and Abercrmibie never said any differently.
The Kenyan official, the ambassador, was ambushed in a radio interview and did not understand the question (English not being his original language). He has said repeatedly that he did not understand the question and that Obama was not born in Kenya. But, say that he had actually thought that Obama was born in Kenya. That would not be a document proving that he was born in Kenya–would it? And it would not be disproof of the fact that there were notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961 and that the could not have been from the parents (the papers did not take ads) and that Hawaii checked out claims of birth outside of a hospital.
The grandmother told the truth, Obama was born in Hawaii. The Kenyan Ambassador did not understand the question.
Re: Pakistan. The answer is very simple. Very, Very, Very, simple–wait for it–PAKISTAN WAS NOT ON ANY NO TRAVEL LIST IN 1981. Who told you that it was? Why would an intelligent person like you believe that site without checking?
There are your factual answers.
First, do not attack. I am not attacking your views, please don't attempt to attack mine. Let's keep this civil.
How DID a bi-racial 4(-/+) child travel?This is still the question. He was removed from his mother's passport. Where is his passport? Why is there no record?
Accusing Tim Adams of being a white supremacist is quite convenient. So then is Dr. Alan Keyes also a racist since he originally questioned Obama's birthright? It seems anyone who questions Obama's birth place is a racist. I don't accept articles from obviously biased publications like the Washington Post or the Huffington Press. If Tim Adams committed perjury, why are there no legal proceedings?
Obama's grandmother did state he was born in Kenya. I listen to the complete tape and also read the complete transcript. So then you claim the affidavit of Bishop Ron McRae is also fraudulent? This is a fact hard to overlook. How about the affidavit of Kweli Shuhubia? I assume this is also a lie.
Re: "How DID a bi-racial 4(-/+) child travel?This is still the question. "
Answer: It is not a question. It is virtually impossible that a child (regardless of race) could have been born in Kenya and come to the USA without either a US visa or being entered on his mother's US passport.
I say VIRTUALLY because bribery or sleight-of-hand magic could have been used, but other than that virtually impossible. The odds against it would have been very high, say one chance in 100,000.
Now, to have been born in Kenya and entered as a child born in Hawaii involves BOTH slipping the child through US immigration without a visa or a US passport AND convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii. The second of these is also VIRTUALLY impossible. Yes, bribery or magic could have been applied but the odds against it were very high, again say one in 100,000. Now, of course, bribery or magic takes time and money–and why use either of them if a child born in Kenya is just as good as one born in Hawaii (for all purposes other than running for president.) So the odds against it were even lower than one in ten million.
To continue to think that there is still a question how a "bi-racial child" could have traveled without a visa or a passport and the parents convinced the authorities that he was born in Hawaii despite the odds against that happening being 1 in 10 million or worse displays a mind-set that is focused on finding any possible way for Obama to have been born outside of the USA and not dealing with reality.
Re: Where is his passport? You are probably referring to the one that he traveled on when he returned from Indonesia (?) Well, it is an old passport, and he may have lost it. But even if he didn't, he wouldn't have to show it because stupid birthers think that he might have used an Indonesian passport (he couldn't have. That would have required a US visa on it, and the application for it would have been found).
Re Tim Adams: He is both a white supremacist (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006140017) and he did not have access to the birth certificate database of Hawaii (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/there_are_some_people_who.html). I do not know what case Adams submitted his "affidavit" for, or whether there was a case at all. But since all the birther cases against Obama have been thrown out for lack of standing, Adams could feel secure that his "evidence" would not be used and that he thus would not run any risk of being tried for perjury. (As for you not accepting the article in the Washington Post, well too bad. Who cares what you think?)
Re: "Obama's grandmother did state he was born in Kenya. I listen to the complete tape and also read the complete transcript."
Well so did I, and there is not a sentence in it that says "born in Kenya" or "I was there at the hospital." All that we know is that she said "Yes" to a question about "Present"–and we do not know how that was translated into the African language.So, the guy who did it asked the obvious question; Where was he born?
Continuing in next
(Continued)
Transcript:
MCRAE: When I come in December. I would like to come by the place, the hospital, where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born? Was he born in Mombasa?
OGOMBE: No, Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in America.
MCRAE: Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.
OGOMBE: No, he was born in America, not in Mombasa.
MCRAE: Do you know where he was born? I thought he was born in Kenya. I was going to go by and see where he was born.
OGOMBE: Hawaii. Hawaii. Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii. In the state of Hawaii, where his father was also learning, there. The state of Hawaii.
END QUOTE
A second interview in which Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that the first that she had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii is reported by the Tribune News Service in the Hartfort Courant, which describes how the Kenyan family received a letter announcing the Aug. 4, 1961, birth. The Tribune reporter noted an interview with Sarah Obama in which she said she was "so happy to have a grandchild in the U.S."
The actual quotation is:
“Six months after they wed, another letter arrived in Kenya, announcing the birth of Barack Hussein Obama, born Aug. 4, 1961. Despite her husband's continued anger, Sarah Obama said in a recent interview, she "was so happy to have a grandchild in the U.S." ( http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/world/chi…
This shows that the birth did not take place in Kenya, but that it took place in Hawaii because the family in Kenya had heard of the birth in a letter from Hawaii.
(But you may not believe the Hartford Courant either.)
IN any case, Obama's Kenyan grandmother never said that he was born in Kenya. In contrast, THREE Republican officials in Hawaii said that he was born in Hawaii.
Re: "So then you claim the affidavit of Bishop Ron McRae is also fraudulent? "
Yes, like the "birth certificate" forged by Lucas Smith, and the birther site that said that the grandmother said that he was born in Kenya, and the birther site that said that Pakistan was on a no-travel list, McRae lied in his affidavit. the affidavit of Kweli Shuhubia is also a lie, and Kweli Shuhubia is a pseudonym, and hence it cannot be a legal affidavit, which requires a real name.
Really? so you know for a fact that it was not possible in 1960's to happen? Really?
Ellen said:
It is virtually impossible that a child (regardless of race) could have been born in Kenya and come to the USA without either a US visa or being entered on his mother's US passport.
So with Barry not the focus of my question here, you are saying that it never happened ever, ever ever? That my friend is not fact unless you were clairvoyant and can channel all know things that ever happened in 1961. I think Virtually Impossible is really straightening it a bit, don't you think.
I have a friend that died a few years ago and he could get anything into the country back in the 1960's from other countries. He arrived at the airport one day and called me to come pick him up and he had ten pieces of rough cut mahogany from the Caribbean islands they were 16 feet long. He paid they people in that Land to load it on the plane and they did. You see young lady in the 1960 a American aboard could give a person in foreign county what seem a very small amount of money and BAM it happened. A couple of dollars in some parts of the world is like a thousand here in the US. So please don't tell me that it was not possible to get an baby (remember Not Barry just any baby) into this country on a plane from a foreign country.
I am saying that the chance of Obama's parents getting Obama through US immigration (Repeat US Immigration, not some foreign country's) without a valid US visa or him being entered on his mother's US passport were (without bribery) one in 100,000.
And I am saying that the chance of Obama's parents getting Obama a birth certificate in Hawaii that said on it "born in Honolulu" without him actually being born in Honolulu (without bribery) was one in 100,000.
The combination of the two things happening is one in 10 million.
And I am saying that Obama's parents did not have enough money to do the bribes (which would have been expensive, it being US officials), and they wouldn't have done the bribe if they did because for all purposes except running for president naturalizing the child is as good has his being born in the country.
In addition to these facts, we have the witness who recalls being told that Obama was born in Kapiolani Hospital, and the Kenyan grandmother who said repeatedly that he was born in Hawaii and that the first that her family had heard of Obama's birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.
What do these individuals have to gain by lying? If these affidavits are indeed false, why are there no legal proceedings against them? Fact would be an affidavit of his grandmother stating he was born in Hawaii. Where is it?
So it was just a misunderstanding when Gov. Ambercrombie said he was having problems finding Obama's birth certificate. How also convenient.
And of course the Kenyan Official was ambushed. He did not understand the question etc etc. He was not "ambushed". It was a scheduled interview. The question was reiterated to insure he understood. If you listen to the complete interview, it was clear and concise answers he gave. Fact would be an affidavit to the contrary.
RE: Pakistan. I am still waiting on U.S. State Department's list from 1981, that still exists, before making a final decision. Until it is produced, it's all just conjecture.
You have not offered facts. You have given me your opinion.
Birth certificate aside, there are more than enough items on which to impeach Obama. Once the proceedings start, it will be a chance to regain our nation.
Re: "What do these individuals have to gain by lying?"
