Obama: Myth v. Reality, Part I

This article is designed as a reply to several questions and issues which have been raised by comments and also as a thank you to M G who has done me an inestimable service by performing certain research that I had no idea how to do.

Without M G’s original contribution I wouldn’t have become aware of a new oddity in the saga of Stanley Ann Dunham and a new twist. I had no idea of how to access the Hawaiian Court Records, thanks to M G I now do.

I advise some posters to read my first article on Eligibility because I have observed that the idea that Native Born and Natural Born are the same thing is once again rearing its head. This argument is, in my opinion, a FALSE one, based on my reading of the Law prevailing at the time of the composition of Article II and of the Intentions of the Framers. I may add that many Lawyers seem to agree with me.

It is perfectly possible that the “KOS COLB” is either a real document treated in such a way as to appear to be a forgery, or that I am correct and that, although it is a forgery, all the information on it is fundamentally true. That would make it a species of “Sting Operation”.

IF that is so, the document is still fraudulent in its intent and in all probability a forgery of sorts. There would be no excuse for this in Law, so far as I am aware. Such conduct is certainly illegal under the New York State Code and may be under other State Codes. I discovered the New York Law while investigating the Federal Misprision Statute under which the Document would also be illegal if it is a fabrication.

If Senator Obama’s name was originally Barry Dunham, I will be quite surprised, it is not impossible but it is very unlikely. When he returned to Hawaii he was registered at Ponahu as “Barry Obama”. Now since Ponahu is quite an expensive place and since the people there did not know the Dunhams they almost certainly asked for some evidence for the Registration.

I think that the evidence they were given was either (a) a copy, in fact the copy, of his original Certificate of Live Birth, or (b) a US Passport based on that Certificate. That Certificate was long outmoded and should not have been used since, again in my opinion, the Birth Certificate in the Hawaiian Records, outside the sealed files, said that his name was Soetoro and that his father was Lolo Soetoro, Race Indonesian/Asian.

There exists not the faintest tinge of evidence that he was ever called Barry Dunham at any point in his life. Occam’s Razor incidentally says “It is vain to do with more than can be done with less”, in other words look for the simplest explanation. To insert yet another legal identity for which there is no evidence defies this principle.

Why use the Original Certificate of Live Birth to obtain the Passport? Because if the Amended post Adoption Certificate in the name of Soetoro were used it is highly probable that the State Department Guidelines would have come into operation and no Passport would have been issued at all on the basis that the boy was an Indonesian Citizen and not a US Citizen.

Again, Occam’s Razor. (Actually, I prefer the spelling Ockham for the Philosopher’s name, but I’ll go with majority opinion.) Throughout I have used this principle. The idea of the Senator having been called Dunham, or that his parents were not married at the time of his birth is, in fact, illogical. Even a pathological liar usually maintains certain core truths and the Senator has consistently maintained that the information given on the COLB is true, so has every other member of his nuclear and extended family and every journalist (for what that is worth).

Had he believed other than that the information given were true, I’m virtually certain he would not be standing where he is. Yes, I do have some background in a field neither journalistic nor historical.

Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, married his first wife, Kezia, in 1957, however the marriage was a village, or tribal, marriage. In 1961, or 1960, Kenya was a British Colony and the British Authorities did not accept, again so far as I can tell, that such marriages were legal. The US is concerned about the Legal Status of a marriage in the jurisdiction in which it happened, if that marriage was not legal in Kenya it was not legal in the USA either, morals and ethics are irrelevant here.

I have no evidence that tells me that Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, could not legally marry Stanley Ann Dunham, I have evidence only that he should not have married her according to my own moral code. Since he was a Muslim, presumably his moral code did not contain a prohibition against polygamy. In fact, I can find little evidence that he had a moral code at all, he seems to have been a very unpleasant man. There is not, and has never been an issue of Legal Bigamy here, unless my reading of the British Colonial laws is wrong. Even if there were, one would require to believe that BHO, Sr, told the Hawaiian Authorities that he had a wife in Kenya and that is very, very, improbable. I am aware of two cases in which students from, respectively, Nigeria and Ghana failed to disclose either to their University, the Government, or the women they married while at University that they were polygamists with, in one case 5 wives and in the other 9. This did not emerge until the new wives went home with their husbands.

