RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

2nd Posting: The Obama Birth Certificate Controversy

By Larry Johnson on July 27, 2009 at 12:30 AM in Current Affairs

Due to the number of comments, we’ve closed the original post and re-posted Larry’s essay in full to allow you to continue your discussion.

The Obama birth certificate controversy emerged again in the last couple of weeks thanks to the questioning of Lou Dobbs:

I think it is important to put to rest the notion that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. He was not. He was born in Hawaii, a U.S. state, and by virtue of that fact is a U.S. citizen. So what’s the big deal? The Obama team have refused to release the original birth certificate and that fact fuels speculation that they are hiding something. Well they are. What?

Barack Obama was not named “Barack” in the original birth certificate. He was “Barry” not Barack. But that’s not all. The birth certificate was amended when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian muslim, around 1968. David Axelrod and Barack Obama decided against trying to explain these issues, worried that the Soetoro birth certificate would reinforce the charge that Barack was a secret muslim. Such a charge would have muddied the waters and alarmed too many folks in the midwest and south. They covered it up and, with the help of an incurious media, kept these questions tamped down.

If you want to read more about Barack’s life as Barry Soetoro you should go back and read a post I did a year ago.

Let me be clear. Barack Obama meets the Constitutional requirements to be President. He was a young boy when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. As a youngster he had no say in the amendment to his original birth certificate. He also was introduced to Islam through his step-father. But that relationship ended when Barry Obama Soetoro returned to Hawaii to live with his grandparents. He never renounced his U.S. citizenship. The refusal of Barack Obama and his political team to forthrightly address these issues has kept the controversy alive.

The following video by video blogger syc1959 illustrates how a birth certificate is legally “updated” to reflect an adoption.

Barack Obama is now caught in the lie. If he comes clean with the original copy of the birth certificate he will be damaged politically because it will be clear he was not forthcoming or transparent about his childhood. People will realize the story he has told is more myth than fact. This in turn will fuel a new meme, namely, that Barack Obama cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

Similarly the rightwing will be damaged if it persists with the nonsense that Barack was born in Kenya. I know many believe this but it is not true. The real reason Barack Obama is evasive about his original birth certificate is that he wants people to forget he once was an Indonesian muslim boy named Barry Soetoro. It is that simple.

  • Patrick Henry

    Spot On..

    Sounds Good to me Larry..

    • Tony Stark

      Suppose hypothetically that the mother of Tony Blair or Vladimir Putin was an American citizen at the time of their birth (but their fathers were not, just like Obama’s father who was a UK citizen) and they were born in Omaha, Nebraska making them dual citizens. If simply being born inside the US is enough to also bestow “natural born citizenship” as required additionally of US citizens by Article II of the Constitution, then shouldn’t both of them be also eligible to be POTUS should they decide to move to the US and run for that office? Wouldn’t they have divided loyalties that the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid by specifying that a POTUS must be a “natural born citizen” and not just a citizen? Citizens can run for any other office and in our hypothetical scenario both Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin could run for Congress as US citizens by birth, but they must meet Article II’s more stringent definition on who is eligible to be POTUS.

    • Tony Stark

      Let’s take another scenario. Suppose the UK government wanted a US administration more subservient to it and decided to have an MI6 agent with both UK and US citizenship (acquired by being born in California while his British parents were on holiday here) move to the US, infiltrate one of the major parties and become their candidate for POTUS. If simply being a US citizen at birth was the same as being a “natural born citizen”, then what is going to stop foreign powers from ending our nation’s existence by allowing such infiltration to the office of POTUS?

      • Jac

        That is wild.

        More likely, one of Larry Johnson’s intel friends did the audacious act (in the slovenly media’s eyes) of checking Hawaii court records for a case in the sixties with a party named Soetero. Whoa! Genius! ;)

        I imagine the jurisdiction was Hawaii, there were witnesses to establish abandonment of father’s rights,

        and the final order instructed the birth certificate to be changed (which I don’t think is necessary for adoption, but maybe it is).

        Do I get a cookie?

        • oowawa

          Whoa–Give yourself a Famous Amos, Jac. I have no idea if this is true, but it satisfies my itch for vicarious spy novel intrigue. I like it!

          • Jac

            It should not be a spy novel! But simple research. I am being a little facetious.

            If Barry Aloha Obama was formally adopted by Mr. Soetero, his birth father’s parental rights must be terminated, if still living. By a court. I am guessing the cause alleged for termination was “abandonment.” There should be court records about this in Hawaii–if Barry was formally, legalistically adopted. I doubt an Indonesian judge would find abandonment on some foreign woman’s say-so.

            • oowawa

              Yes, if your “guesses” are accurate, it should have been discovered by an ambitious investigative reporter through “simple research.” But they all seem to have been on a lengthy vacation . . .

              • oowawa

                Maybe now that so many “investigative reporters” should be heading back from Alaska, they’ll have more time for stuff like this.

            • goldengrahme

              All very interesting, but it does not address the wider litmus test: why are ALL the Great One’s papers sealed from scrutiny?
              Not one of his college transcrips, to my knowledge, has been released to affirm his credentials as an American citizen. If he received student loans as a foreign national…busted!

              His records in the Illinois legislature are still taboo, not floating around the public domain. His white Grandmother was never interviewed by a curious press corps (a glaring void in America’s frenzied news cycle), leading many to ask: “What did she know that Obama wanted to keep secret?”

              A hundred such questions keep cropping up
              and summarily get quashed by the MSM. Why spend a million dollars to keep secrets if said secrets are not a hindrance to political advancement?

              I recommend following the Phil Berg law suit and analysis of the Obama saga. IMO, Barack was illegitimate from day one. He is a handy
              invention by powers who see him as a useful
              idiot. And he doesn’t disappoint, does he?

      • dave

        Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution

        “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President”

        You don’t have to be a natural born citizen to be president. Just being a citizen to the us is enough.

    • deminva

      There’s no need to rely upon the detective work of an individual who has never seen President Obama’s birth certificate and instead tries to compare online photos of it to his own. (Notwithstanding it sure is cool that he’s a Mayflower Descendant!) Nor do we need to rely on Larry Johnson’s estimable powers of speculation about the president’s first name originally being “Barry” instead of “Barack.”

      Factcheck.org has complete information on President Obama’s birth certificate, which its staff have seen and handled. They provide photographs showing its creases and its raised seal. It’s all available right here:

      http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

      I recognize the need of some to question the right of a black man to reside in the White House, but surely there are better ways for us all to serve our country.

      And as to why President Obama won’t respond to these allegations? To “put this ‘issue’ to rest”?
      Perhaps he simply can’t be bothered, because it’s utterly baseless.

      • Califemme

        No, not A black man, THIS black man. Its not about race, you racist.

      • jcsjcm

        Because it is utterly baseless and we do not have that right because we are mere servants and who are we anyone – just the people. We have lost credibility and have no rights in this America any longer. Glad you are willing to just give up your rights (oh nevermind) you are one of those covering his tracks. (wink – I gotcha)

        If we the people have to give blood for a drug test and go through background checks for a high ranking job, then the President of the United States must submit all information pertaining to who the heck he is and where he has been. This cover up BS is beyond comprehension. They stake out Sarah Palins home and butt into her childrens lives, yet OB gets not a notice and everyone stating oh just leave him alone. How pitiful are we as American Citizens. Unbelievable!

    • ron willow

      I think your theory is flawed….his published announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser is not for barry soetoro. I could elaborate further but suffice to say that even that announcement is just based on public records recordings based on applications at the recorders office and is not proof of anything concerning the issues at hand.

      • Jac

        His published announcement lists no name for the child, as customary.

        Larry’s information comes from later acts, Mr. Soetero’s adoption of Barry years after the Obamas divorced.

        I am assuming the adoption took place in Hawaii rather than Indonesia, but could be wrong.

    • ron willow

      I think your theory is flawed….his published announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser is not for barry obama. I could elaborate further but suffice to say that even that announcement is just based on public records recordings based on applications at the recorders office and is not proof of anything concerning the issues at hand.

    • PoliticalWaif

      I fully agree that Larry is spot on here, Patrick Henry. I may suggest a different final assumption as to the desired result of the Obama political machinery.

      Larry J said “The refusal of Barack Obama and his political team to forthrightly address these issues has kept the controversy alive.” He also said: “Similarly the rightwing will be damaged if it persists with the nonsense that Barack was born in Kenya. I know many believe this but it is not true”

      Nail on head… the desired goal, IMHO.

      Obama has no desire, and sees no benefit to put the birther bit to rest. At some point American moderates will be increasingly unhappy with the results of the terrible trio of spending/control, and Bush can no longer be the convenient demonizer. Other generic fodder is needed discredit the GOP as lunatics & saboteurs.

      Most conservatives are as quick to distance themselves from the birthers as many liberals do with the Code Pink types. Yet notice when the going gets tough on selling the latest nanny spending issue, the birther subject manages to find it’s way into the media?

      i.e.: after a particularly bad couple of weeks for the Big Zero, requests to Hawaii officials mysteriously increases without reason. By whom? Genuine “birthers” from out of the blue? Or a coordinated effort to revive it at a convenient moment in time?

      Then yesterday Harry Reid stands on the Senate floor accusing the GOP members of being birthers, effectively hanging that albatross around the GOPs neck for the media to spread.

      Yet that same day, a unanimous House vote (read GOP included) on a resolution to mark Hawaii’s 50th anniversary as a state, also included a clause about the state being the 44th President’s birth place was thrown in for good measure. Did I mention no GOP member opposed it? Bears repeating.

      uh huh. When the going gets rough, the birther issue bubbles to the surface to distract. Any good Alinsky student knows keeping this screwdriver in your toolbox for multipurpose use is invaluable.

  • gumsnapper

    Well, I looked up a constitutional law site and here is what is listed under “natural born citizen”:

    http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

    Natural-born citizen

    Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

    The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

    Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”

    •Anyone born inside the United States *
    •Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
    •Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
    •Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
    •Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
    •Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
    •Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
    •A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

    So it would seem that as long as Obama’s mother was a US citizen, it doesn’t matter who is father was or where he was born.

