Posted on 08/01/2012 11:18:33 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
"Meet The Parents....of alias Barack Obama. Black Sunni Muslim father and White Lebanese Christian mother. Born in the ME, raised in Indonesia, became BHO II in 1982." Dr. Ron J. Polland
The “Mal-Val” youtube video at the link was posted by FReeper Polarik (Dr. Ron Polland) in August of 2011 and while morphing the image of a woman named “Val” into an image of Obama, he insinuates that “Val” is Obama’s mom. One year later this youtube has only 1,150 views.
In July 2012, two FReepers associated the woman, “Val,” in Polarik’s Youtube with Lebanese actress Valerie Sarruf and have posted multiple images of her at various ages on FR eligibility threads. I am opening this thread to invite discussion of and links to any evidence that either supports or refutes a claim that Valerie Sarruf is Barack Obama’s mother, with or without Malcolm X being his father.
Where could Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf have been in 1960 when baby Barry would have been conceived? Is there any evidence that Sarruf could have been pregnant and delivered a baby in 1961? In what country could the baby have been delivered? How and when could the alleged Mal-Val baby have been inserted into the identity and life narrative of the person we have come to know as Barack Hussein Obama?
Full disclosure: I refute categorically all of the Mal-Val narrative as wildly speculative and unsupported by any evidence that I have seen so far.
For several years now a shadowy coterie of FReepers styling themselves as “researchers” has gone onto nearly every FR eligibility thread to aggressively refute all evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham was Barack Obama’s mother. They have actually declared flat out that she was never in Hawaii before 1963, contrary to the voluminous evidence including INS FOIA documents!
Requests for links or any evidence that Stanley Ann is NOT the mom have been frequently met with abusive ad hominem attacks and accompanied by claims that ALL documentary evidence showing her to have been in Hawaii in 1960 and 1961 is forged, but no credible evidence of forgery has offered. I make this observation as a retired Certified Fraud Examiner and CPA.
For years the “researchers” had claimed mysteriously to have conclusive evidence that a different woman is Barry’s mom, but refused to reveal her name or any evidence other than her picture because the “researchers” claimed it would disappear from the net and/or from hard copy archives of the records. But this month, the “researchers” appear to have slipped up and revealed that Valerie Sarruf has been the woman whose identity they have been “protecting.” They have since attempted to walk back the revelation, but it is clear, IMO.
The “researchers” claim that they earnestly want to remove Obama from office. But wouldn’t revealing ALL EVIDENCE of a foreign mother and foreign birth (which they also claim) be the most logical approach to removing Obama rather than hiding the identity of this alternative mother for years while attacking FR threads that sincerely attempt to find out where Stanley Ann Dunham was when she gave birth to Barry?
In my opinion, the best evidence that Valerie Sarruf is NOT Barry’s mother is the mountain of evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham IS his mother, which the “researchers” have totally failed to refute.
Again, please use this thread for discussion of and links to any evidence that either supports or refutes a claim that Valerie Sarruf IS Barack Obama’s mother with or without Malcolm X being his father.
The only evidence missing is proof she gave birth to zero ANYWHERE, and in the absence of a genuine, verified, long form birth certificate from Hawaii showing his date of birth, the name of his mother and father, the name of the hospital where he was born, the name of the doctor who delivered him...you don't know where he was born, who his parents were, or when he was born.
John Brennan was Hussein's first choice for Director of Central Intelligence.
Brennan is Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and Assistant to the President.
I’ve seen no evidence that Fred Newman had a daughter named Jo Ann. Trowbridge’s hypothesis has very little evidence and what she presented doesn’t even hang together.
They wouldn’t release Shabazz’s parents names without evidence of death, but Martha Trowbridge says Shabazz’s social security records have been marked as deceased.
Surely another Freedom of Information attempt should be made?
I think those signatures look the same.
They wouldn’t release Shabazz’s parents names without evidence of death, but Martha Trowbridge says Shabazz’s social security records have been marked as deceased.
Surely another Freedom of Information attempt should be made?
What were the names of Fred Newman’s female relatives? Can’t seem to find them myself.
It’s not too difficult. There is not a single realistic image of SAD, and there is not a single unimpeachable document for SAD. No unimpeachable eyewitness recollections.