What did Tim Adams have to gain by lying? What did the forger Lucas Smith have to gain by lying? But, since you seem to think that the three Republican officials all of whom said that the saw the evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii were lying, what do they have to gain?
Motives: Adams, Smith and the others hate Obama. They hope to increase that hatred.
Re: " If these affidavits are indeed false, why are there no legal proceedings against them?"
In some cases, I speculate, they were not even affidavits. They were claims that they were affidavits. In the others, the cases never went to trial, so their statements were irrelevant. Perjury trials are relatively rare, and expensive to prosecute, and when they are done they almost always are for statements in court.
Re the ambush. The question was not repeated to be sure that he understood.
Here is a transcript:
DJ: One more quick question. Is the spot where President-Elect Obama's birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a spot to go visit where he was born?
Ogego: The place is already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive…
[DJ interrupts]
DJ: But the birthplace, will they put up a marker there?
Ogego: It is already well known.
End Quote:
How can we tell that the Ambassador misunderstood the question (in addition to him having said so later)? Because he said "It is already well known." But the place that birthers claim that Obama was born was in the hospital in Mombassa, and that is NOT well-known,. Ogego was thinking about the family compound, that is why that he mentions that the paternal grandmother (who lives in that compound) is still alive.
Re: "Fact would be an affidavit of his grandmother stating he was born in Hawaii. Where is it?"
The paternal grandmother has said twice in two separate interviews that Obama was born in Hawaii, and so did THREE Republican officials in Hawaii. Why should any of them sign affidavits–just because stupid birthers think that there is a chance that Obama was born in Kenya?
Re: "So it was just a misunderstanding when Gov. Ambercrombie said he was having problems finding Obama's birth certificate.How also convenient."
Answer: Not a misunderstanding. A lie. The birther blogs that published it made it all up. Abercrombie never said anything like it. A birther blog saying "Abercrombie said" does not show that Abercrombie said it.
RE: Pakistan. I am still waiting on U.S. State Department's list from 1981, that still exists, before making a final decision. Until it is produced, it's all just conjecture.
Here is a US State Department Travel Advisory for Pakistan in 1981. It says that US citizens traveling to Pakistan (which it would say they should not or cannot do if Pakistan were on a no-travel list) should be aware that they can get 30-day visas. http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/travel/cis/southasi…
I do not know whether or not there actually was a list of countries that Americans could not visit in 1981, but even dumb birther logic would have to conclude that Pakistan was not on it because US tourists could go there (Pakistan International Airlines flew there from New York, newspapers ran travel articles recommending visiting) and the US State Department was in this document giving them advice about the visa process.
Re: "there are more than enough items on which to impeach Obama. Once the proceedings start, it will be a chance to regain our nation. "
Dream on. Not a single member of congress has called for an impeachment.
Dream on. Not a single member of congress has called for an impeachment.
Yes they have but it is about Libya. A real violation of the Constitution. Barry is not worth the defense you provide for him. no Matter what the subject. It is the persons whole picture in the real world not the ones that even still believe we didn't land on the moon either. Why do you waste your time on conspiracy theories and not the content of this mans statements and his lies if you wish to focus on facts, study ever word he said to get into office and what he says now again on the 2012 campaign trail and there is where the lies lye.
I don't think any members of Congress have formally called for impeachement, even over Libya. Regardless, I suspect you agree with me that it won't happen.
thats bull$hit , my wife was born in hawaii in 1960 and has a bc just like mine
Your right Craig. I didn't want to open the argument that all the native born Hawaiians who say thats not the proper BC were lying. Obama said it was the legal one so it must be. lol
Who are the native-born Hawaiians who say that? The fact of that matter is that the Hawaii government made the Certification of Live Birth the official birth certificate in 2001, and since then THOUSANDS of people have used it every year to get their US passports.
Read Craig's post…..
Craig said that his wife was born in 1960. The Certification of Live Birth became the official birth certificate of Hawaii in 2001. If his wife still has the birth certificate that her family was sent when she was born, it would be the long-form birth certificate. If she lost it after 2001 (which he does not say), then if she applied for a new one, she would have gotten the new official birth certificate, the short-form Certification of Live Birth. It remains a fact that the Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate and that thousands of people use it every year to get their US passports.
Then it's quite interesting how Obama made it from 1961 to 2001 without the proper long form birth certificate like the one Craig's wife has.
Obama HAD (there is a difference between had and have) his long form birth certificate because he used it to get a US passport. We know that he had a US passport when he returned from Indonesia to Hawaii to attend school because he traveled alone and because, of course, if he had used any passport other than a US passport, he would have needed a US visa on that passport. And there is no record of him applying for a US visa (which would have been easy to find in the Jakarta embassy and would have been found by now).
However, many people do lose their birth certificates, and when they do and need them, they ask the officials to send one. That is what Obama did in 2001, and he received the short-form birth certificate, as everyone in Hawaii does (except in the case of the special exception made for Obama recently). Craig's wife, if she applied for a copy of her birth certificate today, would receive a copy of the Certification of Live Birth, the official birth certificate. The certification of live birth is perfectly proper. Thousands of people use it to get their US passports every year.
Let me understand this. So now it's 2001 that Obama applied and received the Certification of Live Birth. Not 2007 that is stamped on the actual form.
And still, he was able to make it 40 years without the proper birth certificate. Especially during the 90's when he was taking the bar.
How convenient for him to "lose" his long form BC when he is entering politics.
Still very interesting
Sorry. He applied and received it in 2007. My typo.
As for the 40 year speculation–and that is all that it is. I said that he had received a US passport and that he had to have shown a birth certificate for that. Once he had a passport he may not have had to show his birth certificate again. For most things he would have simply shown his passport. But maybe he did. In any case, he HAD an original passport. Then in 2007 (you are right) he needed one again, and he filled in the form at the Hawaii DOH site, and the DOH sent him the short-form that it sends to everyone.
People do lose their original birth certificates. It happens very often. Short form birth certificates are perfectly legal, and in fact thousands of people in Hawaii use them for drivers licenses and thousands more for their US passports every year.
Wow, glad someone has proof of this information. I mean, even the U.S. Government is on record questioning Obams's citizenship. They questioned his status as early as 5 years old. The government stated they lacked the documentation to determine his citizenship.
So obviously you still have all this proof and it's not all conjecture. It's curious, if it's as easy as you say, why he would not produce the proof back in 2008 when it was asked of him. He had this "legal" document from 2007 and he refused to produce it. Even to the U.S. Government. Interesting.
The US government questions a lot of peoples' citizenship. In this case they did so because his step-father applied for a visa.
You have the facts all wrong. The US government in that situation concluded that Obama was a US citizen. Read the WND story again. WND says that the US government concluded that Obama was a citizen (even WND has to be factual when the documents are right in front of it). What WND then said was that "It was not known on what basis" the government concluded it.
Well, this is just a throwaway line in hopes that the controversy will stay alive. How do you think it concluded? It checked the birth certificate of course.
So, in addition to the notices in the newspapers in 1961, the absence of any travel document showing that Obama was outside of the USA in 1961, we know that Obama had a US birth certificate at the time of the US government check, and we also know that he had one when he applied for and received the US passport that he used to return to Hawaii from Indonesia.
Re: "why he would not produce the proof back in 2008."
Now it is you are confused. The official birth certificate that he received in 2007 was the one that he published, and it is perfectly legal since thousands of people use it to get their US passports every year. Obama had an original birth certificate, but he lost or mislaid it, which is why he applied in 2007. That one was the one that he published.
Yes, as you said “The US government questions a lot of peoples' citizenship”. It only took Obama and 5 others to question McCain's. I did not misunderstand. Obviously YOU have. Glad to know you have seen how the US government concluded he was a US citizen considering it has never been revieled. In addition, since the 1965 passport application and any other passports Stanley Ann Dunham might have applied for, were destroyed by a 1980s General Services Administration directive (according to the State Department), travel outside the US can NOT be confirmed/denied. It is a known fact Jr was listed on his mother's passport so any travel (or lack thereof) would have been documented here.
When did Obama ever question McCain's citizenship?
Re: "how the US government concluded he was a US citizen considering it has never been revieled. "
Answer: The point is that the US government concluded that he is a US citizen. That is an official decision by the US government. And it confirms the two birth certificates from Hawaii, the notices in the Hawaii newspapers (which were not ads) the confirmations of three Republican officials in Hawaii and the absence of any US travel documents in 1961.
