Skip to comments.Is this really it? (re: possible Obama's Kenyan B.C. - Attny Taitz) Click on the link
Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsidEdited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
Barry's Kenyan B.C.??
Special Motion for leave
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
“You forgot to post the actual site where all the jpegs are. Is this your handy work? http://fearlessblogging.com/post/view/3037"
No its not my handiwork noob.
WND also reporting possible fake here:
SO back to square one?
There are so many cool people on fr!!
You would not be conscripted as you are not a citizen.
Tell that to the foreign nationals living in the US who were drafted during Vietnam
PART of the strategically-important British Protectorate coastal region surrounding Mombasa (known as "Coast Province" today), is known by locals as the "ten-mile strip" and is UNIQUE.
This area was LEASED to the IEAC from the Sultan in 1895 -- similar to the land lease the US had with the Panama Canal where McCain was born in 1936 (ding, ding!).
Many of the local Muslims did not want to be annexed by Zanzibar as the UK handed over control to the people of the region.
Assisted by the Brits for whom Lavender worked as a Registrar, and likely pressured by the KADU, evidence shows they started calling themselves the "Republic of Kenya" before the rest of Kenya. This makes sense, as they gained their independence nearly TWO months BEFORE the rest of Kenya on Dec 12, 1963.
The transitional government seems to have started slapping the "Republic of Kenya" on documents and instruments such as deeds, contracts and other associated paperwork (such as birth certificates) to ensure their citizens wouldn't get cut out of agreements later if leaders reneged on their promises.
Please read the following about the "ten mile strip" of what is now part of "Coast Province":
Views were divided as to whether the coastal strip should be treated as a single entity with Kenya Colony, or whether it should be handed back to the Sultan of Zanzibar or it be treated as an independent entity and declared Independent.
In a report submitted to the British Government and the Sultan of Zanzibar entitled The Kenya Coastal Strip Ð Report by the Commissioner Mr. Robertson recommended that the coastal strip be incorporated into Kenya before self government and independence subject to certain safeguards being given to the coastal people which should be entrenched in the constitution.
Robertson further recommended that the British Government abrogate the 1895 Agreement with the Sultan of Zanzibar and that another Agreement be made between the Government of Kenya and the Sultan of Zanzibar whereby the Sultan of Zanzibar will surrender his Sovereignty claims over the Coastal strip in consideration of the Kenya Government undertaking to respect and safeguarding inter alia the maintenance of the Sharia Law for Muslims and the retention of the Kadhis Courts.
On the 5th October 1963, the said Agreement was actually executed in the form of an exchange of letters between the Prime Ministers of Kenya and Zanzibar Messrs Jomo Kenyatta and M. Shamte respectively.
I was laughing—and still am—at your idiocy and now you try to misdirect even further. Bwahahahaha ... you’re not even adept at insult, you have to plead your ‘link was merely a suggestion’. LOL
[Point Two] that is the biggest thing wrong with this country today. Courts do not uphold the clear law; they do what they see as politically expedient. Ina nutshell, that is the cancer that is dissolving the foundations of this nation.
Point one is intentionally insulting and I ought to respond in kind.
Look, if you were a real lawyer, you would know a couple of additional relevant things. As a matter of law, in the United States, we have adopted the English Common Law--we haven't adopted de Vatel's Laws of Nations. So a real lawyer will cite the common law authority. He might also cite Vatel because Vatel is secondary authority and his hearsay observations might have some weight.
Facts are that the common law rules of the rights of individual persons versus the state have been under development since the beginning of the 12th Century, long before de Vatel came along. Probably much of de Vatel's work looks to these rules to some degree.
And, nothing wrong with either de Vatel or your recounting of the rules on the topic from him--I would guess without having done any real research on the topic, that there is some merit in the Two Parent argument since it has come up in another topic on the same subject. Personally, I doubt that whatever merit the rule has, it won't have any operation here in either the public forum or before the U S Supreme Court if a case ever got there. Maybe it ought to--but it won't. The enemy knows that which is why they are ignoring all these tertiary points in an effort to smear the one real fact that counts which is that he was born in Kenya.
As to Point Two, I of course agree with you completely. When you are just sitting around looking for something to read, look up the Switch in Time and NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel and related decisions.
There is no original in London.
Someone released photos of the birth certificate on the same bedspread that the one we are looking at is in and had an old typewriter, a shilling coin to make the seal and big writing “You’ve been punk’d” on it.
We have, officially, been punk’d.
A registry book number (i.e. 44B) might exist in multiple, or every, British colonial registry. Each of those could have identical page numbers.
What would set them apart is the location of the registry office, and the contents of that particular page at the different offices.
"44B" obviously refers to a registry or "Birth" documents. It is highly likely that births were occurring and being registered at a variety of British colonies (possibly at every single colony).
Note that the embossed seals are quite different.
You sound like some sort of activist TROLL, trying to ‘divine’ the Constitution from your personal interpretation of external writings, rather than from reading the WORDS OF THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF.
Susan Blake mentioned something about the baby being pink. Black or bi-racial children are lighter at birth than later.
It’s entirely possible — even probable — that the Dunhams sent Ann back to the Pacific NW to have that child out of wedlock and spare themselves the disgrace that would have attended such a birth in 1961. Barry may well have been born in a maternity home in British Columbia, and Susan Blake may have seen Ann and the baby soon after their discharge.
That would explain why there are no photos or eyewitness accounts of a pregnant Ann Dunham.
Then, upon receiving news of the birth and that Ann was determined to keep the baby, Madelyn filed an affidavit of home birth with Vital Records, which, in turn, listed the birth in the newspaper column with others recorded that week.
The marriage itself? Maybe, maybe not, maybe common-law, maybe a myth to avoid scandal.
And to think there still are some folks out there who believe there was NO conspiracy in the last election ...
And in the upper photo, where is the brown smudge? Nice try, the foundational paper onto which your fake of the exhibit was faded to make it match the original exhibit and this faded the brown stain also. But that is a nice try.
Another fine Constitutional opinion from the FreeAlaska32, who also said:
“you do not have to be a natural born citizen to qualify for POTUS.” at post #6503
I find even the lawyers that are lawyers play badly too, especially the lefty lawyers. ;-)
No more insulting than yours (pot,kettle?)
When you post your emotions, why is it insulting to be called on it? That the “Natural Born” clause is based on Vattel is well backed by Jay’s letters to Madison. Jay’s exact words made it into the constitution.
I’m taking flack over here for mentioning it. Don’t these pics prove the BC one is phoney?
How do you figure the Aussie one is phoney, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.