    • http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/07/27/2nd-posting-the-obama-birth-certificate-controversy/#comments GORDO

      Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (CDR USNR Retired) – Lead Plaintiff in Kerchner et al vs Obama & Congress et al wrote the following:

      “There is absolutely nothing in that U.S. Statute, USC Title 8 Section 1401, that grants “natural born citizenship” to anyone. The legal term of art “natural born citizen” is not even mentioned in that law. USC Title 8 Section 1401 only determines by law who is a “citizen” or a “national” of the U.S. at birth, i.e., a basic “citizen at birth”. The Section 1401 law is a naturalization law which grants citizenship by law, not by nature. The legal term of art “citizen at birth” is not the same legally as the legal term of art “natural born citizen”.”

      http://tinyurl.com/lz3m3m

    • jbjd

      gumsnapper, the only job in the Constitution that lists as one of its qualifications, one must be a NBC, is the POTUS. If NBC = C then, why did the drafters explicitly add another category?

      • bho boo

        exactly jbjd, they’re different
        in Article II s.1 it says NBC can be POTUS OR a USCitizen if alive at time of ratification (pertained only to founders)

        So the Constitution specifically states that NBC does not equal US citizen, they are entirely different.

        NBC is dirt and blood (BOTH parents) AT BIRTH

        • bho boo

          oops it says POTUS can be NBC OR US citizen alive at time of ratifiction

          • jbjd

            Yes; but since no one who was a citizen at that time is currently alive… NBC means nothing until defined by the courts. But, given the full wording, one could ask, since the founders were born in America, what aspect of their status would make them not NBC’s? Answer: they were born subjects of a foreign sovereign.

            • bho boo

              ALL of them were born here before the country existed.. so none of their parents could be US citizens, so they could not be natural born citizens even though they were US citizens

              I think NBC has been defined in the three SCOTUS cases, Wong’s parents had permanent domicile all their adult life in the US, and John Bingham father of the 14th spelled out the definition in the Congressional record plainly

              • jbjd

                No; no court of law has defined NBC. You are right in saying that some of the parents of the founders were born in other countries. However, the only difference parentage makes is that it could subject the child to being a subject of more than one sovereign.

                • bho boo

                  Happersett, Perkins v. Elg, US v. Wong Kim Ark set forth the definition of natural born citizen. It’s been codified since 1758.
                  http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm
                  La Loi Des Gens, the basis of the Constitution
                  in Book I, Chapter XIX, part 212, it says: “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” The definition the Founding Fathers did not deem necessary to supply since it was already understood. And since Obama’s father was a Kenyan citizen, Obama is therefore not a natural born citizen and is thus ineligible to be President.”

                  • Bill McGee

                    Bingo, Vattel’s Law of Nations(1758), the veritable guide that the founding fathers used and even mention in article 1 sect 8 under the congressional powers part..

                    good catch, many people either don’t see, don’t want to see, or don’t “get it”…

            • Bill McGee

              you’re quite correct with but one exception, the Constitution does actually tell us where to look for the definition..
              Please feel free to read the following article of mine, it’s too long (I think) to post here, so I’ll just give you a link to it if it’s alright…

              http://www.sodahead.com/group/3652/forum/8064/discussion/189461/

              • oowawa

                Thanks for posting this link, Bill. A very interesting discussion.

                • Bill McGee

                  you’re welcome, I hope that it helps whether or not someone agrees with it…

    • bho boo

      BUNK! the 14th defines US citizenship, not natural born citizenship

      US citizenship is defined by statutes (as you list) but Natural Born Citizenship is birthright to a nation encoded in law since 1758 via La Loi Des Gens

    • old one

      That makes him a citizen, but not necessarily a “natural-born citizen”, required for POTUS. Wrong amendment, wrong definition.

    • guess who

      Nice try.According to your post Osama bin Ladin’s son could be president of the us.I don’t think so.
      Imagine any wowen who is a natural born citizen could be paid to go to some enemy country of the us. get pregnent by the leader of that country,fly back to the u.s.a. and have his child here.Then later he could run for president and run the country that is the enemy of his father.Now do you understand why both parents must be citizens of this country.Obamas father was Kenyan which makes Obama ineligible the birth certificate does not matter.Obama is the first president in the history of this country to sign an executive order sealing all his records on the very first day in office.Now why do you think he would do this?

    • Bill McGee

      About the only flaw in your thinking there is that he becomes a statutory natural Born Citizen, not a constitutional nartural born Citizen as outlined in the intent and Understanding of the founding fathers and the common understanding at the time.

      very good post though, but the fact that he’s a citizen, or even possible a “natural Born Citizen” negates the intent and meaning of the Constitution’s Article 1 sect 1 requirement, however if you’d really like to know what the founding fathers refered to for their definition and their understanding of “Natural Born Citizen” simply note that in Article 1 sect 8 they reference the “Law of Nations” written by E. Vattel in 1758, and in “The law of Nations” book 1 chapter 19 sect 212 it clearly states (abgridged) that a native, or natural Born Citizen of a country is one who is of the country and of parents who are citizens of that country.
      the SCOTUS has upheld that definition on several cases ranging in dates from 1874 through 1939, and this is also reflected in the K.W.Ark case as well, since the SCOTUS deemed him a “citizen”, but did not confer “natural Born” status on him.
      It’s also interesting to note that the 14th amendment does not confer “Natural Born” status either even though many interpret it to do so.

      In the case of Obama, we are best guided by looking at the 1874 Scotus opinion, and the words of the man considered to be the father of the 14th amendment.

      In 1874, in the Minor v. Happersett case, the Supreme Court affirmed the definition of natural born citizen which had appeared in the 1797 English translation of Vattel’s Law of Nations:

      …it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. (Minor v. Happersett, 1874)

      In the 14th Amendment, what does “jurisdiction” mean?

      During the debates over the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, both of its primary framers, Sen. Jacob Howard and Sen. Lyman Trumbull, made it clear that the word “jurisdiction”, as used in the 14th Amendment, means sole, complete, absolute, exclusive U.S. jurisdiction and the absence of any other jurisdiction or allegiance.

      Sen. Lyman Trumbull: The provision is, that “all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” That means “subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.” What do we mean by “complete jurisdiction thereof?” Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

      Sen. Jacob Howard: [I] concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Trumbull], in holding that the word “jurisdiction,” as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now. (What ‘Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof’ Really Means)

      In 1884, the Supreme Court said:

      The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized… (Page 112 U. S. 101-102, Elk v. Wilkins, 1884)

      Sole U.S. jurisdiction was a core requirement for 14th Amendment citizenship. The 14th Amendment granted citizenship to emancipated slaves and their descendants, because they were, and have always been, under sole U.S. jurisdiction. Native Americans were subject to tribal jurisdiction and thus were not under sole U.S. jurisdiction. That’s why the 14th Amendment did not grant citizenship to American Indians, even though virtually all American Indians were born in the United States.

      For sake of argument, if the 14th Amendment had redefined “natural born citizen” to mean anyone “born in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” (where “jurisdiction” is understood to mean sole U.S. jurisdiction), Obama would still fail to meet the natural born citizen requirement. Here’s why…

      On his web site, Obama claims that his father was a British subject and that, in 1961, the citizenship status of children of British subjects was “governed” (that’s Obama’s word) by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Thus Obama’s citizenship status, at birth, was “governed” by British law, in addition to U.S. law.

      If Obama’s citizenship status at birth was “governed” by the laws of a foreign country, how could he, at birth, be subject to sole U.S. jurisdiction, which is an essential requirement for 14th Amendment citizenship?

      you can read more at: http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

      Thanks
      Bill

      • Bill McGee

        dang typos, That’s article 2 section 1 not 1/1, I’m sure as i re read this “since I didn’t see it had posted originally, that I’ll find something else…

    • jcsjcm

      This is where you are mistaken. A Citizen is not a natural born Citizen. A natural born is born from 2 us citizens since neither parent holds allegiance to any other country. Barack Senior was a British citizen and Barack Jr. would be considered a dual citizen at birth which means he has allegiance both to the United States and to Britain.

      This is where I beg to differ with the meaning of Natural born. Now 2 naturalized citizens can have a natural born citizen since their allegiance lies with the US.

      This needs to be brought forth to SCOTUS since they know that the entire country is at each others throats as to the true meaning of Natural Born. This is a constitutional issue and they are fast asleep on the job. God Bless America we are slowly sinking!

  • typical.white.person

    gumsucker,

    you obviously didn’t read the foot note in the link you provided. It says:

    * There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.

    Obama’s father, from Kenya, was a British citizen, and Obama admitted he was a British citizen at birth.

    A “natural born citizen” excludes a person with dual citizenship.

    Children of diplomats are excluded because their allegiance would be to their parent’s homeland.

    • typical.white.person

      FactChexk.org, Obama’s propaganda outlet:

      As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:

      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.

      In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

      • bho boo

        Well he can’thave it both ways, Stanley Ann as a minor was a British citizen if married to Obama Sr. (by BNA 1948) so Obama never had anything but British citizenship and nothing to revert to at age 21 but that…except that he became an Indonesian citizen

        • Tony Stark

          If his long form BC shows that he was born in Hawaii, then that would make him both a British and US citizen. That still won’t make him a “natural born citizen.”

      • Chicago Joe

        yes, a “citizen,” but not a “natural born citizen.”

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    But there was an age requirement of the parent bestowing the US citizenship rights at the time of Obama’s birth that may have not been met. You have to go the laws that were in effect before 1980′s. Also, there is a time requirement argument bantered around about how long Stanley Ann had lived in the US after the age of fourteen. Seems she may have cut that one close, also.

  • WhatNow

    gumsnapper states – Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”.

    This does not define what is a NATURAL Born Citizen. According to our Constitution – ONLY natural born citizens can be President. Being a citizen at birth just gets you a certified copy of your birh certificate but NOT necessarily the Presidency.

    There’s a distinct difference between Natural Born Citizen and a Citizen at birth.

    Anyway – why is Obama spending nearly 1 million dollars on lawyers to NOT show the birth certificate?

    Nice try but no banana for you.

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    If Obama really is eligible and the fear is that the lie of his childhood would have made him politically unappealing, WHY are all the rest of his records sealed?

    Wouldn’t he wanted to have used those to bolster his personal credibility?

    As it stands now, he is a phantom. It’s the unknown about him that will not be put to rest.