Re passport destroyed. NO. NO passports were destroyed. The birther FOI Act request did not ask to see the passports or the documents that showed that they were issued. It only asked to see the applications for the passports IN the passport file of Obama's mother. I repeat. The birther FOI Act request did not ask to see Obama's mother's passport or the records of when it was issued or whether or not Obama was on it. It only asked for the application for passports in that file.
And it turns out, that to save space in the 1970s thousands of passport applications were scrapped. But the files were not scrapped, nor the records of issuing the passports in the files.
If Obama was listed on his mother's passport, it could not have been before he was born. If he was born in Kenya or some other country than the USA, the listing of him on his mother's passport would have had to have taken place in that country. There would have been records of it, both in Obama's mother's passport file and in the records of applications to change passports in Kenya (and in other countries), and the Republicans were in charge of the US State Department until January 2009–and they found no such document.
In addition to the absence of any US travel document (US visa or addition of Obama to his mother's US passport) that has been found for Obama in 1961, there are the notices in the Hawaii newspapers.
These could not have been ads because the Hawaii newspapers did not take birth notice ads in 1961. The papers published the official notices of the government of Hawaii, which sent them out for births in Hawaii and not for births outside of Hawaii, and it could not have been fooled by a claim of a birth at home because in those cases it demanded witness statements.
In addition, Obama has published the official birth certifiate and the long-form birth certificate of Hawaii, and three Republican officials have confirmed the facts on it.
Of course. Only those who DRINK THE KOOL-AID have intelligence enough to ask for the proper documents.
Again, I don't want your OPINIONS. Please give FACTS.
OKAY. Obama has published the official and long form birth certificate of Hawaii, both of which say that he was born in Honolulu. The facts on these documents have been confirmed repeatedly by three Republican officials in Hawaii. There were notices of Obama's birth in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961. There is no US travel document for Obama in 1961.
These are FACTS.
Obama has shown two FRAUDULENT birth certificates. Since they are frauds, any information on it is are also fake.
Obama is an usurper.
The director of health of Hawaii has stated in writing that the long-form birth certificate is exactly the same as the document in the files. Two Republican officials have seen the document in thje files, so if there were any difference between it and the document Obama published, they could have said. They said nothing
When Obama published the first birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth, there was a CONSERVATIVE Republican attorney general in Hawaii. If it were forged, he could have taken action. He did nothing.
Obama has published the official and long form birth certificate of Hawaii, both of which say that he was born in Honolulu. The facts on these documents have been confirmed repeatedly by three Republican officials in Hawaii. There were notices of Obama's birth in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961. There is no US travel document for Obama in 1961.
So all the EXPERTS that have stepped forward and STATED the BC Obama has presented is a fraud are lying? Or are you speaking of the ONE "expert" Fox News found in Canada and had to twist his comments to make it appear he said it was valid?
It's been proven the BC is a fraud. Now prove it to be fact.
Wow, really trying to stretch it aren't you?
Don't cry too hard when your Messiah is impeached.
Please cite the names of the "experts."
The director of health of Hawaii has said in writing that she saw the birth certificate being copied, and that the copy is exactly the same as the original. TWO Republican officials in Hawaii had seen the original, so if there were anything different, they could have said, and they did not say anything.
No member of Congress has called for an investigation of the birth certificate, much less call for an impeachment.
irst, it should be obvious even to the dumbest birther that a child born outside of the USA requires either a US visa on a foreign passport or to be entered on the mother’s US passport to get to the USA. Those documents or the applications for them would still exist and would have been found easily IF Obama was born outside of the USA. But no such document has been found.
Second, there were notices of Obama’s birth in the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961. And these were not ads placed by relatives. They could not have been ads because the Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice ads in 1961. They only took the official notices sent to them by the government of Hawaii, which only sent out the notices for births IN Hawaii. And, the government could not have been fooled by a claim of a birth at home because in those cases it demanded witness statements.
So Obama’s parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya); (2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother’s US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed; (3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one); (4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital; (5) got three Republican officials in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama’s files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
ALL of that would have had to have happened for Obama to have been born outside of the USA.
ELLEN HOW CAN YOU BE THAT STUPID AND STILL WRITE UNLESS YOU ARE HAVING MC FEAR DO YOUR WRITING. A CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH WILL BE ON THE ORIGINAL.
Too much Kool-aid Jim
Why don't you go CRACK JIMMIES CORN, YOU NUT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ellen/James McPherson's bott! Same old same old bs! this is kind of old! Dumb also! Why not try something new James?
Idiot!
"Why not try something new"
Good question; why don't you? http://www.westernjournalism.com/palin-media-trea…
"Why not try something new James?"
Because this is typical for those that view Obama as a Messiah. If you read his posts, he offers NO facts. Even his "opinions" are attacks. His only purpose is to deceive and distort the truth. He wants to mislead the readers from the facts.
He once claimed he appreciated facts. But when presented with historical facts and rulings, he goes into attack/incite mode.
I've probably not read ALL of his posts, but those I have show him to be juvenile and argumentative. (i.e. I know you are, but what am I?)
His whole purpose is to continue the impression that those who question Obama's eligibility are racist zealots. Don't allow this to continue.
He has obviously taken his cues from Obama. Grade school playground antics. Name calling, bullying and slander.
The newspaper posting is not fact of his Hawaiian birth. Case in point. My own brother was born in Ohio, but yet his birth was noted in a major newspaper at our grandparents home state of Tennessee. This is why I don't accept the newspaper clipping as proof. We also endured years of being told a "certificate of live birth" was in fact a legal birth certificate. Fact, it is not. Case in point. My sister took her certificate of live birth from Ohio and tried to use it as identification for her drivers license. She was told this was NOT a birth certificate. She applied to Ohio for her BC and did in fact, receive her legal BC which is much different. Now years later, Obama no longer claims a certificate is a BC and presents us with a "long form" BC. Wouldn't these facts make you a little suspicious?
For arguments sake, lets ignore the BC. I would love to know how a United States citizen entered Pakistan in 1981.Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list at this time. There is no argument he did not take this trip. It's not just one but many discrepancies that have me wondering.
Seeks_The _Truth very good points!
For clarification, I should add my brother was born in 1960.
Read closely. The notices in the newspapers in Hawaii WERE NOT ADS. Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice advertising in 1961.
What they did was to publish the official birth notices sent to them by the government of Hawaii. Hawaii did not send out those notices unless the child was born in Hawaii. Could it have been fooled by a parent or grandparent who walked in and claimed that the child was born at home? No because in those cases it insisted on witness statements.
The certification of live birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and it is accepted for drivers licenses and for US passports.
Re: "I would love to know how a United States citizen entered Pakistan in 1981.Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list at this time."
Very simple. IT WASN'T ON THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT'S NO TRAVEL LIST AT THE TIME. That is one of the many lies manufactured by professional birther sites. Pakistan was neither on the US no travel list, nor did Pakistan keep US tourists from visiting. So any American using an ordinary US passport could go to Pakistan, and since it was relatively peaceful at the time (so peaceful that US newspapers ran travel articles recommending visiting), many did. Obama had a US passport from at least the time that he returned to the USA from Indonesia. He had to have used a US passport on that trip because (1) he traveled alone; (2) if he had used any other country's passport than the USA's, he would have needed a US visa on that passport–and there has been no record of him applying for a US visa in Indonesia.
He was not an Indonesian citizen, nor was he adopted while in Indonesia either, as a call to the Indonesian Embassy in Washington will confirm.
So your claim is that Hawaiian newpapers rules completely different than any other publications in the U.S. at that time. It is also improbable that the newspapers were "fooled" by fraudulent witness statements. That in 1961, his white grandparents might attempt to insure their bi-racial grandchild would have U.S. residency is ludicrous?
You also claim that adoption in Indonesia is open to public inspection. So much so that a simple call can confirm any information you want? Then by this admission, Obama's Indonesian school records, and the information contained, must be fact.
As with Pakistan, you have the list from 1981 confirming that Pakistan was NOT on the U.S. Department's no travel list? I would love to see it. If not, then it's still just unverified facts on both sides.
Hawaii newspapers have SAID that they did not take birth notice ads in 1961. That should be sufficient. However, if you think that they were lying, then check the notices themselves and you will see that they ALL follow the same format, names of parents, address, son or daughter, date.
Your comment about the witnesses is irrelevant since the newspapers did not run ads nor did they take notices from individuals, so they did not check witnesses. The issue is whether the government of Hawaii could have been fooled, and since it required witness statements whenever there was a CLAIM of a birth outside of a hospital (Obama was born in Kapiolani as both a witness and the former Republican governor of Hawaii have said) it could not have been fooled.