I’m really disappointed with what’s going on with this “research”. What I see is a debate between complete Obots like Siezethecarp and people who disagree with them, but are also not going anywhere with the “investigation” after a long long time. My fear is that no-one is actually what they appear. This is all smoke and mirrors to mislead the rest of us into thinking “something is being done”.
I’d like to see a whole lot more about who Obama’s parents actually were. Not seeing anything at the moment apart from videos on X and Sarruf morphing into Obama. After over 4 years, that’s not good enough.
First, although there is a fair amount of conflicting, substandard, and outright false photographic evidence on the subject of Stanley, you can look back to the era of her birth documents and imagine that during the war, temporary and substitute people were involved in what was then a quasi rural area intensely involved in the war effort; and add all that up to the proposition that there is a reasonable factual support for her history through 1955, age 13, in Seattle. Say the general story is probably 75-80% probable.
After that, her story becomes increasingly less clear until March 1963 when she enrolled at University of Hawaii as an entering Freshman. After that date, there are some outright uncertainties but there is also a general outline into the 80's.
In looking at the couple of million dollars Zero's forces admit to spending on outside legal in this area; and the fact that they appear to have stopped accounting for it as outside expense and have had a cadre of government lawyers and related entity supporters; and looking at the quantity of legal work and support work that got done (manufacturing fraudulent birth documents for example), you can estimate that they have spent somewhere in excess of $10million; my own guess is in excess of $12million on their effort to conceal from public view, any information about zero's origin or background. (You are also welcome to second guess my estimates--find a lawyer with a 100-200+ lawer firm and ask him what the volume of work that has been done here would cost.)
So tell you what; you get together what zero's forces have spent in a law firm trust account designated by me with appropriate authority to act; and in 12-18 months I think I can answer all your questions. Now unfortunately that is not a guarantee although I can offer somewhat more assurances of result than a prayed for.
You're "really disappointed"? Well I admit to being disappointed but not surprised. It is hopelessly unreasonable to expect that a bunch of amateur volunteers is going to defeat one of the better law firms in the country with the kind of professional support available to them in a determined effort that appears to span close to 30 years. Just not very realistic.
Jerry Corsi is a great man who has done significant and successful work--without him, among other things, John Kerry would have been President. The Sheriff and Mike Zullo are dedicated public servants. But among them, they don't have either the quantity or capability of the kind of professional support you can buy with ten or twelve million dollars.
It is particularly disappointing for the reason that we can see hundred's of millions being spent in the electoral process which boils down to electing a minimum replacement who may not really represent much of an improvement in terms of policy. If we had professional capability a year and a half ago, we might have enough information to have zero out but if our best chance to replace him is Mitt Romney, you could probably expect to be saying President Clinton again by January. So maybe a ballot box replacement with Mitt is better than kicking zero out on eligibility grounds earlier.
On the other hand, if Romney is elected: After the election, absent outright resistance from a Romney administration which is possible; there is likely to be an incentive to continue a professional effort to unearth zero's history because if it proves subsequently that he was born outside the United States and was therefore ineligible to hold the office of President, a number of his substantive acts would get unwound. The two Supreme Court nominees are a couple of examples; I expect that on the way out the door, a few pardon's will get issued; I think but have not looked at the actual time line, that he signed the Zerocare bill after Congress adjourned which would thus have been legally pocket vetoed; there are a bunch of other acts which ought to be reversed if Romney has the integrity to act.
“very old Virginia?” Please. The woman is only a few years older than Stanley Ann. She’s, as you said, 20 years younger than her half-brother. In 2008, she was sprightly enough to host the media to look over her display of (photoshopped) family photos. She and her husband have a country-western band. I’m sure that Mrs. Goeldner would have more than a bone to pick with you for characterizing her as “very old”. That’s insulting to the intelligence of our MANY seasoned citizens right here at Free Republic. Virginia said what she said. I do think it’s likely that she did not know her half-brother well or especially his daughter. That distance might explain why, when first approached by the media, she accidentally told the truth instead of the narrative that she was supposed to tell.
I haven’t a clue who Fred Newman’s relatives are. When Trowbridge first put out that stuff, I did waste time trying to confirm ANY of it. As soon as I realized it was a wild goose chase, I stopped looking.