I have no certain knowledge of Stanley Ann Dunham’s feelings on Polygamy but his second American wife certainly knows now and probably knew at the time of the marriage that Kezia existed. Those who believe that Bigamy was an issue should consider that second marriage in the USA very carefully, nobody has ever suggested that it was illegal.

Stanley Ann apparently filed for divorce from BHO, Sr, on the grounds of “grave mental suffering” NOT BIGAMY. That in itself is evidence that no issue of Bigamy was ever raised in the US Courts, therefore there is no reason to think that the Certificate of Live Birth would read Dunham. Incidentally, the divorce would also have deprived BHO, Sr, of grounds for contesting adoption.

As for the “follow the money” idea, please do. If anyone can find out where the disproportionately large sums of money expended over the years by the Dunhams and more particularly by Stanley Ann Dunham came from I, for one, will be fascinated because I haven’t been able to find out.

In 1961 Madelyn Dunham was a Bank Teller and Stanley Armour Dunham was a Furniture Salesman, or possibly the Manager of a furniture shop, reports differ. Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, on the other hand was the son of a rich man, by Kenyan standards, and on a scholarship paid for by the Government, so he may have been a good deal better off than they were. Certainly he hadn’t been spending a lot living at the “Y”. One imagines he paid the Hospital bills, probably in cash, if the Senator was born in a Hospital at all. This issue is under investigation, at this time, but all contributions of knowledge are welcome.

It is known that the Senator’s PATERNAL grandparents were opposed to the marriage, I have no information at all on the opinion of his MATERNAL great grandparents. Indeed Stanley Armour Dunham’s mother killed herself when he was a boy and his father seems to have left shortly afterwards, Stanley was raised by his grandparents, I do not know if they were still living at the time of their great granddaughter’s marriage. Had they been asked about the marriage I would not be surprised to learn that Madelyn’s parents opposed it, but since they had bitterly opposed her marriage to Stanley I doubt that she would have cared.

Had his MATERNAL grandparents been opposed, I doubt that Madelyn Dunham would be speaking to him or that she and Stanley would have helped to raise him.

While it is possible that Senator Obama was born outside the USA, it is not the most probable scenario and I am convinced that there is a core of, perceived, truth lurking amid the smoke and mirrors of the Obama Legend. However it was obtained, presumably from the Original Certificate of Live Birth, that core of truth as known to Obama and his sister is that Senator Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4th 1961, that his father was Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, and his mother Stanley Ann Dunham.

I suspect that the Original BC is missing, lost, or was destroyed long ago. If that is the case the Senator quite possibly did not, or does not know, which hospital he was born in, or if indeed he was born in a hospital at all. Passports do not contain that information.

Now while we have no Wedding Certificate, no witnesses, etc, we do have a newspaper clipping, testimony from a Congressman, testimony from various family members other than the Senator and according to a number of sources evidence for a divorce filing in, I think, February of 1964. Taken together these would lead to a bona fide supposition that BHO, Sr, and Stanley Ann Dunham were married at the time of the Senator’s birth, but that BHO, Sr, abandoned his wife and child in 1962. If he did he was a derogate father and would have no rights in regard to any subsequent adoption of the boy, if the adoption that I believe took place did BHO, Sr, had no rights to assert and even if he did could not assert them in a US Court. As a Citizen of Kenya he would not have a standing to re-adopt his son, so far as I can see.

There are investigations under way to determine the answers to all of these questions.

I repeat, I believe that at the time the COLB we see was created (if it is not a real document and I do not see how it can be) Senator Obama DID NOT have physical possession of ANY Birth Document of any variety from the State of Hawaii. He may have now, but IF I am right, it does not say his name is Obama and it does not say that his father’s was either. In both fields it says Soetoro.

The document with the Obama name on it is sealed in the Archives of the State of Hawaii, again if I am right, and it would require a Court Order for him to obtain it. I do not believe that such an order has been issued to date. This is not to say that he may not get one.

I do not believe that he has ever changed his name by Court Action, or by applying to the Lieutenant Governor of Hawaii and I suspect that he has never gone to the trouble of changing it by announcement in the newspapers either. Why should he if he has been using a US Passport issued in the name of Barack Hussein Obama as ID for his entire Adult Life? Of course, I could be wrong but I’d be surprised if he has.