I never said anything about adoption in Indonesia being open to public inspection. I said that if you believed that he was adopted in Indonesia you could call the Indonesian Embassy to check, and it will tell you (as it told me a long time ago) that Obama was not adopted and that he was never a citizen of Indonesia.
Re Obama's Indonesian records. There is an unsigned application for a school that says that he was an Indonesian citizen. The SAME document also says that he was born in Honolulu. The document is not proof. The Indonesian government knows whether or not Obama was a citizen of Indonesia, and it says that he wasn't.
Re Pakistan:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/passport.asp
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/02/11…
http://www.dailypaul.com/102272/lets-talk-pakista…
Let me add my own recollection that Pakistan International Airlines had an office on Fifth Avenue in New York and flew via London from JFK Airport to Karachi. To be sure, it flew other places than Pakistan, so it could have had an office on Fifth Avenue even if there were a travel ban, but it wouldn't have been very profitable.
I don't accept a newspaper ad as proof of an Hawaiian birth. Newspaper ads can be inaccurate and manipulated. You can't use it as proof of birth at any government office. Therefore I throw that tidbit out.
As far as adoption, tell me which U.S. Government office I can call to verify an adoption. There is none. So if you can call the Indonesian Embassy and verify whether there was or was not an adoption, this states that their records are open to public inspection hence the remainder of my argument.
And as I said, until the official list from the U.S. State Department's no travel list from 1981 is made public, it is all just conjecture.
You can claim you did anything, does not make it fact. The only FACT would be the list.
Re: "I don't accept a newspaper ad as proof of an Hawaiian birth. Newspaper ads can be inaccurate and manipulated. You can't use it as proof of birth at any government office. Therefore I throw that tidbit out. "
First, as I said, they were NOT ads. They were notices by the government. The newspapers did not take that kind of ads. Second the government did not send out the notices unless it had proof of birth in Hawaii.
But, still, I agree with you that by itself the notices in the newspapers is not strong evidence. What exists is not just the notices in the newspapers. It is the notices in the newspapers, plus the official birth certificate, plus three Republican officials in Hawaii saying that the facts on the birth certificate were accurate, plus the absence of any travel document showing that Obama was born in Kenya or in any other country.
Re Indonesian adoption. It is not like the USA. The US federal government doesn't know about adoptions. The Indonesian government can find out about adoptions, and in this case it did, and it says that Obama was not adopted (and by the way, so did the US State Department in a legal filing.)
Here is a US State Department Travel Advisory for Pakistan in 1981. It says that US citizens traveling to Pakistan (which it would say they should not or cannot do if Pakistan were on a no-travel list) should be aware that they can get 30-day visas. http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/travel/cis/southasi….
I do not know whether or not there actually was a list of countries that Americans could not visit in 1981, but even dumb birther logic would have to conclude that Pakistan was not on it because US tourists could go there (Pakistan International Airlines flew there from New York, newspapers ran travel articles recommending visiting) and the US State Department was in this document giving them advice about the visa process.
I will agree Indonesian adoption is not like the U.S.. In Indonesia, if Lolo Soetoro adopted Obama at age five or younger, then Obama would automatically have become an Indonesian citizen according to the country's laws in the 1960's, which stipulated any child aged five or younger adopted by an Indonesian father is immediately granted Indonesian citizenship upon completion of the adoption process.
But you claim a simple call to the Indonesian Embassy will confirm/deny adoptions. How interesting.
And from my own experiences, yes there is an actual "list" of no travel countries.
Funny how there are ads being run at this time for travel to Israel, Korea, and even fewer but still, Iraq, Pakistan,as well as others.
The Indonesian government also says that Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia–why not call the embassy and ASK?
Obama arrived in Indonesia in 1967, which would make him at least six.
NO one but birthers have claimed that Obama was adopted by Soetoro, and the Indonesian government says that he wasn't. The same goes for the US government, which stated that Obama was not adopted in a legal filing in response to FOI Act request. Only birthers say "adopted" and two governments say "not adopted."
Re: "yes there is an actual "list" of no travel countries. "
Well then you find it for 1981, and you will find that Pakistan was not on it. Why not? Because it would be absurd for US newspapers to run travel articles recommending travel to Pakistan if it were illegal to go there.
Of course, Pakistan would know whether or not it was on a no-travel list in 1981. You could call their embassy to check. I have already shown plenty of citations including the US State Department Travel Advisory.
Re: "Funny how there are ads being run at this time for travel to Israel, Korea, and even fewer but still, Iraq, Pakistan,as well as others. "
Answer. It is not illegal to travel to Israel, South Korea, Iraq or Pakistan.
OK. So I can be a good sheep, tell me which I'm supposed to believe. What he says now or then. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdxbjlrdMVU&fe…
What I read now or then. http://web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/eastand… http://www.modernghana.com/news2/189461/1/america…
Funny how Hawaii only recently realized their mistake from 2006. http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Ja…
Oh yea, that's right. These are fake. The whole world hates him.
The youtube video is a well-known forgery. You should have known better. (One way to see right away that it is a forgery is to look at the reaction of the audience. When he was supposed to have said "born in Kenya" there is no reaction. Not one member of the audience reacts with surprise or astonishment.).
The Ghana newspaper story reference to Kenya-born refers to the fact that his father was Kenyan. Many countries use the term "French-born" or whatever country-born to indicate the fact that a parent came from there. In any case the Ghana newspaper did not cite any evidence that he was born in Kenya.
That is right. They are errors, or they are fake.
They do not disprove the obvious fact that for Obama to have been born in Kenya he would have needed a US travel document to get to the USA. And there is an official and a long-form birth certificate, both showing that he was born in Hawaii, and on which the facts were confirmed by three Republican officials.
The possibility of having smuggled Obama from Kenya to Hawaii without a US visa on a foreign passport or he being entered on his mother's US passport AND convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii is about one in 10 million.
Yes, yes of course. I should have KNOWN better. The whole world hates him or items are "misunderstood".
The whole group was to jump in astonishment, even though it was not an issue. After all, he was just running for Senate, not the Presidency.
I forgot when they say "Kenyan-born" they are referring to the FATHER of the individual, even tho it's an AP article and they never did it before(or after) My mistake.
Yea, we retired,Chicago area, ex-high level union officials, (era 98-2003) are senile now.
I should know better than to believe media reports. I should know better than to believe official documents. How silly of me.
You must have these documents the U.S. couldn't find from his entry to Hawaii as a child. You should share them.
It was NOT an AP article. The Kenyan newspaper inserted it into the AP article. IF the AP had ran an article saying: "Obama was born in Kenya" (1) we would all have known about it; (2) if would have cited evidence that he was born in Kenya.
The video is a well-known forgery.
IF the Republicans, who were in charge of the US State Department until January 2009 had found any documents showing that Obama had traveled from Kenya to the USA in 1961, they would have released them.
Obama's birth in Hawaii was shown by two birth certificates from Hawaii, confirmed in writing by three Republican officials (at a time when a Conservative Republican was attorney general of Hawaii, who could have taken action against them if they had lied). It is further confirmed by the notices in the Hawaii newspapers (which were from the government and not issued for births outside of Hawaii) and by the absence of any document showing that Obama traveled from Kenya to the USA in 1961.
There have been many forged birth certificates and forged videos and the mistakes made in African newspapers. But the facts above are overwhelming.
So the Associated Press accepting ownership of this article does not make it so?
The video is PROPOSED to be a forgery. Proof has not been shown. It is an attempt to discredit it.
Your right about forged documents. Obama is trying to make us believe his are real.
There are many attempts to discredit articles and other media that show Obama is ineligible to serve as POTUS. But facts are facts.
"So the Associated Press accepting ownership of this article does not make it so?"
No, Seeks, it doesn't work that way. Most American newspapers and many international newspapers belong to the AP. If you write for AP or for any of those papers, your stories can be sent out to all members, and then used–and most importantly, CHANGED for one's own readership–by any other member. Furthermore, AP doesn't "accept" ownership of the article; the newspaper claims it's an AP article.
"The video is PROPOSED to be a forgery. Proof has not been shown."
Actually it has. The original creator of the original (ObamaSnippets) has created several Obama spoofs. Even his have been passed off as real, but now birthers are cutting of part of his and passing the new edited version as reality. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJUxsFBwcbs
Of course, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that confirms facts is FORGERY.
Only Obama and his campaign tell the truth. His administration is so transparent you know.
If its against the Messiah, its a fake. We get it.
Why get testy and defensive? Your comment makes no sense, and I've never made the claims you're exaggerating.