  • bobo

    Larry has been wrong before but I think he’s correct about this. I really don’t care where Obama was born because it doesn’t change the fact that he’s president and almost nothing will force him out of office until America chooses to do so in 2012. However, I do wonder about why Obama does not end the controversy and just release his birth certificate. I think he should release his BC and Republicans should find a smart way to pressure him to do this. But I agree that absurd lies and theories about Obama being born in Kenya does nothing but make the Right look like fools. Demand the BC because nothing less would be covering the absolute truth from Americans. We have a right to see the BC.

    • bho boo

      thanks but no thanks for putting words in our mouths

      we say he’s not a natural born citizen because his father was kenyan
      based on supreme court precedent definitions of the term natural born citizen

  • anon

    …From Obama’s propaganda outlet, FactChexk.org

    As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:

    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.

    In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

  • indict_cheney

    Obama’s propaganda outlet, FactChexk.org

    As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:

    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.

    In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    I have never seen the rightwing go for the Kenya angle. Did I miss something because I don’t listen to Rush? Only the conspiracy wingers are working that angle, I thought.

    The best GOP bet is to keep the controversy going to let the public get really wary of Obama on all fronts – the polls are already reflecting the public’s reticence on his decision making and loyalty to democracy as America defines it. Gates-gate was certainly another nail in the popularity coffin.

    Secondly: Get the bill passed requiring all presidential candidates to provide irrefutable proof of citizenship by election time 2012. No grandfathering for Obama allowed.

    The law would then require Obama to produce those mystery documents.

  • viking

    I think this:

    LJ is probably right or he would not have stated it.

    If our current POTUS forged documents there’s a serious problem.

    Whatever the explanation to the people for forging docs will not wash because it requires the people to admit and consent that they are as stupid as his handlers thought we were; plus worse, liars win.

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    So possibly it does boil down to the problem with the document that was released through his stop the smears website? (Correct me if I’m wrong, it’s late)

    • TeakWoodKite

      This is why I would like to see the BC BO mentions in his Book.

      Since his book is full of fabrications, It would be worth looking at.

  • viking

    I think you’re right on.

  • lahana

    During the campaign, I thought that once people learned the truth about Obama that they would turn away from him.

    Instead, I now think that the opposite will happen. As people turn away from Obama, calls for investigations will increase and suddenly people will be aghast about what they learn. (Cue clip of the inspector from Casablanca being ahast to discover that there is gambling at Ricks’.

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    So the ramifications become numerous and large in scope for Obama, if indeed documents were forged. It’s hard to buy the story that HI destroyed original birth certificates eight years ago…

    What would play into the reason that there are NO records of Obama’s being made available?

    • viking

      I don’t believe all of HI’s records were destroyed at all. I think its possible that LJ’s statement is true. But that generates the question about the veracity of his posted Certificate of Live Birth, which is seriously short on any detail AND may have been altered (forged).

    • FranSC

      I think all those school and college records are being kept under wraps because B0 may very well have been an Affirmative Action student and that would be embarrassing to him and remove his elitist labels.

      He did not want to speak about his family having a hard time of any sort in the campaign until his strategists decided he was being too elitist. He then began to reluctantly embellish the fact he was the son of a single mother who for a time was on food stamps. He much preferred to look prosperous and sophisticated.

      All I can say is, he makes me ill – then and now!

      • Tuppence411

        I think he may have also filed as a foreign student with his dual citizen status. Oh my! I can just imagine those college admission directors salivating at the thought of decorating their campus with someone with as an exotic background as Barky Oblahblah.

        • FranSC

          Tuppence411, I agree completely about the possibility of B0 using the foreign student angle or the concerns that the records might reveal some aspect of his citizenship that would not add up to other things he’s said.

          Remember his mother and father were ‘career’ students at ivy league universities. So they would have known many ins and outs for success in gaining admission to those universities as well as how to be awarded significant financial aid using that status. You are also right about the admissions people probably falling all over themselves to get such a student.

    • Lisabona

      If, HI Health Department went paperless, why 0bama sign on January 29th, presidential order # 13489, to stop releasing any personal records of his?

  • FranSC

    It was reported here by a reliable source that Nancy Pelosi certified the election results and it was on that certification that the question was asked if the newly elected president was a naturalized or natural-born citizen of the US. Pelosi, not Barack Obama, certified “Yes” to that question at the same time she certified the votes.

    Seems to me that is putting the cart before the horse. Why is certifying naturalization delayed to that point? Why is that certification and proof not required before someone becomes a candidate for their party’s nomination?

    • jbjd

      Under laws enacted in the states, in order to get the state’s election official to print the name of the candidate for POTUS from the major political party onto the state’s general election ballot, the party officials must certify, he is their nominee. In addition, in 1 (one) state, HI, the party must also certify, the nominee is Constitutionally eligible for the job. Hawaiian Revised Statutes §11-113 So, that’s what NP certified, in HI.
      http://www.scribd.com/doc/9656064/DNC-Obama-Hawaii-Cert-2008

      • FranSC

        jbjd, thanks for clarifying my information and for providing the link to the certification document signed by Pelosi. I’m very happy to have this document for my files.

    • http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1703 Kip Hamilton

      obama has another potential problem because he certified himself as eligible (and a natural born citizen) to the state of Arizona:

      http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1703

  • lahana

    Actually I do believe that the originals for Obama’s birth certificate have been destroyed — along with almost everyone else’s. But not until they had been scanned or filmed for microfiche. Just because they do not have the physican copy does not mean that they do not have the record. Laws are very specific about things like this, and if his records have actually been destroyed, someone is in very big legal trouble.

    • bho boo

      Fukino personally saw the long form bc in 2008
      http://www.theobamafile.com/_images/FukinoStatement
      so it could not have been destroyed in 2001

    • b mathews

      does no one think its odd that immediately after the election, obama went to HI and rham emanuel went to africa? perhaps with a pocket full of campaign cash to pay off some corrupt officials in africa to bury the original bc? how come no is mentioning that obamas own grandmother said she was at his birth in mombassa? too bad she died before some real reporters had a chance ot talk to her. have we been had?

      • jcsjcm

        It was actually Mama Sara which is Barack’s Step Grandmother. She stated she was at the hospital in Mombasa when he was born. Immediately after that admission many came down on her and under tight security was able to now confess that it was Obama Sr that she had witnessed the birth of. Problem with that is she was only about 12 years old when Sr. was born. So, you do the math on that one and who strong handed her!

  • DaddysDarlin

    How is it then that Obama traveled to Pakistan when no American Citizen at that time could travel to Pakistan? What does his passport say that would allow him to do such a thing? It would have to say that he was the citizen of another country in order for him to gain access.
    There is the fact to that he wont even release his college records, because it is reported that he received a scholarship that is only awarded to foreign students. If that isn’t so, why not release his college records?
    Obama is hiding too much, if you are telling the truth you don’t have to hide anything, that is why Obama will never, ever be transparent or have a transparent government. Obama has too much to hide.

    • viking

      You’re right! God bless you, America and everyone here at NQ!I fully agree with our premise. Goodnight all, I’m signing off.

      Let not your heart be troubled! (I, obviously, stole the line from Hannity) Nonetheless, those are good words!!

      • FranSC

        Yes, Viking those are good words, even Biblical (Let not your heart be troubled), but the only thing that grates on me worse when Hannity says that phrase over and over, is when he follows it with, “the great, great, great, American panel will be with us next” – night after night, after night. Jeezzz. He obviously made that up by himself and likes it!

        • tzada

          The rest of that verse says, you believe in God. believe also in me. Spoken by Jesus

    • RKStone

      At the time Obama traveled to Pakistan, Americans were allowed to travel to Pakistan on American passports.

      • maniaco

        RKStone -

        Thanks for your participation.

        For the sake of credibility, please provide the source of your information when you say that:

        “At the time Obama traveled to Pakistan, Americans were allowed to travel to Pakistan on American passports.”

        It seems that the overwhelming majority here at NQ have exactly the opposite opinion.

      • maniaco

        RKStone~

        Thanks for participating.

        For the purpose of credibility, please provide the source of your information when you say:

        “At the time Obama traveled to Pakistan, Americans were allowed to travel to Pakistan on American passports.”

        The overwhelming majority who have posted on this subject here at NQ and elsewhere have exactly the opposite opinion that you claim.

        • Michael Adams

          http://wire.factcheck.org/2009/06/05/more-birther-nonsense-obamas-1981-pakistan-trip/

          There was no such ban. Americans traveled there without incident, as shown by a travel piece that appeared in the New York Times in 1981, dated June 14. Barbara Crossette, an assistant news editor of the Times, told her mostly American readers they could travel to Lahore, Pakistan, by air, rail or road, adding: “Tourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans) at border crossings and airports.”

          Her article prompted a letter to the Times from the U.S. consul general in Lahore saying he would “welcome an influx of Americans” to Lahore. He cautioned only that in addition to getting a visa for Pakistan, American visitors also should be careful to line up an Indian visa for the return trip if they planned to travel overland. The letter is dated Aug. 23, 1981.

          Also, a travel advisory from the State Department dated Aug. 17, 1981 notes that Americans traveling to Pakistan require a 30-day visa, and that any staying longer must check in with Pakistan’s Foreigner Registration Office. A digital copy of the advisory is archived at the Electronic Research Collection, a partnership between the State Department and the Federal Depository Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

        • Kevin

          “Before traveling to Pakistan, American Citizens should be aware of the following updated visa requirements: 30 day visas are available at Pakistani airports for tourists only. As these visas are rarely extended beyond the 30 day time per visa. Tourists planning to stay longer should secure visas before coming to Pakistan. Any traveler coming into Pakistan overland from India must repeat must have a valid visa, as 30 day visas are not repeat not issued at the overland border crossing point at Wagha.”

          US State Department Travel Advisory for Pakistan in 1981, No. 81-33A

      • tzada

        Did he travel there more than once?

    • felizarte

      I also wondered if he used an Indonesian passport to go to Pakistan. This would have been tantamount to waiving his US citizenship. Other questions I have: (1) what passport did he use as a child to travel to Indonesia? (2) What passport did he use to come back to the U.S. to live with his grandmother? Did he use an Indonesian passport? (3) When did he apply for a U.S. passport? Was it after his trip to Pakistan?

      • b mathews

        how come no one has asked to see obamas passport? that would certainly clear things up.