There is good reason to suppose, by the use of Occam’s Razor, that Senator Obama possesses a US Passport issued on the strength of a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth which gives his name as Barack Hussein Obama II and his father’s name as Barack Hussein Obama. This is a genuine document but, if I am right, it should not be being used because the Certificate currently, and for at least the past 41 years, accessible in the Hawaiian State Archives says something other than that.

In fact, if such a passport exists, it was obtained by a species of fraud, but it is probable that the Senator was not the one who committed the fraud. Of course if he knows it to have been a fraudulent process he is liable under the Misprision Law.

I want to express my greatest thanks to M G whose own research has just shown yet another area in which the Obama Legend is false. I checked the Hawaiian Court Records as M G suggested and in those Records, exactly as MG said, are the papers for Stanley Ann’s Divorce from Lolo Soetoro.

What those papers show is very interesting. Most sources give the impression that Stanley Ann Divorced Lolo Soetoro soon after Senator Obama returned to school in Hawaii in 1971. More detailed sources say they Divorced in 1980. What the Hawaiian Court Records show is that the Divorce proceedings BEGAN in 1980 and ended after the death of Lolo Soetoro in January 1987. Specifically the case terminated on November 26th 1988.

Further examination of the Hawaiian Records, as suggested by M G’s invaluable research, shows not only that the Soetoro Divorce Case was terminated more than a year, indeed almost two years after Lolo Soetoro’s death, but that no proceedings beyond the initial filing ever happened in Hawaii.

a) How can two people who live in another country file for divorce in the USA? And why would they unless property in the USA was involved? Stanley Ann Dunham was living in Jakarta, Indonesia, in 1980 and so was Lolo Soetoro.

b) Is the reference I have found in an Indonesian source that Lolo Soetoro divorced Stanley Ann in 1980 in Jakarta correct? The same source stated that he remarried and had two more children. It should be remembered, though, that Indonesia allows Polygamy. Maya Soetoro-Ng says that her parents divorced in 1980, but is she right?

c) Why is it that most sources say, or imply, a divorce took place if it didn’t?

It seems that both the journalists and myself have slipped up on this one. Certainly Stanley Ann filed for Divorce but there would seem to be some evidence to suggest no divorce ever took place. Certainly if it did, it did not take place in Hawaii.

The fact that the journalists say that she never asked for either maintenance or child support reflects false thinking on their part, if they are thinking of the Hawaiian case. How could one ask for either from a man living in another country who, under the laws of that country might not be obliged to pay either?

d) Does it strike anyone else as odd that a divorce would take 8 years and terminate over 1 year and 10 months after the death of the defendant? And with no Court proceedings? Did Stanley Ann just forget the Hawaii Filing? It looks as if this may be the case but then I know nothing about the Hawaiian System.

e) Bearing Islamic Law in mind, is it possible that the marriage was polygamous, at least from 1970? In Islamic Law a husband is actually supposed to provide a separate house for each wife. Could this mean that he did and that he simply chose to live with his second/junior wife rather than Stanley Ann? Maya and Barack could have been unaware of this arrangement.

In any event, it reflects another hole in the Obama version of events, because it is possible that there never was a divorce. When the action terminated Maya Soetoro would have been 18. It would also mean that there could have been no finagling with Senator Obama’s status as Soetoro’s adopted son (by Barack Sr., for instance), at least until he reached his majority, and then only by himself.

As a note against a pet theory of my own, if no divorce ever happened it is possible that Stanley Ann did not take up Indonesian Citizenship. If she was still married and living in a house owned by her husband she would lose neither custody of her children nor her home, even if she remained a US Citizen. Her position as a senior wife living with her children would be unassailable in Indonesian Law. I must admit that I never thought to check to see if the action was completed by the time of Soetoro’s death, I anticipated that an action filed in 1980 would have been completed at the latest by 1985, in any jurisdiction. I was totally wrong.

One must also note that when Ann returned to Indonesia from her second period of study and after she got her Master’s Degree she intended to take both of her children with her, this on the testimony of several sources. Her son, then in his teens, chose instead to stay in the USA, because he felt his chances of advancement were better here.

Yet more smoke and mirrors. And yet more Legal Papers in Hawaii that ought to be somewhere else. I shall have to dig deeper into Indonesian Sources.