As for your "Messiah" comment, I've been a regular critic of Obama. But I also appreciate facts and reason, as I thought you did.
While I rarely care about birther arguments, I've appreciated your previous efforts to be civil–which is why I offered two clear and easy-to-check statements of fact. Do what you will with the information.
I'm not getting testy nor defensive. Since you are just reiterating what Ellen continues to try to pass as fact, I am answering as such.
To you, if I came off as such, I apologize.
If you have read my comments, you will see I have also offered easy-to-check legal standings of my position. Legal definitions, as well as laws.
Yes, I have offered some other information that has, quite frankly, just charged to be fraudulent but never proved with fact.
I have not seen your statements of fact. I did, however, offer the complete video. Please link proof it is a fake, not thought that it's a fake. In proof, I will take another look.
That is the difference between those who believe Obama to be an usurper and those who don't.
Someone has taken the position of POTUS illegally and is destroying what's left of this once great nation.
Those that show proof that he is in the position unjustly are discredited. Even those of high standing.
Just as it's hard for you to believe an unjust person is holding the position, it is just as unlikely, in my eyes, that high level officials would attempt such a scandal.
Obama has been the one caught in a multitude of lies.
You said you appreciate facts. Here are MY facts why BHO jr is an usurper.
For arguments sake, I will concede Obama was born where and when it's said and there was no adoption. He was born to S.A. Dunham and BH Obama Sr, a citizen of Kenya at Jr's birth.
In 1961 Kenya was under United Kingdom rule. BHO SR. was a citizen of the United Kingdom and bound by laws and jurisdictions of.
The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section-5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if HIS FATHER is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.
BHO Jr. lived the majority of his first 10 years outside of US jurisdiction. Jr has not denied or rescinded UK citizenship, as was with the Wong Ark case. At best, BHO JR. held DUAL citizenship.
Because it questions allegiance, those with dual citizenship are prohibited from holding POTUS as previously ruled by SCOTUS in the case of Chester A. Arthur, 22nd POTUS.
These are the FACTS I base my belief Obama is an usurper. Believe as you will.
Since you have now broken down and accepted the overwhelming number of facts that show that Obama was born in Hawaii, you have to concede that the video that apparently showed him saying that he was born in Kenya was a forgery.
As James has pointed out earlier, the video that was shown at one time had an attachment in which the guy who forged it admitted it. Birthers have taken it and run it without that admission.
In addition to that, there is the internal evidence of the video. It show an audience that does not react to the apparent statement that Obama was born in Kenya. Not even a widened eye.
Finally, the MSM did not pick up on the video, and even more tellingly, WND did not cite it either. It is a forgery.
By going off on the dual citizen tack you have switched from being a strict birther to being a two-fer, one who believes that the legal requirements of Natural Born Citizen status were higher than Obama simply being born in Hawaii.
You said: "person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if HIS FATHER is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth. "
The answer is that it was well known that Obama's father was a Kenyan citizen (British at the time of Obama's birth) and that Obama was a dual citizen at the time of birth. Despite this, the US Electoral College gave Obama every single vote that he won in the general election. That means that not one single Elector switched her or his vote because of thinking that Obama's father's citizenship or dual nationality affects Obama's Natural Born Citizen status. And the same goes for the US Congress, which confirmed Obama's election UNANIMOUSLY.
You said: "those with dual citizenship are prohibited from holding POTUS."
Answer. The reason that the Electoral College electors did not change their votes and the US Congress confirmed Obama unanimously is that the above statement is not true. And, in fact, Thomas Jefferson was a dual national at the time that he was president, having been made a full voting citizen of France.
You also said: "…as previously ruled by SCOTUS in the case of Chester A. Arthur, 22nd POTUS."
Answer: At this point I wonder where you are getting your "FACTS." That is because the US Supreme Court did not act on Chester A. Arthur, who served out the remainder of Garfield's term and simply lost to a more popular Republican, Blaine, at the Republican convention.
It is your allegation that Arthur was not a Natural Born Citizen, but if he was born in the USA, he was.
You have comprehension problems. I now understand.
When someone states "for arguments sake" this means that these parts are no longer part of the argument.
Anything else you state is irrelevant. Have a good life.
Regardless of what you've been told, education is your friend.
The AP did not accept ownership of the article.
The video is an obvious forgery. It has not been cited as a fact even on WND.
The Hawaii director of health has certified in a letter accompanying Obama's long-form BC that she saw the file copy being copied and that the resulting document is exactly the same as the one in the files. Two Republican officials had said a long time ago that they had seen the original long-form BC in the files. If the image that Obama had shown were different from what they had seen they could have commented, but they didn't.
For Obama to have been born outside of the USA, Obama's parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya);
(2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother's US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed;
(3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one);
(4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital;
(5) got three Republican officials (two of whom stated that they had seen the original in the files) in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama's files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
ALL of that would have had to have happened for Obama to have been born outside of the USA.
BHO Jr's travel can only be speculative. Jr. was originally on his mothers passport. All applications and passports prior to 1965 relating to his mother was, according to the State Department, destroyed. There is no verifiable information either way.
And yes, ANYONE or ANYTHING that questions the Messiah is a forgery. I get it.
(He's made it very clear. To HELL with Bi-partisan, If I say its LAW then its LAW! )
Re passports. NO. The passports were not destroyed, nor were the documents showing that they were issued. What the FOI Act request asked for ONLY was the records of applications for passports in the passport file of Obama's mother. To save space, the applications for passports in thousands of files were destroyed in the 1970s. But the records of the passports themselves were not destroyed.
IF Obama were originally on his mother's passport, the key time for it would have been IF he were born in Kenya. If that had taken place, the application to put him on that passport would have had to have taken place in Kenya. No such document has been found. Yet the application to change a US passport would exist both in the passport files (and remember the birther FOI request did not ask for the passport or for changes to it) and in the files of applications to change passports in Kenya in 1961–and no such thing has been found.
The absence of a US travel document for Obama in 1961 is part of the evidence that includes his official birth certificate from Hawaii, the confirmation of three Republican officials and the notices in the Hawaii newspapers.
There have been plenty of birther forgeries, the video and the Lucas Smith "Kenyan birth certificate" (a convicted felon who never even proved that he had gone to Kenya) are just two of them.
"The Indonesian government also says that Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia–why not call the embassy and ASK? "
Wow, that is so easy.With information so forthcoming, why hasn't anyone thought of this before?
BIrther sites do not mention this truth because of their hatred.
How about that, neither does Obama sheep sites.
Go CRACK JIMMIES CORN YOU NUT JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't give a damn where the bastard was born his father was not a citizen of this country why can't IDIOTS like you understand that, he is not a natural born citizen no matter where he was born, you overlook the obvious, aren't you full of the koolaid yet? And why does mr transpanency have to hide all his records for 3 years in the first place , could it be that they would confirm what everyone with half a brain allready knows? That he is inelegible to run for the office of president,
Podcast The Peter Boyles Show – May 10, 2011 7am
WND.com publisher Joe Farah came on the show to talk about the latest birther issues.
http://www.khow.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page…
Several stories to come out later this week pointing to the fact that BHO Sr. is NOT The Pretender’s biological father.
"Several stories to come out later this week pointing … "
Gee, what with the whole end-of-the-world thing, I guess I missed those stories. Perhaps you could provide a link, Mike?
The Birth Certificate That Dumbocare Sends Out Is A Forgery And Like Most Forensics Experts Say It Is Not A Very Good Forgery, Yikeess, However Any Thing That Comes From Dumbocares Goons Will Have Errors Both Wi th Paper, Numbers Etc, So While The Experts Check-Out This Forged Birth Certificate, Lets Bring Up The Forged Social Security Card Issued To A Conn Man Born 1890 And Not Barack Obama Check It Out 042-68-4425 That Obama Used Several Times In Chi From 1986 To 2008, Yikeess Was Also Used To Get A Forged Selective Service Card In 2008, Check It Out With Lic Private Investigator SUSAN DANIELS ,, God Bless America And Susan Daniels.
MY LAST POST WAS CENSORED! TRYING ONE MORE TIME.
THE B.C. MEANS NOTHING BECAUSE THE D.O.J REFUSES TO DO ANYTHING, NOT MATTER WHAT EVIDENCE IS SUPPLIED. THEREFORE, THERE IS ONLY ONE OPTION LEFT…
VOTE OUT EVERY ENCUMBENT, EVERY TERM… PERIOD!
IF WE CAN ELIMINATE POLITICAL CORRUPTION, AMERICA WILL FIX HERSELF!!!