      • FLDemFem

        Children up to the age of seven, I think it’s seven, may travel on their mother’s passport. So he wouldn’t have needed one to go to and from Indonesia. He would have had a page, with picture and information, in his mother’s passport. Two of my sisters travelled on my mother’s passport as small children. I always had my own, as did another sister, since my father was the consular officer in charge of issuing visas and passports where we were born, and posted, at the time. The other two travelled on my mother’s passport because they were born in the States and the State Dept found it easier to add them to mother’s passport than to issue them their own.

      • jcsjcm

        I especially would like to know what passport he used to go to Pakistan especially since he went their via Indonesia to visit his family first. Why would he go that route first? To update his passport? I would really like to see his documents that are sealed. All of them!

    • tzada

      Harvard has shielded 0 on this, as well as Columbia.

    • Regina

      Reply to Daddy’s Darlin
      I agree with you. Furthermore, Obama is the biggest scam perpetrated on the american people by the wall street driven media. There isn’t just one issue surrounding questions about his citizenship. There are many issues. People just can’t believe someone could do such a thing. In addition, what about the 17 unpaid traffic tickets he accumulated while studying law at Harvard. A few days before he announced his candidacy for president he paid them. Reported in the Boston Globe and easily googled. What does this say about his honesty and his respect for the law? Tell Axelrod we ain’t buying his story Larry.

    • Doc99

      I know of many American citizens who’ve traveled to Cuba, also on the “no-travel list.” Just saying …

      • FLDemFem

        There is a difference between a “no travel” listing and a “travel advisory”. The no travel listing means that the US has no diplomatic relations with that country and no embassy or consulate in place to aid US citizens. It also means that it is illegal to go there. A travel advisory is basically a “go and whatever happens to you is your own stupid fault”. It is used for war zones, epidemic areas, places of danger for Americans, etc. Other travel advisories, like the one cited above, concern the paperwork required by the country in question.

    • Bill McGee

      you actually have to only ask what passport he used to travel on since the available information shows that he did not even have a US passport prior to becoming a Senator in 2005…

      so what passport did he use after the age of 18 and what country did he claim allegiance to in order to use that passport?

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    True.

    It is lacking crucial information that would verify actual birth in Hawaii. That’s been brought out.

  • http://www.hillaryorbust.com Hillary or Bust

    On the subject of Obama hiding something – the Globe tabloid has an article on the cover about Obama’s “gay lover” working in the White House or something along those lines.

    The Obama = closet homosexual story seems to have been (pardon the pun) coming out in the tabloids lately.

    I could care less if Obama is gay on a personal level – but I do have a problem with him lying about it and then being all anti-gay marriage etc.

    Jon Stewart was poking fun of the birth certificate issue – I wonder if the mainstream media isn’t partially picking it up now just to debunk it…and the bigger story is with our favorite con artist, Larry Sinclair, whose book just came out… (pun again, sorry)…

    • politicalidentitycrisis

      Definitely, something is coming. LJ says, he’s all legit, he just lied, simple as that. CNN says he’s all legit, it’s all good, bit the document was destroyed in ’91 (? or whenever it was). The problem is you debunkers need to get your stories straight before you go spewing your epiphanies because now tonight O’Reilly said he saw the document about a year ago, he simply requested it and the Hawaii officials sent it, simple as that. Well, gee, O’Reilly, how did you see a destroyed document???? It might be best for all of you debunkers to come into some agreement as to your story or someone is going to blow the cover up for you all!

  • Diana

    I just wanted to stop in and thank AGI for the reading material, it was very interesting. Also Annie. I knew I worded it wrong after I’d did it, but had to leave. It was a busy week and weekend.

    • http://sarainitalyblog.blogspot.com/ American Girl in Italy

      :OD

  • Tuppence411

    The cover-up gets you every time. Barky and Axelrod should have learned that lesson by now. I agree with Larry. I think Barky’s original HI birth certificate is one clusterfu@k of embarrassing information and redactions accompanied by a probate file 3 inches thick.

  • Rich

    Larry,
    First, I do not believe that Obama is a natural born citizen, since he does not meet the requirements of both jus soli and jus sanguinis.
    That aside, you dismiss his Indoensian citizenship too quickly. You are correct to state he never renounced his Indonesian citizenship. However, he was an Indonesian citizen, and if he applied for foreign aid when entering Occidental, that is considered by US law to be an overt attempt at renouncing citizenship. If he applied for foreign aid, he is then an illgal alien in this country.

    • b mathews

      i read yesterday (possibly here) that occidental college has finally been forced to release obamas records and that he was there as a foriegn exchange student. any truth to this?

      • http://sarainitalyblog.blogspot.com/ American Girl in Italy

        nope.

  • tzada

    Passport seeker has no sympathy for Obama

    Says he can’t cross river to visit family without showing birth certificate

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105027

    • Elliott

      This is exactly what I am saying in remarks below. The Hawaii birth record is an abstract and would not be acceptable for some things. You could probably use it for getting a child into school, but the State Dept for a passport, Social Security for a card, and the military for enlistment would not accept an abbreviated version.

      • Slim Tyranny

        Wrong. Check the State Department site for information on getting a passport, the Hawaiian COLB meets all the requirements, as has been verified by the Hawaiian Department of Health.

  • Elliott

    The birth record that has been in the press for the President is a short form or abstract of the birth certificate. The birth record issued for President Obama has the information from the Hawaii record but is not a facsimile of the actual record that most people are issued as proof of age or citizenship. I agree with Larry that he does not want some information on his record made public. Why or what? I cannot make an informed statement like Larry, but it may have to do with information he has put in one of his books or something in public “story” is not true. I do not think the state of Hawaii would issue a fraudulent document but rather a carefully edited one.

    • Ellen D

      I’m a bit confused.
      If the birth record posted is a short form for what exists in the files, and Larry is correct about the amended birth certificate, then how is this a short form for what is in the files?
      I agree that there is something they are hiding on the certificate. When you go further back, there were weird requirements and even weirder answers. My BC says “Race” and that has been filled in “Scottish”. Who knows what’s on his?
      However I disagree with Larry that the “Kenya” accusation should be dropped. It seems these days the more outlandish the claim, the more people believe it.

  • MissTickly

    I am not convinced you are right, Larry, but it’s certainly plausible.

    Obama’s lost tons of credibility on this issue for not releasing the long form alone–from the left and the right.

    If it were only to avoid getting ensnared in a lie, his PR team could have spun this as an unfortunate example of “the Indonesian/Muslim experience in America” LONG AGO.

    Next thing you know, it’s our fault.

    Besides he blatantly lies everyday and doesn’t give a shit what anyone thinks about it.

  • apishapa

    I don’t think where he was born or his citizenship at the time of his birth is the issue. He was adopted by an Indonesian official and was made a citizen of Indonseia at the age to 6. THe United States did not have a dual citizenship agreement with Indonesia and had virtually no diplomatic relations with that country at all at the time. In Indonesia at teh time the mother had no rights at all. He was his stepfather’s child. In order to attend the State run schools, he had to be an Indonesian citizen. In order to become an Indonesian citizen, he had to give up his United States citizenship, because neither country allowed dual citizenship.

    We do not knopw how his citizenhip was restored when he returned to the U.S. THat is why we need to see an actual birth certificate. As I understand it from reading Bud WHite at NoQuater over thelast year, when a child is dopted his old birth certidficate is destroyed and a new one is issued. I don’t know what happens when they are adopted by a foreign citizen, but I believe that in orer to resore his citizenship and new birth certificate had to be issued.

    Natural born does not encompass someone who was born in the U.S., renounced his citizenship , then changed his mind and regained his citizenship.

    • Michael Adams

      You don’t lose your citizenship as an American citizen unless you voluntarily relinquish it which he did not. Nice try.

      McCain investigated. Nothing.

      Obama was born in Hawaii. It was announced at the time in 1961 and the newspapers got their announcements from the Department of Health which certified the accuracy.

      In 2001, Hawaii went to a paperless system, laser scanned all the NECESSARY information into files, then shredded the paper. CNN just reported this a couple of days ago. The information in the files is from the oringinal birth certificate, but now only a short-form is available.

      The State of Hawaii has issued a Birth Certificate that meets all of the requirements of CFR 22.51.42. That Birth Certificate is certified by the State of Hawaii, and is considered proven by the Laws of the United States. It will be up to anyone who challenges its authenticity to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Birth Certificate is actually invalid.

      Under this CFR, a Birth Certificate will be accepted as proper evidence of Jus soli citizenship if it shows the full name of the applicant, the applicants place and date of birth, and the full name of the parent(s). The certificate must be signed by the official custodian of the birth records for that state, and the record must bear the seal of the issuing officer. In addition, the filing date shown on the certificate must be within one year of the date of birth. If all of these requirements are met, the certificate is proven under the CFR and by implication, under the general laws enacted by Congress. In order for that CFR to be over-ridden, wither the CFR would need to be changed, or the Congress would have to specifically change the requirements by legislation.

      There is a very high standard of proof that must be met in order to override the Constitutional ‘Full Faith and Credit’ standard granted to the State of Hawaii in this matter. That standard of proof would require that the complainant show proof that there was an actual fraud committed by the State of Hawaii in the certification of that Birth Certificate, or that the certificate itself was fraudulent. Either way, the burden of proof rests with the complainant. Merely making accusations that this may have happened is not sufficient.

      This would be true even if a foreign power were to present a Birth Certificate that was claimed to show birth in another country. Under the standard of ‘Full Faith and Credit’ that is specifically provided for in the Constitution, the public records of the State of Hawaii would take precedence over the public records of any foreign power. In order to meet the required burden of proof, the foreign record would not only have to be proven as true, but also the State of Hawaii’s record would have to be proven separately as false.

      The short form certificate in Hawaii has been accepted and certifed by the US for passports, etc., and is accepted as proof of eligibility to run for office.

      • Ellen D

        That’s a pretty lousy system.
        There is more than just the written information on a filled-in-document. Why not scan the whole thing as an image? Just taking the information off makes it too easy to alter that information. And in a small state like Hawaii they can’t find room to store the originals as well?
        Besides, I think a lot of documents of that period were also put on microfilm. My birth certificate is, and I have negative printouts from it.
        The more I think of this, the more I don’t think this “paperless” “information only” story is something that a true custodian of records would permit. Sounds fishy.