You’re not on the right side are you?
I guess it depends upon what you call the right side. I have serious doubts about Trowbridge’s stuff. I wasted a lot of time trying to confirm any of it. She doesn’t supply anything but a bunch of speculation. Photos she claimed were Stanley Ann in no way matched photos she later on claimed were Stanley Ann, if I remember correctly, but since she locked her site from the public, I can’t double check my memory. I’m on the side of logic and truth. I’m on the side of not being sent running around on wild goose chases by somebody who throws out tantalizing suppositions with no supporting evidence whatsoever. Yes, there apparently was a person named Jo Ann Newman who wrote that article in praise of the late, great X. Was she Fred Newman’s relative? Who knows? I never could figure out if Trowbridge was ridiculing people or what her game was. Did you ever look into Trowbridge herself?
Yes, I do think the signatures belong to the same person, they may not be as uniform as you expect them to be, but that is probably due to the fact he was signing a recently adopted name.
He was a Jamaican man named Barrington H Smith, iirc.
Fine. At age 70 in 2008, (she was born c. 1938) she was merely “old” not “very old.” However, being age 62 myself and having had reason to do a fair amount of research on age-related cognitive clarity, even if she did say at one point, IIRC, that Barry was an unrelated child whose mom had died while he was a child (which is NOT corroborated by any other statements from her and contradicted by many statements), any person's memory of events decades earlier can degrade and cannot remotely compare to contemporaneous documentation which is cross-corroborated, such as we have with the numerous documents that establish Stanley Ann as Barry's mom.
And on second thought, if you had the wit to crop the three signatures, why not reduce the size and show the entire Social Security documents? I don’t get it...who signs the same application three times?
“.... numerous documents that establish Stanley Ann as Barry’s mom.”
You’re having a laugh aren’t you. There isn’t a single document of record that O’traitor hasn’t with held.
Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”
A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.
Contrary to what you stated I did not use quotes and deliberately said a university in WA knowing that it was the wrong university relative to where she IS documented to have gone. You have not in any way called into question the authenticity of the FOIA INS doc by observing this discrepancy between the INS file note and what she did.
It is entirely reasonable for getting the particular WA university wrong to have been an honest mistake or it is possible that at the time she WAS intending to attend WA State, not U of WA. People get the “U. of (fill in the state)” vs. “(fill in the state U.” wrong all of the time in the numerous states where such confusion can arise. I went to one such university myself.
Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”
IMO, SAD’s passport file is complete except for the “missing” pre-1966 record of either a renewal and/or initial application. Yes there are wrong dates and the mystery Soebarkah cross-out, but absolutely nothing that indicates ANY forgery of the FIOA passport records which are verifiable and available to anyone...except the “destroyed” ones, of course.
All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.
The burning question in my mind at this point is this: Are any people in positions of power and responsibility going to do anything about this guy in the WH or not?
Of course I continue to read every bit of research and discussion I can, I always want to learn. But when are those tasked with maintaining law and order going to do anything? Say anything?
If they continue to be silent, or worse yet, dismissive, then they are JUST AS DAMNED GUILTY as those who have perpetrated these crimes.
Zero arrives in Hawaii on his own passport, no one knows what his name was, Soebarkah had been removed in August, 1968, no one knows who he was sent to live with, no one knows if anyone tried to pick him up at the airport, all the indications are that he was placed into the care of a Catholic refugee organisation. And maybe the Dunhams ultimately became his guardians. He certainly wasn't a dependant of SAD and Soetoro on their combined income tax return in 1973...
THEREFOR in 1982, when the Geoldners visited the Dunhams in Hawaii, when Madelyn told Virginia that the boy's mother had died in 1970, that was their THEN explanation - and that really IRKS SOME PEOPLE.
That interview was quickly followed by another from which of course the offending statement was removed, the entire interview was rehashed...there was a message written across the top of the text to the effect - this is the first interview the Goeldners have ever given...
...but the journalist forgot to remove the original version, and every time I refer to it, someone on FR flies into a rage and of course now the PAGE HAS BEEN REMOVED. (But the original excerpt remains on FR.)
And yes, the sickening, simpering video is missing audio, I wonder what she said this time?
P.S. Any inference that the woman is old and senile is a self serving disgusting lie but what's new?
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.