Ah, so out of the millions of "birthers" , some in Congress, no one had the sense to make a simple call. And no one from Camp Obamamessiah could mention they made a call to verify.
OK, well:
I made a call to the Indonesian Embassy earlier. They will not confirm or deny adoptions. The information they will give is HOW MANY adoptions there were for the year of inquiry.
There went your "proof". ( I know, I called the wrong department or "they used to")
And to correct a point. No one "hates" Obama. It's disgust. Disgust that a non-U.S. citizen can hold the position of POTUS and destroy our grand nation as bad as he has.
The Indonesian Embassy told me a long time ago that Obama was not adopted and was never a citizen of Indonesia. Try the press officer.
Obama is a US citizen, having been born in Hawaii, as two official birth certificates, the notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961 and the confirmation of three Republican officials all show.
I just KNEW I called the wrong department.
There is NO WAY an Obama follower would state something that isn't true.
Obama is a United Kingdom citizen for his father is. Because he lived for the first years of his life subject to the jurisdiction of the same.
TWO official birth certificates, MOST people have ONE. And don't forget, Ambercrombie witnessed the birth.
IN all states that have switched from long-form birth certificates to short-form birth certificates and have not destroyed the originals, the people born before the switch can have two, logically at least (though like Hawaii many states now only send out the short-form BC).
Having been for a time a dual citizen does not affect Obama's US citizenship or Natural Born Citizen status.
You have proven you have a comprehension issue in a previous post.
Anything else you state is irrelevant.
I don't care for your OPINION.
Have a good life.
Education is your friend.
The reason that the Electoral College gave Obama every single vote that he won in the general election was that not one single Elector thought that Obama was born outside of the USA or that the citizenship of Obama's father or dual nationality has any effect on Natural Born Citizen status.
The same was true of the US Congress, which confirmed Obama's election unanimously. And the US Supreme Court has turned down every birther case.
In addition to the Indonesian Embassy having told me–years ago–that Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia and that there was no evidence that he was adopted, there is this from the US State Department:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/department…
In that legal document, a court filing, the State Department repeatedly denies that Obama was ever a citizen of Indonesia or was ever adopted.
Sorry ellen, I wasn't aware up till now that you talked
with the Indonesian Embassy years ago.
And you can make the SAME call now, and they will NOT release information on adoptions, only how MANY adoptions there were for the year in question.
So they are tired of answering the question. But the claim that Obama was adopted comes ONLY from birther sites. There is no confirmation from any other publication or site. And the US State Department has denied it in a legal filing.
AND if a child were adopted, either in Indonesia or Hawaii, there would be evidence of it in the courts of either. Both Hawaii and Indonesia require adoptions to be ruled on at district courts. If there had been such a ruling, there would have been papers. But for some reason neither WND nor Trump has found them.
Of course there HAD to be some explanation.
History is wrong and your OPINION is right.
You have a proven problem with comprehension.
Education is your friend.
These are the FACTS.
Eduction is your friend.
Your the one who keeps giving opinions and refuse to accept historical FACTS.
Education is your friend.
There are NO facts showing that Obama was adopted. None at all. Just birther speculation.
Glad to know YOU PERSONALLY know this. I'll keep that in mind.
(even though there is no proof either way)
There are no facts showing that Obama was adopted. Just birther speculation.
And you have proof of this? Besides your supposed call to the Indonesian Embassy. Seems YOUR the only one they would tell.
Both the Indonesian government and the US State Department have said that Obama was not adopted.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/department…
Like that call you made and they PERSONALLY told you. A call, that it appears, NO ONE ELSE can make and get the SAME information.
When you made that claim, I knew right then what an idiot you were.
Keep being a good little sheep and defend your MESSIAH.
BOTH the Indonesian government and the US State Department have said that Obama was not adopted.
Just like you said, they told you PERSONALLY.
You made a call to the Indonesian Embassy and they were so helpful and told you PERSONALLY anything you asked about an individual adoptions.
Now they won't release any information to anyone else, but they told YOU.
BOTH the Indonesian government and the US State Department have said that Obama was not adopted.
You DID say you PERSONALLY CALLED the Indonesian Embassy and acquired the information on whether or not Obama was adopted..
They gave you information PERSONALLY that others can't seem to get. Now you try to change it.
Show the PROOF where YOU CALLED. That IS your CLAIM.
No one can take you seriously.
Again, glad to know YOU PERSONALLY know this. I'll keep that in mind.
(even though there is no proof either way)
You have proved you have a comprehension problem in a previous post.
Anything else you state is irrelevant.
I don't want your OPINION.
Have a good life.
Education is your friend.
And…… IF he was adopted, it is unknown if it was in Hawaii or Indonesia.
So, why doesn't WND or some other birther site send a reporter to Hawaii and Indonesia to check the district courts to find out whether Obama was ever adopted?
Or, maybe they have already done so–and do not want to publish the fact that they did and found no evidence that he was adopted.
I believe there are some people working on it. Donald Trump (bless his heart lol) has investigators,to my understanding, working on it.
To me, it's a moot point. I don't believe it really matters. Since Jr was not a citizen at birth, it doesn't matter if he was adopted or not.
Obama was a citizen at birth due to his birth in the USA, in Hawaii, as proven by the two birth certificates, the confirmation of three Republican officials in Hawaii, the notices in the Hawaii newspapers, the absence of a US travel document in 1961 and even the Kenyan grandmother saying that the first that her family had heard of Obam's birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
Don't hold your breath for Trump's "investigators."
Obama was a person at birth?
You have proved you have a comprehension issue in a previous post.
Anything else you attempt to state is irrelevant.
Have a good life.
Education is your friend.
You are no longer discussing facts. Simply calling names. Well, at least you have stopped trying to make up the facts, like Leahy's "statement" and the US Supreme Court having ruled that Chester Arthur was not a Natural Born Citizen.
What is your motive in making up these things?
Of course since you have no FACTS to offer, all you do is state OPINIONS.
History is wrong and your OPINIONS are correct.
You have a proven issue with comprehension.
Education is your friend.
Well, at least you have stopped trying to make up the facts, like Leahy's "statement" and the US Supreme Court having ruled that Chester Arthur was not a Natural Born Citizen.
As I said, YOUR the one who refuses to accept historical FACTS.
Education is your friend.
It is NOT a historical fact that the US Supreme Court ruled on Chester Arthur. The US Supreme Court took no action at all on Chester Arthur.
If you did a little research, you will find a SCOTUS ruling against Arthur.
In this ruling, you will find they ruled against his dual citizenship.
Do the research yourself. Don't take others word for it.
Or are you afraid of what you will find?
There is no US Supreme Court ruling on the Natural Born Citizen status of President Chester Arthur.
Keep wishing hard enough, you just MIGHT make it come true.
Too bad it's real. Your just too lazy to go look.
Doesn't it suck when you can't prove you're right (with a simple court citation, for example), but can't admit you're wrong?
Saying something over and over doesn't make it true.
I wouldn't know. Since I have posted proof, I know it to be fact.
I'm not going to repeat myself because you don't know how to do a search.
Must suck to defend a man you know to be a usurper.
You have NOT posted any proof at all.
You have never posted a citation.
It is not a fact. The US Supreme Court did not rule on the Natural Born Citizen status of Chester Arthur.
I DID submit proof. YOU chose not to accept it. Simple as that.
I tire of your childish games.
Last time. It IS in SCOTUS rulings volume from 1885. Claim whatever you wish. Anyone who looks in it will see what an idiot you really are.
I've shown proof it's there. Show proof it's not.
Other than that, I'm done.
You have not shown any proof.
And therre wasn't any Supreme Court Ruling on the eligiblity of Chester Arthur.
Only an IDIOT like you, an Obama follower, doesn't accept the truth. You going to CRY when your Messiah is IMPEACHED?
Keep DENYING. I love the attempt at misinformation and misdirection.
Obviously you can't find any such fictional ruling, or you could cite it. Just saying something over and over doesn't make it so. If you're going to make wacky claims, the burden of proof rests with you.
Sucks when you can't prove you're right or admit you're wrong, huh? Obviously you can't find any such fictional ruling, or you could cite it. Just saying something over and over doesn't make it so. If you're going to make wacky claims, the burden of proof rests with you.
Sucks when you can't prove you're right or admit you're wrong, huh?
If you recheck my posts, you will find the volume where I found the ruling. I also added an excerpt of the ruling. The entire ruling would not publish in this small space. do some research.
Since I did give the information, I have no idea what sucking is.
Isn't that what you are doing to Obama's balls?
"millions of 'birthers' , some in Congress"
I take it House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC), for one, is in no stretch of the imagination in congress?