        • politicalidentitycrisis

          The originals are never lost. They are scanned or microfiched. Even in a hospital, all those old records get microfiched and stored in a storage facility. They have to keep records like that!

          Boy the Obizczar seems to be sweating forcing all these stories!

      • apishapa

        You don’t lose your citizenship as an American citizen unless you voluntarily relinquish it which he did not. Nice try.

        Excuse me, but How do we know he did not renounce his citizenship? THat would not be in U.S. records, but in Indonesian records which byt all accounts are not very complete since they can’t even find his school records from a state run school.

        Also, I am the parent of four children. I make decisions for them as long as they are minors. I sign doncuments for them as their mnother. Barry was only six years old when he was adopted. His mother was married to an Indonesian citizen and they were living in Indonesia. In Indonesia in the 1960s, the mother did not have any rights. His adoptive father would have had the right to denounce his citizenship.

        In the 1960s we did not have a dual citizenship agreement with Indonesia. That means you could not be a citizen of both countries at the same time. Neither country would recognise it.

      • jcsjcm

        Can you prove that it is an acceptable form to be used to get a passport? Another blogger had a similar Certification of Live Birth and was unable to get a passport.

        I do not believe that Obama was able to get any passport using this document. How about we see these passports that he was able to get? What’s the big deal?

  • ACPD

    I have always felt that the way to deal with this “question” is for BO and his people to offer for inspection the originals of all his documents. We don’t have any information about the originals documents that deal with his education or his selective service, as well as his birth and citizenship. That’s why this question persists. If he hasn’t anything to hide, why does he insist on hiding it? Also, why do his lawyers insist on fighting any lawsuits that either request this information or challenge it? They have fought on technical grounds, not on factual ones. That only adds to the suspicions. This whole matter would go away, if the required documents were presented in person to the public or to some judge or to the FBI….I, too, think most people on the far right are nuts; but this time I have to agree that this question smells pretty fishy….

  • Hg

    Does all this mean Obama’s Grandmother is just another liar when she says Obama (jr) was born in Kenya? Seems his Grandmother would want to defend Obama’s eligibility to be president instead of destroying it. Maybe she is simply an honest lady who speaks the truth, there are still a few honest people left in the world.

    • Michael Adams

      His grandmother didn’t say that. It was part of a telephone call in which the latter half was omitted online. Obama’s grandmother, Sarah, who speaks only Swahili, was the victim of a con in which she supposedly acknowledged his birth in Kenya. This “recording” has been debunked. Birthers have made other claims that have shown up in anti-Obama lawsuits and in the proliferation of “birther” websites. One relies on an audio tape of Obama’s step-grandmother Sarah Obama, who lives in Kenya, being goaded into saying (through a translator) that the future president was born in Kenya before quickly correcting herself and confirming it was her son, not her grandson. (A doctored version of this tape, which cuts off before the retraction, is posted on YouTube.

  • http://www.smallbusinessgrantsmoney.com Michael Adams

    You don’t lose your citizenship as an American citizen unless you voluntarily relinquish it which he did not. Nice try.

    McCain investigated. Nothing.

    Obama was born in Hawaii. It was announced at the time in 1961 and the newspapers got their announcements from the Department of Health which certified the accuracy.

    In 2001, Hawaii went to a paperless system, laser scanned all the NECESSARY information into files, then shredded the paper. CNN just reported this a couple of days ago. The information in the files is from the oringinal birth certificate, but now only a short-form is available.

    The State of Hawaii has issued a Birth Certificate that meets all of the requirements of CFR 22.51.42. That Birth Certificate is certified by the State of Hawaii, and is considered proven by the Laws of the United States. It will be up to anyone who challenges its authenticity to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Birth Certificate is actually invalid.

    Under this CFR, a Birth Certificate will be accepted as proper evidence of Jus soli citizenship if it shows the full name of the applicant, the applicants place and date of birth, and the full name of the parent(s). The certificate must be signed by the official custodian of the birth records for that state, and the record must bear the seal of the issuing officer. In addition, the filing date shown on the certificate must be within one year of the date of birth. If all of these requirements are met, the certificate is proven under the CFR and by implication, under the general laws enacted by Congress. In order for that CFR to be over-ridden, wither the CFR would need to be changed, or the Congress would have to specifically change the requirements by legislation.

    There is a very high standard of proof that must be met in order to override the Constitutional ‘Full Faith and Credit’ standard granted to the State of Hawaii in this matter. That standard of proof would require that the complainant show proof that there was an actual fraud committed by the State of Hawaii in the certification of that Birth Certificate, or that the certificate itself was fraudulent. Either way, the burden of proof rests with the complainant. Merely making accusations that this may have happened is not sufficient.

    This would be true even if a foreign power were to present a Birth Certificate that was claimed to show birth in another country. Under the standard of ‘Full Faith and Credit’ that is specifically provided for in the Constitution, the public records of the State of Hawaii would take precedence over the public records of any foreign power. In order to meet the required burden of proof, the foreign record would not only have to be proven as true, but also the State of Hawaii’s record would have to be proven separately as false.

    The short form certificate in Hawaii has been accepted and certifed by the US for passports, etc., and is accepted as proof of eligibility to run for office.
    OH! You’re my new favorite blogger fyi

    • Regina

      Then why the veil of secrecy?

  • tzada

    Lou Dobbs is getting some MAJOR criticism from the forgers (Obots defending Obama’s eligibility based on a Certificate of Live Birth forgery). The Birthers (Patriots and people who just want justice, because everyone else is expected to abide by the Law, and Obama should not get a free pass) are pressing for some substantial proof of natural-born citizenship.

    The Forgers are coming out on the MSM bought and paid for Liberal airwaves in an attempt to label all Birthers as “Conspiracy Nuts”. So far, it appears the Birthers are gaining leverage, as the Forgers are becoming more defensive and hostile. It’s hard to defend something that hasn’t been proven to exist .. and yet the Forgers are calling the Birthers conspiracy nuts?? It’s like the Pot calling the Kettle Black. Also, when all else fails .. as often as been the case in recent debates .. the Forgers are resorting to the race card.

    It’s hard to defend something that hasn’t been proven to exist.

    Obama could actually make the Forgers look good by producing a genuine vault copy of his birth certificate, and not a Certificate of Live Birth (COLB), which is issued to foreign-born children in Hawaii. It is a “Psuedo-birth certificate” for foreign-born children. It is not a birth certificate short-form either.

    Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866, in CHINA. HE HAD a HAWAIIAN COLB. Are you going to say HE was born in Hawaii?

    The forgers are running out of excuses for the Certificate of Live Birth, and have also been unable to “morph” the Constitution to support their claims … simple because Article II is very clear on the definition of natural-born citizen, and Obama fails to qualify because his Father was not a citizen of the US.

    It’s hard to defend the undefensible and the Forgers are left defending someone who does not seem to care that millions of Americans are only asking that he respect the Constituion of this great country as they do. Not a lot to ask when you’re spending Trillions of American taxpayer dollars in only 6 months time

    http://216.221.102.26/blogger/post/Hot-Hotter-Hottest-birthers-on-the-offense-forgers-defending-blindly.aspx

    • Docelder

      Somebody who is undeniably foreign born and also with a Hawaii COLB needs to announce they are going to run for President. This would nudge the press.

  • Pingback: 2nd Posting: The Obama Birth Certificate Controversy : NO QUARTER | Obama Snafu

  • TeakWoodKite

    In 2001, Hawaii went to a paperless system, laser scanned all the NECESSARY information into files, then shredded the paper. CNN just reported this a couple of days ago.

    .

    This information was not part of any articles I read during the primaries on the subject.
    I find it odd that “CNN just reported the original was “shredded”. which was mentioned by a poster up thread.

    • Elliott

      This is very strange to destroy original records. Records were copied onto microfiche many, many years ago to make retrieval easier but the original records were not destroyed by states or other custodians. The same would apply if the records were digitally copied for retrieval. The UK is digitalizing centuries of records to make them available for researchers and geneologists, but the actual records are not being destroyed and are prized artifacts. I recently purchased the Waterloo medal list online in PDF and it is an exact copy of the list. Records are destroyed by fire, flood, even insects but I have never heard of destroying original records on purpose. I wonder if they destroyed the 18th and 19th century records also?

  • tzada

    Is the Obama administration working on a forged long-form Birth Certificate as we speak?

    from DC source that an Administration team is working on perfecting a forgery of the long-form birth certificate. They plan on presenting it in a a month or so. The source is FBI agent who has drinking buddy from University of Illinois now in the Administration. Its second hand, but the source is supposed to be solid.

    They have already prepared the forgery with special paper and ink. The document was printed on a fully functional 1960 Heidelberger printing press located at a print museum in Toronto. Access was arranged by a trustee of the museum who is connected to a large Canadian banking/investment firm with major US interests.

    The blanks in the forged form were filled in with an old Underwood Manual typewriter bought at an estate sale in Skokie, IL. The raised seal was the easiest piece to fake, since you can buy a special order corporate seal from just about any online office supply store.

    The only reason they haven’t rolled out the forgery yet is that it is “seasoning” under mild UV light and a back and forth rotation between between a humidifier and a sauna. Get ready….one to two months tops.

    I also said they’d have to get a 1960s Printing Press, and indeed, by this information, looks like they found one.

    The banking connection is disturbing too, gives more credibility to this also. The details here are solid.

    Obama visited Canada not that long ago, anyone know if he went to Toronto?

    http://216.221.102.26/blogger/post/Is-the-Obama-administration-working-on-a-forged-long-form-Birth-Certificate-as-we-speak.aspx

    From me: They will then blank out the sequence numbers as they did on the online BC ?

  • Objective Analysis

    So Larry,

    Do we CENSOR comments that post the truth?

    Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 states that to be President of the U.S. you have to meet 3 requirements:

    1. Natural Born Citizen OR Citizen of the U.S. at the Time of the Adoption of Constitution (Sept. 1787)
    2. At least 35 years of age
    3. At a 14 year resident of the U.S.

    Natural Born Citizen is defined under english common law and the U.S. Supreme Court explained its meaning and cited examples in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1787) and U.S. v. Perkins (1939).

    A Natural Born Citizen is a person who meets 2 requirements:

    1. Born in the U.S. Mainland (50 states or 1 district of columbia)
    2. Born to two American Citizen Parents (both the mother and father have to be U.S. Citizens)

    Question for you Larry, if Obama’s father was a kenyan National (subject to British rule) at the time of his birth on August 4, 1961, how can he be considered a natural born citizen under the law and the constitution?

  • oowawa

    (sigh)
    We have about as much chance of discovering the truth about the original O long form birth certificate as we do of finding out for sure what came down in the desert of Roswell, New Mexico on July 8, 1947.

    File it under the X-Files. Let Mulder and Scully worry about it.

    • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

      That could be true, but the real problem is the lie and the cover-up that took place regarding the document presented as official on Obama’s fight the smears website during the campaign.

      If you watched the whole Dobbs clip, Roland Martin about stroked out on the subject and the idea that legislation could be passed to require full disclosure of birth certificates. It was a reaction that was way, way over the top.

      • http://sarainitalyblog.blogspot.com/ American Girl in Italy

        WAY over the top. I thought he was going to pop.

        • TeakWoodKite

          goes the weasel.

          I am wondering American Girl in Italia, Speaking of going pop, if it would be possible to feed the MSM so crap it will choke on itself.

          People just forget what religious pond Roland Martin crawled out of.

      • b mathews

        i saw that and thought roland martin doth protest too much. his attitude? lets move on..nothing to see here.

        • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

          Yup. Roland’s reaction was a major giveaway that all is not well in Obamaland.

          Americans need to keep up the pressure on all fronts of Obamaland.

  • Elle

    Lou Dobbs is the only one left on CNN with any journalistic credibility.
    Good,there is one left man standing with courage.

  • Lindy

    I was adopted by my step-father at age two. My bc lists him as my legal father, on a short form, with no details of hospital, attending physician, no signatures. Any adoption, even by a step-parent, means your original long form bc is SEALED, forever. I think Obama really has no copy of his long form bc, because that bc was sealed upon his adoption. His LEGAL bc most likely states that his “birth father” is Mr. Soetero, just as mine states that some other man is my “real” father. I think Obama’s legal name is still Soetero, and he has no documents to show otherwise. He would have had to have some kind of Court proceeding to change his legal name back to Obama, and I don’t think he ever did. Years ago, the law was that a woman could go by any name she chose, and that is how I was able to get my ID and SS# changed back to my birth name. There was no applicable law to men. They had to file through a Court and name changes for men were never granted. It may be that he has “illegally” used the name Obama for many years. There is NO WAY that Hawaii can release any kind of bc showing the name Obama, because upon adoption by his step-father, his original bc with the name Obama was SEALED by Court order, forever, and a new LEGAL bc was issued in his adopted name. The Hawaii bc is a total fraud. There is NO WAY after an adoption that the original SEALED bc with the birth name can ever be seen by anyone, ever!

    • Karma

      I was going to say something similar speaking from that same experience.

      Being adopted by his step father negates any legal relationship with his real father unless that adoption is ‘set aside’. Which usually must be done within five years or the ‘statute of limitations’ is up. It is rare for the courts to go past the ‘statute of limitations’ on any case and so a reasonable cause must be shown in the documents submitted to the court.

      If, in fact, there is no legal proceding that has ‘set aside’ the adoption…..it makes him Barry Soetoro to this day. Whether he likes it or not.

      I suspect he went to Harvard on his real father’s legacy and some other scholarships tied to his real father. And that is why we haven’t seen any college records because of the fraud involved with using an old birth certificate that has been negated.

      Past that I think this birth certificate issue is a dead end. Clearly, the powers that be will protect him from revealing he isn’t an Obama anymore.

      Being a Barry is soooo white bread.

      • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

        The whole birth certificate issue may be a dead end but… what about the forged one that was posted on his fight the smears website??

        Any legal problems there?

        tick…tick…tick..

        • Karma

          Yes, I think he has a lot of legal probelms going back years with the birth certificates and right up to this forged version. But they aren’t going to see the light of day in any courtroom, in my opinion.

          And I highly doubt he wasn’t aware of these probelms even as a small child. I was fully aware of all of these issues.

          He knew then…he knows now…and that is why he has spent so much to hide it. Legally he isn’t an Obama and he doesn’t want anyone to pull on the string and reveal the many truths if they do.

    • TeakWoodKite

      I think Obama’s legal name is still Soetero, and he has no documents to show otherwise.

      It is my understanding that the adoption records are part of Indonesian record. I have wondered for over a year about the absence of any application to a US Court for a change of name.

      An interesting point and novel legal point. How can he sign executive orders if he is not using his legal name?

      He has applied to the Illinois Bar and as a an elected official signed many a document that are potentially fraudulent. Makes me think BO’s whole life has been one big “getting off on a technicality”.

      I have no idea as to the legal bottomline on what the law requires, it is something my first year law students will have to correct me on I’m sure.

      • jcsjcm

        It has also been stated when he signed his bar exam papers that they ask if you have used any other alias and he signed this as an absolute NO. Why is no one investigating the fact that he lied on his bar exam – wouldn’t that be considered a felony or fraudulent activity or just really wrong. :)

  • Surfered

    Bill Maher quote: “If you think the government is going to take your Bible away, you’re an idiot. If you think the government is going to take your gun away, you’re an armed idiot. And if you think the government is going to take your gun and give it to an illegal immigrant to shoot your God, you’re Lou Dobbs.

    • cpabooks

      And if you think Bill Maher is funny…

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    What would Bill Maher say if the government showed up to take his pot stash away?

    • maniaco

      BuzzisbackLatte -

      I like everything you’ve been writing in this thread, esp. this:

      “The best GOP bet is to keep the controversy going to let the public get really wary of Obama on all fronts – the polls are already reflecting the public’s reticence on his decision making and loyalty to democracy as America defines it. Gates-gate was certainly another nail in the popularity coffin.

      “Secondly: Get the bill passed requiring all presidential candidates to provide irrefutable proof of citizenship by election time 2012. No grandfathering for Obama allowed.

      “The law would then require Obama to produce those mystery documents.”

      My thoughts exactly. But instead of following THAT law, BO’ll produce documented Doctor’s Orders that he will be unable to run again in 2012 — mystery disease, anyone?

      • politicalidentitycrisis

        If he’s out in 2012, I’d drop the documents issue. Whatever makes him get out! All ok by me. He can keep his dirty little secret lies hidden, just resign now Obama!

  • Alex

    Larry, thanks for addressing this topic. It’s about to blow sky-high.

    BTW, as I’m sure others have said numerous times, Barry is NOT eligible to be president because, due to his father’s British citizenship, Obama is NOT a natural born citizen.

    Anyway, it is my opinion, and I’ve seen at leasts one other person say this, that the Lou Dobbs piece was just a setup for releasing the new lie: “Yes, we said we saw the BC last year, but, in actuality it was destroyed eight years ago.”

    So transparent. So ridiculous. But very necessary. Because now that Army Major Stefan Cook has made it very clear that military men are going to start coming out of the woodwork asking for Barry’s birth certificate, Obama’s backers had to make an excuse why that original paper document is “no longer available.”

    Think about it. If it was the case that the BC had disappeared eight years ago, why wouldn’t they have mentioned that LAST YEAR? Because they had not forseen that the brave, patriotic men (and hopefully women, at some point) of the United States military would come forward, in the face of great personal danger, to save this country from a fraud who is trying to take us to hell in a handbasket.

    Thank God for them, and God bless them and Dr. Orly Taitz!

  • maniaco

    I remember the heartbreak when McGovern got destroyed in the Nov. ’72 landslide by Tricky Dick Nixon. That’s what made watching RN resign in Aug. ’74 so unbelievably, deliciously enjoyable.

    Deja vu? Long, steady, slow slide into oblivion? An LBJ “I will not seek re-election” moment on the horizon?

    By the numbers:

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

    And OBTW, aren’t the W.O.R.M. crowd that seems to show up here great propagandists? . . . apparently NOT!!!

    But please keep posting, fellas. We absolutely love it!

  • Carmen

    The COLB lists his race as African. There is NO RACE OF African. You are white, or in those days you would be Negro. There is no African race!

    At best he is a duel citizen. Why else do you think he and Michelle have been so RUDE to the Brits. Because in black liberation, the brits are hated much as the slave owners are hated. He has lied, he has commited document, and election fraud, he has committed RICO violations for crossing state lines in his fund raising. He was a British citizen, and his mother was too young to bestow US citizenship on him, AND the citizenship ALWAYS in those days went with the Father. Then he was adopted which further changes the story.
    I do not think he was US born, but even if he was, he is still not Natural Born.
    Also, if the BC was destroyed then why did the gov of Hawaii, and the sec. of state state in writing that they had the BC under seal. Why did they not state over a year ago that it had been destroyed? This story has NEVER been heard until Lou and CNN investigated. This is just the newest LIE.
    Then you have his legal name which was not given on his questioneer for the bar in Illinois. More fraud. Also his name was never LEGALLY changed to Obama, so even his name is illegal which would void his elections clear back to Illinois.

  • Carmen

    I am going to refer to these series of lies “out of sync” with each other as “Lie Collisions”. A Lie Collision happens when more than one party defending the Birth Certificate lack of evidence are not advocating the same “facts” about the situation.

    In an effort to get “in sync” with the other party, the remaining partie(s) make the necessary changes to “match-up”. Here are a couple of major lie collisions that happened in just the last month:

    New Lie
    Kapiolani hospital claims to have received “birth letter” from White House and posted on their web site. The letter was supposedly written by Obama saying he was born at their hospital.
    The “birth letter” appeared to be a blatent forgery as the letter was done with standard HTML. Once confronted about the implications of a forgery, Kapiolani quick removed the letter from their site. (See complete details here)
    Original Lie
    Snopes.com, one the main White House propaganda sites, had “Queens Medical” as the HI hospital of Obama’s birth for several months. After the “birth letter” surfaced, Snopes changed it to “Kapiolani” as the birth hospital the next day after WND broke the story. Another major news publication site also changed the hospital the next day (See complete details here)
    New Lie makes Original Lie untrue – The result? Snopes tried to make New Lie true by changing hospitals.
    Original Lie
    Janet Fukino (Dept. of Hawaii Health) director claimed to have seen and examined Obama’s long-form (vault copy) of his birth certificate in late 2008, though she carefully stopped short of saying Obama was born in HI.
    New Lie 1
    CNN Lou Dobbs reports on the Birth Certificate and was told that Hawaii destroyed all paper birth certificates, including Obama’s, since the HI Dept. of Health went all electronic in the year 2001. This is a major collision if the report is true, because it makes the original lie untrue. (See complete details here)
    New Lie 2
    Also, the next night after Dobb’s report – his “fill-in” on CNN, in an effort to refute Dobb’s claims, said Linda Lingle also saw and examined the long-form birth certificate. A completely non-true statement, as Linda Lingle only claimed it was on file and not to have seen it, as CNN reported. In any case, CNN also contradicted the report that all long-form certificates were destroyed in 2001 by saying Linda Lingle examined it. (See complete details here)
    Either new lie 1 or new lie 2 makes the Original Lie untrue – The result? There have been no actions yet in an attempt to correct it – look for that one coming soon.
    Also, in the last month – the major search engines have given weight to the White House propaganda sites so they’ll appear at the top of searches filling up several pages before any of the non-WH sites are shown covering the same issue but seeking the truth.