Do you think, just maybe, they haven't moved on it yet because Obama at this time has control?
I misspoke, there are those that hate. Just like there are those to the other extreme.
Those that are following the FACTS have disgust.
Clyburn is indeed in Congress, but he's certainly no birther–he claimed that if Republicans took over the House (which they did) they would investigate birther claims (which they haven''t).
Clyburn is no longer majority whip, either, since Republicans now control the House. So I'm still waiting to see who these birther members of Congress are–but apparently they'll never speak up, if Obama "has control"? How very brave of them.
Actually, he stated he would investigate the claims of his ineligibility which there are others beside the BC(provable). "Birther" is a term that has been coined by Obama followers.
Now do you wish the list of those who BELIEVE him to be ineligible? Many have stated in so much, none have the guts to act upon it.
So you believe Obama to be a "natural born" citizen and not a "native born" citizen?
"do you wish the list of those who BELIEVE him to be ineligible?"
A short list would be fine, since you've claimed they exist.
"So you believe Obama to be a 'natural born' citizen and not a 'native born' citizen?"
Don't know; don't care.
Well since you don't know and don't care, feel free to use the internet to pull up any information you wish.
The information I "claim" is there. Help yourself.
So in other words, you can't find it either–as expected. Thanks.
"Don't know; don't care"
Since you don't know or care why bother.
State a congressman who denies Obama's eligibility, but because he is no longer majority whip, his opinion is invalid.
Guess the comment that you appreciate facts was a lie.
As expected.
"congressman who denies Obama's eligibility"
Wrong again. seeks-the-fantasy. Clyburn never denied Obama's eligibility–he said Republicans would waste a lot of time investigating the claims of ineligibility (and he was wrong about that, of course–Republicans were smarter than he gave them credit for being).
Guess you should stop criticizing others for their comprehension problems.
No, that's just YOUR interpretation.
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) warned Republicans will investigate Obama's birthplace if they take over Congress.
He predicted that "gridlock" in Congress would "define" Obama's first term if Republicans win the House
Sounds like Clyburn believes Obama is ineligible.
"and he was wrong about that, of course-"
Redirect and misinterpretation.
No, no comprehension problems here. I see the truth, where you only make inferences attempting to mislead and cause discontent.
I have read most of your posts. Most seem to attack the poster or attempt misinformation. Most of the time, you don't even offer an opinion.
I should have known better than to expect more of you now.
"that's just YOUR interpretation"
Yeah, sure–'cuz your idea that a black Democratic congressman is a birther makes so much sense.
I didn't say it, HE did.
It makes so much more sense he wants to investigate BECAUSE it holds no merit.
It WAS the BLACK Former Assistant Secretary of State Alan Keyes that first intensely debated Obama's eligibility.
Your attempt to add race holds no merit. MANY BLACKS voted against him as the Democratic nominee. He lost the Primary Election, but won the Caucus.(a feat no one has done without fraud) This was due to voter intimidation by,none other than, the Black Panthers. The Federal charge against them was thrown out by guess who? Do you really want to try to add race?
You just don't like to accept truth.
Yeah, sure. This really is a pointless discussion if you truly believe that Clyburn is a birther. And apparently the only supposed Congressional birther you can name.
For some reason I don't seem to see ANYONE else–even other birthers–buying your version of "truth."
I DIDN'T call him a birther. YOU did. What I SAID was that he questioned Obama's eligibility and he wanted to look into it.
"Birther" is a term coined by Obama followers and the meaning changes as they see fit.
"I don't seem to see ANYONE else–even other birthers–buying your version of "truth."
By what factors do you base this on? Others not replying with me? MOST see your name or Ellen and just pass you by. They know you just want to misdirect or argue.
And I can name more. Since you don't know or care, I don't care to waste my time.
"I can name more."
Yeah, sure.
"he questioned Obama's eligibility and he wanted to look into it
No, he didn't. He said Republicans would want to look into it.
Yes, I can. But as I said, since you don't care, I'm not wasting my time.
Quote:"The White House will be full-time responding to subpoenas about where the president may or may not have been born, whether his mother and father were ever married, and whether his wife’s family is from Georgetown or Sampit" Majority House Whip James Clyburn (D-SC)
Sounds like a lot more than just Republicans WOULD WANT to look into it. Just another attempt to ignore the truth.
He was making a (wrong) prediction (or using a scare tactic) about what the GOP would do. He didn't say he wanted it to happen.
Just another attempt to ignore the truth.
How skinny can we go here?
Guess I was mistaken about you.
Just another Obama follower drinking the kool-aid.
All native born US citizens are Natural Born US Citizens. The only kind of a US citizen who is not a Natural Born US Citizen is a naturalized US citizen.
As usual, just opinion without facts to back it up.
“Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
Keep trying to convince yourself.
Here we go again.
Dual citizenship DOES have direct relation on Obama's ability to hold POTUS.
The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section-5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if HIS FATHER is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth. (BHO Senior was British so Jr. is ALSO British) which is a violation of the U.S. Constitution
No, it doesn't. It has no effect.
In fact, Thomas Jefferson was a dual national of the USA and France when he was president.
Keep thinking a ruling from SCOTUS has no effect.
What a good sheep you are.
Re Trump's statement that he would investigate the claims of ineligibility.
Give him another month. Say the end of June. And by then, Trump will have shown absolutely nothing.
Of course your OPINION is correct.
You have proven you have an issue with comprehension.
Education is your friend.
Education is your friend too. I will bet that in a month, even two months, Trump will not show anything that affects Obama in the slightest, despite Trump's words that the investigators had found things "that they can't believe."
OK what ever with Trump. No big deal. Just icing on the cake. Too many other issues to really matter.
I'm not the one who can't comprehend what someone writes.
Education is your friend.
Yes, education is your friend. Education shows that the US Supreme Court took no action of any kind on Chester Arthur, and James Blaine won the Republican nomination from Arthur for many reasons, of which the allegation that Arthur was not a Natural Born Citizen was not a major (or probably not any) one.
There WAS a SCOTUS ruling pertaining to Arthur. There was a ruling against his dual citizenship. He was denied renomination by the Republican Party. Because you are too lazy or inept to research does not make it invalid.
Instead of listening to "friends" do a little research yourself.
Many others have found it. Some have posted the ruling on their websites.
Education is your friend.
There ARE SCOTUS rulings on Arthur. If you state otherwise, you have NOT looked.
Are you afraid of what a little research might tell you?
There was no SCOTUS ruling on President Arthur.
If you claim that there were rulings, you have not looked. Are you afraid of what a little research might tell you?
I'm sure you would love for there to NOT be a ruling, but there is.
Many others have found it besides myself.
Sorry to know your too inept (or lazy) to find it.
I'll give you a hint. It's in the SCOTUS archives.
Guess your afraid what a little research will find you. You'll find what people have been saying was right all along.
There was NO ruling by the US Supreme Court on President Chester Arthur's Natural Born Citizen status.
It is not in the archives. There was no such ruling.
Obviously, you didn't get off your lazy butt and go look or else you would have found it.
It's there.
Obviously you can't find any such fictional ruling, or you could cite it. Just saying something over and over doesn't make it so. If you're going to make wacky claims, the burden of proof rests with you.
Sucks when you can't prove you're right or admit you're wrong, huh?
Actually, I have posted proof elsewhere. Why should I bend to your wish? You don't know or care. I don't care to repost. It's hard to admit Obama is a usurper when you've fought for him for so long.
Why should you post eveidence? No reason, if you're willing to let us all keep assuming that you're lying.
I have posted proof. I can pose to you to prove it doesn't exist. I know it to be fact. I have proved it to be fact. Why should I repeat myself because you can not do research?
Hay ACLU Teachers-Azz James "Thumbs Down" McPhersonnnn Agent For The Soros Media Empire, Your A Fool In A Ball Cap, However You Will Not Go Away And You Will Have Only One Vote Nov 2012 So Hang Tough Comrade James< Yikeess, "From Each According To His Ability, To Each According To His Need". God Bless America And Sarah Palin.
So what would somebody that had no doubt that he
was born in Hawaii, but believe he was adopted be
called?
What is the term for that?
A person who believes in something without evidence for it. And, get this, if Obama were adopted by Soetoro, it would have absolutely no effect on either Obama's US Citizenship or on his Natural Born Citizen status.
What gave you the idea that it would have an effect?
All native born US citizens are Natural Born US Citizens. The only kind of a US Citizen who is not a Natural Born Citizen is a naturalized citizen.
The US Supreme Court did not rule against Chester Arthur. Senator Leahy did not say that Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen.