    • oowawa

      “Lie collisions”–I like it! When two parties fabricate different stories to support the same falsehood, it is a “lie collision.” Later, when they get the stories in synch, it is a “lie collusion.”

    • TeakWoodKite

      I wished your links worked.

      Imagine how US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald felt with all that sand in his face.

      Neat post on the face of it anyway. The physics of a lie. mmmm What is it called when the lies fall apart?

      • oowawa

        When the lies fall apart–an “emergency.” Then it’s time for a diversion, an irresistible red herring dragged across the trail to confuse the hounds. Razzle dazzle ‘em.

  • tzada

    AOL poll: 81% want Obama to release it
    Say president should show American people birth certificate

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105023

    Guess they better turn that aging machine up a notch.

    • oowawa

      81% want Obama to release it

      O boy! This could shape up to be a major media event like the Academy Awards or Geraldo’s assault on Al Capone’s vault–and this time the vault’s in Hawaii! For the host, I suggest Tweetie in a tux, with a lei around his neck. I can picture him, surrounded by secret service agents, working the combination to the vault slowly and seriously, with several pauses for commercials, as the suspense builds . . .

  • tzada

    I think we have entered the realm of Chinese curses. “May you live in interesting times.”
    A Constitutional crisis would play into this radical American hater congress dreams and our worst nightmares.

    Constitutional crisis looming?

    Per­haps Obama was con­vinced by his han­dlers that nobody would care about this nat­ural born cit­izen thing. Or, per­haps they con­vinced him that he could get away with it even if they did care.

    What Obama may not know is that these same han­dlers might soon offer him up as a cheap sac­ri­fice in order to force a Con­sti­tu­tional crisis.

    Why? Because it would almost cer­tainly require a Con­sti­tu­tional Con­ven­tion to straighten out the mess. Every Pres­i­den­tial act would be inval­i­dated. Civil unrest would be ram­pant. Chaos would reign, and chaos is the desired envi­ron­ment for the powers behind Obama.

    With every passing day that the birth issue is not resolved in Obama’s favor, the odds will per­sis­tently increase that a Con­sti­tu­tional crisis will soon unfold, and that America will be polar­ized like never before in history.

    http://www.augustforecast.com/2009/07/24/constitutional-crisis-looming/

  • http://blueskyrising.blogspot.com blueskyrising

    The Media knows they lie, but they do it anyway. Just look at this quote I discovered by the Former Chief of Staff of the New York Times. After reading this quote if the naysayers still believe the lies the media propagates for their corporate profit ends then I don’t know what will wake them up.

    http://blueskyrising.blogspot.com/2009/07/prostitutes-of-main-stream-media-know.html

    • Constantinople

      Bluesky says on his blog, “conspiracy theory = truth.” Life just isn’t that easy or simple, as his quote about the NYT “chief of staff” demonstrates.

      1) The quote has been attributed most often, and most (but not completely) reliably, to John Swinton. He was the chief editorial writer at the New York Times earlier in his career, but at the time he supposedly uttered this quote, he was an editor at the New York Sun. Swinton died in 1901.

      2) Gordon Clark, a contemporary of Swinton’s, wrote in 1894 that Swinton said something of the sort in 1883, but said Swinton disavowed the popular version of the quotation that Bluesky has posted. In other words, the supposed author of the quote said he was misquoted.

      http://books.google.com/books?id=bwVDAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA710&dq=swinton+%22clumsily+reported%22

      3) This 19th-century radical is an unlikely hero for present-day critics of “the liberal media,” who feel his comment from another age of history somehow indicts the 21st-century media. Swinton was a radical for his times: a socialist, and an ardent supporter of union organizing and strikes. He left the Sun in 1883 to start a pro-labor paper.

  • J.J. (The PUMA)

    Has anyone noticed that the term “birther” is being used now the way “teabagger” was used a few months ago to discredit the tea parties??

    • Ellen D

      Yes, I have. Who has given the marching orders for this one.

      • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

        John Podesta?

    • oowawa

      Even more disgusting than “birther” is the term “birtherism,” which I have been seeing. Apparently this is an attempt to demonize the wish to see Obama’s birth certificate to the hateful level of other despised “isms” such as “Communism” or “Fascism.”

      • TeakWoodKite

        Collisions-isms?

  • IndayHill

    I have a feeling the WH will do everything/anything to hide the truth from the people. However, there is the Almighty Judge, who will render His decision on the judgement day of Obama’s life.Barack Obama does not go to church anyway, so will he & Michelle care??
    For the meantime, Obama is sitting in the Oval office, as the great pretender to many, which include me.He cheated ! Hillary is the rightful POTUS. Ok, I am still dreaming. But 101 % she is a USA citizen, born & raised here !

  • Lisabona

    Even if I believe that 0bama was born in Hawaii, I’m convinsed 100%, he is not eligible to be president.His duble citizenship, (1)American/British. As many said, he was a child and he never gave up his American citizenship.That is OK. But his mother gave up hers and married with a Indonesian citizen. (2) So, both of them being Indonezian citizens, 0bama was adopted by Soetoro. How he can remain American citizen? That is impossible. When he return in States, he retake his citizenship, as naturalized citizen. No matter how you go around, 0bama is not qualified to be president

  • Scranton4Hillary

    I want to see the passport the boy blunder traveled to Pakistan with in his 20s. What country issued that passport??

  • typical.white.person

  • Pingback: Hillary Is 44 » Blog Archive » Big Media And The Obama Birth Certificate Issue And “Whitey”

  • Will

    You people are freaking nuts! Get a job for God’s sake!

  • vadaryl

    This could be why Obama has sealed his Thesis, medical records, college grades, and whatever else he has locked up. He would have to explain the name that is on all the forms. He could of used the name to get grants in college as a foreign exchange student. If this is all true then what? Impeach him? Vote him out in 2012? What can we do about it?

  • Hank

    What would happen to everything he has signed as President?

  • tillthen

    Sorry if this was already been asked and answered: Does the CIA and or the DOJ know what Larry Johnson is saying and if so, are they not obligated to take action, whatever that may be? Who goes to whom with the evidence? Congress, the Supreme Court, the FBI?

  • prieur

    my mum was american, my late dad was french- my parents lived in the US where I was born- from birth and I did not choose it I have been a natural born dual citizen in thos edays to be anatural born citizen we had to be born from a US citizen in the USA, THAT IS IN IOWA as for the french laws, having a french dad wherever I was born grants me for life a french citizenship
    we lived sometime sin the US then we moved to france in my childhood, -my parents marriage was a happy one if alas cut short by ill health- fact is by birth w/o me trying to cheat on any 2 countries was a dual citizen by birth
    I hold a US PASSPORT and life has it that living in Britain I can ask for a british passport after 5 ys there – crazy isnt it
    my husband is french but life has it that we also lived in the US where our son was birn and again same thing he is an american citizen by birth and same thing from his dad
    NO we dont plan to become POTUS
    and no we did not plan our lives
    the most relax is my husband who only has one nationality
    though after so many yrs could apply for US citizenship but why
    we dont live in the US
    yet if we plan to retire not in Britain not in France he can apply for US CITIZENSHIP AS we certainly can prove a longstanding relationship
    just saying barack did not plan anything regarding his childhood and his mother vagaries
    for all we know, his mum may have lost his birth cert.
    kept my son`s in the safe but things can get lost when one is moving countries and houses
    How does one look at oneself due to life`s jokes
    well sometimes I wonder if the letter C in atlantiC ocean should not be an island where at least no one would ask me to choose between my sainted mother country and my beloved dad homeland
    my parents never asked to choose between them who I loved most never
    when I read those posts I fear many have not carefully considered what is the actual real life of us dual citizens by birth
    as an adult- OK fair enough I chose to become a US citizen
    but France does not recognize it because I can only lose my birth right if I commit some heinous treason against the fernch laws and I really dont see how I could commit any treasonous act
    as my private and profesional life is rather bland and possibly blame free- ok the podd parking ticket
    you see LARRY i FEEL THAT BARRY or BARACK is not responsible for the mess and yes like you I thi nk he was born in hawaii and his parents and his mum specifically made a mess in paperworks
    so what his name was soetoro
    he was raised by his grandma from teh age of 10 in hawaii
    I dont think he connived to become POTUS from that tender age
    I still would vote for him regardless
    and if some americans are offended because his mum chose a non american man twice it is between then and obama late mother
    the sins of the parents are not to burden the innocent children
    life is odd
    my son girl friend is american
    will make life easier for my grandkids isnt it
    we dont choose who we love
    I wish you all peace of mind
    OMG what will happened if my grandson wants to become POTUS or POTFR….

  • Daisyjane

    I haven’t read each and every post; seems to be going over much of the same ground.

    Larry’s theory seems entirely plausible and I’m willing to accept it at face value. But that doesn’t end Obama’s problems, and here’s why:

    First of all, we have a potential national security issue. (Larry, you’re the expert of this. You can correct me if I’m wrong, of course.)

    Obama’s hiding of his records makes him a candidate for BLACKMAIL, foreign and domestic. He needs to come clean to eliminate this possibility.

    The rank & file military, both officers and enlisted (whom are about to get to the bottom of this, just wait about a month) are concerned they might be facing an “enemy combatant” problem of their own. Without a legitimate CIC, they can be picked up on the battlefield, held without GC protections, just like Gitmo.

    Finally, if Larry’s theory is correct, we still have that little matter of his college records. The speculation, unproven but rampant, is that he entered school and received aid as a foreign student.

    Trust me on this one. If he entered school and accepted aid as a foreign student while holding American citizenship (forget the NBC for a second), this is FRAUD, gang.

    If he WAS legally a foreign student, there isn’t a snowballs chance on God’s green earth that he meets the threshold of the presidency (eligibility wise)

    This is such a mess, it’s unreal. It’s also what happens when the “race card” is turned into a race “shield.”

    good grief….

    • Slim Tyranny

      “The speculation, unproven but rampant”

      Pretty much a perfection description of all this absurdity.

  • smrstrauss

    Re: “The Obama team have refused to release the original birth certificate…”

    It is because Hawaii refuses to send out copies of the original birth certificate that Obama cannot show it.

    He asked for a copy of his birth certificate in 2007 or 2008, and Hawaii sent him the Certification of Live Birth. This is a legal document and it legally proves birth in Hawaii, absent proof that he was born anywhere else (and there is no proof of that).

    But, it is not the original birth certificate. Who controls the original birth certificate? Not Obama. He cannot authorize Hawaii to show a copy because Hawaii has rules that it sends out only the Certification of Live Birth. http://www.starbulletin.com/features/20090606_kokua_line.html

    So, it is Hawaii that is preventing showing the original birth certificate. The solution is to get Hawaii to change the rules. The Governor of Hawaii is Linda Lingle.

    However, you will discover that the original birth certificate shows just what the Certification of Live Birth shows, and what has been confirmed by the officials in Hawaii, and what was confirmed by this witness (http://www.buffalonews.com/494/story/554495.html), that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    I suspect you will ask again, “then why doesn’t he show it?” The answer is that he doesn’t have it because Hawaii will not send it to him, or for that matter, it will not send copies of original birth certificates to anyone.

    • Ladysforest

      You are entirely wrong. They can’t release it to anyone without a tangible interest. He (obama) himself can obtain and present the long form BC. It would be wonderful if some of you in denial would check out the actual facts instead of blindly believing in what some flunky self proclaimed reporter “writes” in an ill conceived attempt to gain favor with this white house.
      The facts, the laws, and the sources are plastered all over the internet now. Now go forth and educate yourself, you will be stunned.
      BTW.
      This is one of the best threads I have run across, and has excellent and correct information for the most part.

  • Pingback: The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Not a McCarthyite

  • Pingback: “Just making stuff up” (?) at Traction Control

  • Pingback: The TIW Blog- NRO: Birth certificate controversy beneficial

  • Pingback: Birth Certificate Lying Still [Updates] : NO QUARTER

  • Pingback: NRO points to Larry Johnson’s birth certificate questions : NO QUARTER

  • Pingback: A Liar, a fraud and a whole lot more Obamess… WHO IS THIS GUY? — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  • Pingback: threedonia.com » Where There’s Smoke, There’s Fire

  • Dan

    The endless debate on this topic, and the strident personal attacks from the left on those who are simply requesting routine and readily produced proof (if in fact Mr. Obama has the hospital certificate on file he claims to have) should motivate those on both sides to simply ask for that which would resolve the question one way or the other: A certificed copy of the birth certificate on file in Hawaii.

    One can very quickly find out from the Internet what a hospital-issued birth certificate from Hawaii looked like in 1961. That document has all the details necessary to quickly confirm its authenticity and lay this matter to rest.

    There is a tremendous amount of confusion here, some deliberately spread by folks trying to make this go away without said disclosure. First, a Certification of Live Birth is not a long form hospital birth certificate. In fact, such a certification would result from a delayed filing of birth, a procedure in 1961 which some folks used to get birth certificates for non-Hawaiian births.

    The skeptical should notice that the hospital has refused to confirm the alleged birth there and that Hawaii has steadfastly refused to disclose what form of vault copy they have and they sure aren’t going to admit that folks not born there could get those delayed filings approved with little verification other than proof of residency for one year.

    Anyone who look’s at this individuals rather unique history, including adoption by a foreign national of a country that does not recognize dual citizenship (Indonesia), potential eyewitness reports of his birth in Kenya with no offsetting similar reports from Hawaii, his obvious travel to Pakistan when it was banned by the U.S. which means he was traveling on a foreign passport, possibly as a foreign national.

    And then there’s those concealed college admission records that would show under which nationality Mr. Obama applied to college.

    Add it all up, and there’s sufficient reasonable doubt here such that asking Mr. Obama to simply disclose that which he claims to have, is hardly unreasonable or wacky.

    So let’s see that hospital birth certificate you claim to have, Mr. Obama.

  • Eric_Stanton

    You are about to see a new, never before released program that makes millions.

    Featured on NBC news, Forebes.com, CNN money, Newsweek, Wall Street Journal and Fox News and developed by Ivy League graduates, 4 seperate robots for the price of 1.

    [b]100% hands off trading robot, no experience necessary.[/b]

    This is an automated trading platform, that basically tells you when to buy and sell stocks, it combines 4 trading robots into 1 platform.

    [b]Visit:[/b] http://revolutionary-automated-system.com for more information.

  • David Becher

    Under the 14th amendment of the US Constitution a child born on American soil is a US citizen regardless of parentage … So Barry Jr. could have had a US citizenship by birth right… and he would have had British and Kenyan citizenships even though he may not havec held a passport. The tricky part in Obama’s case … which I have not seen discussed anywhere …

    Section 1 of the 14th amendment (… the relevant part) says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    Akhil Reed Amar (constitutional law scholar at Yale Law School) in “America’s Constitution, a Biography,” says the 14th Amendment followed by several months the Civil Rights Act of 1866, enacted following the Civil War. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 overturned the 1857 Supreme Court ruling under Chief Justice Roger Taney on Dred Scott. The language in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 re birthright citizenship is almost identical, “all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”

    The 14th Amendment provides the unambiguous constitutional legal expression of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It excludes persons under the jurisdiction of another jurisdiction, including children of a foreign parent under the jurisdiction of another country, and tribal Indians. The intent of the jurisdiction clause was meant to prevent infiltration of the U.S. government by foreign influence. Barack Sr. was nominated by the Kenyan government to visit American to attend college. The reason for not wanting offspring of foreign diplomats as defined under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment was to guard against the lingering fear of foreign countries especially Euros and especially Brits gaining control.

    The US allows dual citizenships under some circumstances, but if a child is born with dual citizenship it is born under dual jurisdiction of the two countries which disallows a Natural Born citizenship. This is a fundamental difference which (for election of President and Vice President), the authors of the 14th amendment clearly recognized.

    Under Part II of the British Nationality Law 1948, Barack Obama Jr. was born a citizen of the United Kingdom by descent because his father was a citizen of the United Kingdom.

    Sec 5.—(1) 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:

    If Obama Sr. became a naturalized citizen of the United States then this wouldn’t be an issue.

    People are failing to recognize the difference between a US citizen and a Natural Born citizen. There is a difference. If there weren’t a difference then the Framers of our Constitution would not have used the exact words they used. They / the document was not meant to be repetitive/redundant, and all of the have explicit intent.

    The 14th amendment incorporates but is not limited to Article II.

    Obama as born with multiple citizenship rights, and therefore was subject to jurisdiction and loyalties to multiple governments therefore he was not / is not a “natural born citizen.”

    It doesn’t matter where he was born.

    Upon birth, Barack Obama Jr. was subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom and perhaps Kenya via his father. He is not a Natural Citizen and therefore unqualified to be elected / serve as President of the United States.

  • David Becher

    As said here
    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/james-c-ho-birthright-citizenship-the-14th-amendment-and-state-authority/#comment-2149here and by Akhil Reed Amar in “The Constitution” it is the 14th amendment that is important. It incorporates both citizenship and requirements for being President of the United States. Obama, even if he was born in the United States does not pass the “jurisdiction” requirement of the 14th amendment, because he had de facto British/colony citizenship when he was born which disallows meeting Natural Born citizen test.

  • Pingback: birth certificate record

  • Pingback: Andy McCarthy, just askin’ questions | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8q7o2ev0iQ paxEscall

    Hey everyone!

    My name is Jordan, I just wanted to introduce myself since I am new to this site…

    I am a newbie to the internet but I am learning alot real fast!

    I’m a Hair-boiler Operator and devoted father.

    The things I like most in life are family, friends and football.

    On week days you’ll usually find me riding my bike. On the weekends I like to party and watch football.

    My idea of the perfect day would start with breakfast. And then I’d go to the park. Later I’d eat a great dinner from TGI Fridays. And I’d top it all off by snuggling with my lover.

    I also love hip hop videos.

    Anyways it’s great to be a part of your site!

    Thank you

  • goldengrahme

    Yes, viking, your observation is the crux of the issue, IMO.

    A million dollars in legal fees were spent to keep BOs past under the radar.  This fraud is so huge, it strikes at the foundation of
    Constitutional law.  But after the graft & corruption of the Bushistas,
    the American people were tired and willing to sip the Kool Aid while
    singing, “Happy Days Are Here Again.”  Group psychology administered by clever mind manipulators.

    Also, there is a big question of Obama’s draft records; seems they were also fudged to meet with image necessities. 

    And the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that the Henry Louis Gates incident was staged.  The big “teaching moment” dramaturgy bit seemed more like a skit inspired for freshman dorm consumption.

    If memory serves, Gates had spent his summer vacation on
    the upscale isle of Martha’s Vineyard.  Wonder if the plot was hatched during that time.  Methinks he did indeed protest too much.  The
    whole thing was silly to the max.

  • Pingback: Barry Soetoro aka; obama : Who Is He That Enraged An Islamic Crowd Who Latter Committed Genocide Against Christians? « Political Ape

  • jecolon

    You are a deceitful man, Larry. You are a flip flop. What did Hillary paid you to shut up about the BC? Is that why you haven’t spoken of it for two years? Your golden girl is going to be in the headlines soon. And it won’t be in the trail- it will be in front of Congress. Obama was NOT born here. So continue your deceit for at the end, you will be another one that will look like a liberal idiot to most of us who ONCE had respect for you.

  • Pingback: Donald Trump Scores and Important Victory . . . Against the Media | Free Articles Directory, Article Submission - IMFreakz.com

  • Pingback: Donald Trump Scores and Important Victory . . . Against the Media