The reason that the Electoral College gave Obama every single vote that he won in the general election was that not one single Elector thought that the citizenship of Obama's father or dual nationality has any effect on Natural Born Citizen status. And the same was true of the US Congress, which confirmed Obama's election unanimously. And the US Supreme Court has turned down every birther case. And Thomas Jefferson was a dual national when he was president.
Of course history is wrong and your OPINION is right.
You have a proven issue with comprehension.
Education is your friend.
These are the FACTS.
Education is your friend.
And YOUR the one who refuses to accept historical facts.
Education is your friend.
The historical facts are that the US Supreme Court took no action on Chester Arthur, and James Blaine beat Arthur at the Republican convention for many reasons, the main one being that Blaine was more popular than Arthur.
The SCOTUS ruling was against Arthur and his dual citizenship. Arthur was denied renomination for Presidency by the Republican Party.
The ruling is in the SCOTUS archives. Do a little research. You might just not like what you find.
There was NO Supreme Court ruling on Arthur.
Do a little research. You might just not like what you find.
Obviously I DID do research. That is how I FOUND the SCOTUS ruling against Arthur.
Are you too inept or just too lazy, to find the ruling as many others have?
I did do research.
And your right, I didn't like what I found. I found out we have an USURPER sitting as POTUS.
Are you afraid of this revelation also?
There was NO US Supreme Court ruling on the Natural Born Citizen status of President Chester Arthur.
Keep trying to convince yourself.
I've seen it and read it so I know it's fact.
It was YOU who made the claim, and you have not shown any evidence to support it.
There was NO US Supreme Court ruling on the Natural Born Citizen status of President Chester Arthur.
I stated there IS a ruling by SCOTUS against Arthur.
I gave proof there is such a ruling. You AGAIN denied.
I really don't care if you believe it or not.
I, as well as others, know it to exist. I have seen it with my own eyes. You can not even say you have researched.
Keep trying to convince yourself. I know it to be fact.
You did not give any proof at all. You never cited any ruling.
I did. You refuse to accept it.
I don't care if you believe it or not. I have seen it. I have posted an excerpt. Others have seen it. Others have posted it. The end.
The US Supreme Court did not rule against Chester Arthur. Senator Leahy did not say that Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen.
Education is your friend.
Yes, I have known education to be my friend for a long time. That is how I know that SCOTUS ruled against Chester A. Arthur. My comprehension skills enable me to know Senator Leahy made the statement.
Now if YOU would find this friendship, you might be able to recognize the truth.
Keep dreaming. The facts are closing in fast around you aren't they?
Don't cry too hard when your Messiah is IMPEACHED.
Education is your friend.
I suggest you make friends.
The US Supreme Court did not rule that Chester A. Arthur was not a Natural Born Citizen. There is no such ruling. Senator Leahy made no such statement.
Education is your friend.
I posted where the ruling can be found AND an excerpt of it.
You are OBVIOUSLY to inept AND too lazy to seek the truth yourself. Until you take control of your life, you will always be a sheep.
Education is MY friend, Try making it yours.
It is YOU who tries to ignore FACTS.OTHERS TELL you YOUR opinion.
In the words of Rep, Bingham, who is believed fathered the 14th Amendment,in the Spring of 1868:
"May God forbid that the future historian shall record of this day's proceedings, that by reason of the failure of the legislative power of the people to triumph over the usurpations of an apostate President, the fabric of American empire fell and perished from the earth!…I ask you to consider that we stand this day pleading for the violated majesty of the law, by the graves of half a million of martyred hero-patriots who made death beautiful by the sacrifice of themselves for their country, the Constitution and the laws, and who, by their sublime example, have taught us all to obey the law; that none are above the law…"
Why can't somebody check the published birth certificate number and date against the number and date for his birth recorded in the State of Hawaii?
Birth certificates were processed in batches. That means that their numbers were not necessarily in chronological order.
First, it should be obvious even to the dumbest birther that a child born outside of the USA requires either a US visa on a foreign passport or to be entered on the mother’s US passport to get to the USA. Those documents or the applications for them would still exist and would have been found easily IF Obama was born outside of the USA. But no such document has been found.
Second, there were notices of Obama’s birth in the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961. And these were not ads placed by relatives. They could not have been ads because the Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice ads in 1961. They only took the official notices sent to them by the government of Hawaii, which only sent out the notices for births IN Hawaii. And, the government could not have been fooled by a claim of a birth at home because in those cases it demanded witness statements.
So Obama’s parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya); (2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother’s US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed; (3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one); (4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital; (5) got three Republican officials in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama’s files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
ALL of that would have had to have happened for Obama to have been born outside of the USA.
Who is
"First, it should be obvious even to the dumbest"
the birther or the person trying convince them they are wrong. At the beginning it was the birther, now it seems to be the ones even discussing this non issue, unless that is was the DNC want you to do. See the longer you stay on this subject the more convinced you are just a hired hack from someone in the DNC or higher to continue this charade.
I got no facts but I got politic in my blood and can feel the charade being used by the left. Heck no lets not talk about real issues and that Barry is the worst President in History. Period.
You "got no facts"—which says it all.
And you've got a fairy tale.
So, vote against him. Support his opponent. Big deal.
Obama may well loose the election, but it will not be because of the myths that he was born overseas, adopted, became a citizen of Indonesia or that his father's US citizenship affects Obama's natural born citizen status. (Or the one about Obama senior not being Obama's biological father.)
If a Republican can convince the American voter that she or he is better than Obama and should be president, that is fine as far as I am concerned.
But the lies about Obama's place of birth, adoption, real father, etc–are despicable.
Yo, ellen! http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=299781
Yo Gary!
Though WND claims that the article it cites says that all birth certificates were processed in order, the article actually does NOT say that. It is far more likely that they were processed in batches or that the documents were simply stacked and processed from the top, with the earliest being processed last.
And, of course, the WND article does not account for the following:
It should be obvious that a child born outside of the USA requires either a US visa on a foreign passport or to be entered on the mother’s US passport to get to the USA. Those documents or the applications for them would still exist and would have been found easily IF Obama was born outside of the USA. But no such document has been found.
Second, there were notices of Obama’s birth in the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961. And these were not ads placed by relatives. They could not have been ads because the Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice ads in 1961. They only took the official notices sent to them by the government of Hawaii, which only sent out the notices for births IN Hawaii. And, the government could not have been fooled by a claim of a birth at home because in those cases it demanded witness statements.
So Obama's parents would have had to have (1) traveled to Kenya or some other country late in pregnancy at high risk and high expense (particularly to Kenya); (2) got the child back to the USA without either a visa or his being entered on his mother's US passport or somehow had the files of the document and the applications for the document all sealed; (3) lied about the place of birth (which is also unlikely because when you have done something interesting like give birth in a foreign country you generally boast about it. And it is also unnecessary to lie since for all purposes but the presidency a naturalized child is as good as a natural born one); (4) gotten away with the lie despite evidence that Hawaii demanded witness statements whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital; (5) got three Republican officials in Hawaii to lie about the fact that the original birth certificate in Obama's files verified that he was born in Hawaii.
ALL of that would have had to have happened for Obama to have been born outside of the USA.
Yes, I believe it does. Since I personally don't care one way or the other. It holds no relevance to what facts I have found that Obama is a usurper, why should I care?
My interest was when it was "claimed" they made a phone call to the Indonesian Embassy and they openly reveled adoption information. I make the same call, and they would NOT release any information on individual adoptions.
I have NEVER asserted Obama was adopted. In my opinion, it holds no bearing on his eligibility.
To put it plainly, I DON'T CARE if Obama was adopted or not.
James
You are living on another planet of you think our elected officals "give a chit" what their constituents want or need. It is ALWAYS about what THEY want or need… period!
That fact has been proven over and over again, by all parties throughout the decades. My exageration has a purpose… a basic concept to impose term limits BEFORE corruption takes hold. Lobbyists and special interests SHOULD be illegal. They breed the type political corruption that we are experiencing in this current administration and the unprecidented power grabs. "AS SOON AS YOU GET SCREWED… YOU CHANGE THE SHEETS IMMEDIATAELY"
Nope it ain't over until Ellen says so. So I guess we will have to watch this thing pan out while Barry destroys the country and keeps lying on almost everything he has ever said.
So, vote against him. Support his opponent. Big deal.
Obama may well loose the election, but it will not be because of the myths that he was born overseas, adopted, became a citizen of Indonesia or that his father's US citizenship affects Obama's natural born citizen status. (Or the one about Obama senior not being Obama's biological father.)