There seems to be very good evidence that Senator Barack Hussein Obama may not legally be entitled to his name. There seems to be good evidence that the document that he has provided as evidence that he is happens to be a Forgery. I, personally, do not see a valid alternative to the supposition that he is using his birth name, rather than the name on his real Certification of and Certificate of Live Birth from the State of Hawaii.

At the very least, the real Document available to him, if I am right, would be a Public Relations Disaster of major proportions. At the worst, if I am right, it would demonstrate his probable Ineligibility for the Office of POTUS and lead to investigations that would establish said Ineligibility.

There are many theories floating around in the blogosphere, most of them either defy Occam’s Razor, or are factually, or legally, inaccurate and one should beware of them.

a) US Certificates of Live Birth don’t contain a field for “Religion”. The Senator’s Birth Certificate could not say that he was a Muslim. His Indonesian School Records can and do.

b) Islamic Law does not seem to say that if your father is Muslim you are. Many people more expert than I on the subject have positively stated this or that very few Islamic people would take it seriously if that were the case. Indonesian State Law, on the other hand, does state exactly that.

c) There is no solid evidence of any description that Senator Obama has ANY Arab blood, or Genetic Component whatsoever. The Luo Tribe are NOT Arabs and most of them are not Muslim. The Senator’s extended family in Kenya are the exception and not the rule.

d) IF Senator Obama possessed Kenyan Citizenship as a boy it is very, very unlikely that he still does because he would have AUTOMATICALLY lost it at age 21 unless he either Renounced his US Citizenship or obtained a Kenyan Ministerial Decree overriding the requirements of Chapter VI, Article 97 of the Kenyan Constitution. I do not know that he did possess such a Citizenship.

e) Unless he was born abroad of married parents, the age of the Senator’s mother at the time of his birth is irrelevant to his claim of US Citizenship. He says he was born in Hawaii and I think he probably was.

There are a lot of arguments in the blogosphere that are being advanced by reason of Islamophobia or Xenophobia.

Senator Obama was a Muslim as a boy and he is lying about it, but my objection is to the lie and not to the Religion.

As for an Arabic speaking background, (a) Obama doesn’t come from one and (b) Ralph Nader does, his parents were Maronite Christian immigrants from the Lebanon. He is bilingual in Arabic, he also speaks five other languages. Obama can speak and read some Classical Arabic but that is like speaking Church Slavonic, it is a dead language.

I do not care about any Candidate’s Race, Religion, Sexuality, Gender, or Parental Nationality. I do care about the Constitution.

Some, at least, of these arguments have been planted as distractions and strawman arguments by Obama supporters. Some have been put forward by people who oppose Obama because they are crypto-racists, or even just racists. These arguments are essentially false.

There are some people who oppose Obama who can and will demolish all of these arguments. It does not prove that they are Obama supporters, it proves that they are honest, or at least true to their principles.

Those are arguments advanced against Senator Obama, now I will address the principal argument used in his favor by all of his followers and by the Senator himself. I have addressed this before but I shall do so again. The Senator, his followers and even some of his opponents state categorically that he is “A Citizen under the XIVth Amendment”. They say this as if it were relevant to something. It isn’t, it never was. People who quote the Constitution should read the Constitution.

Before I quote the XIVth Amendment let me say again, as I have been saying since my very first article, I, personally, HAVE NO DOUBT THAT SENATOR OBAMA IS AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CITIZEN UNDER THE XIVTH AMENDMENT AND IT CHANGES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND IN NO WAY AFFECTS MY OBJECTIONS TO HIS ELIGIBILITY FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!

The XIVth Amendment says nothing about Eligibility for the Office of POTUS, indeed it specifically does not address the issue in any of its Provisions. Here is the text of the XIVth Amendment (edited TD for brevity; ask her for full version):

“Section 1. 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.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President…. shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-ninth Congress, on the 13th of June, 1866. It was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State dated July 28, 1868 to have been ratified by the legislatures of 28 of the 37 States. The dates of ratification were (ask TD for text).

Now let me backtrack on myself a little here, this is the first time I have used this particular version of the Text and this version is dated 2000 and comes from The Library of Congress.

I notice that as of 2000 The State of Hawaii had not Ratified the XIVth Amendment and I suppose that could be a ‘can of worms’ in itself. I doubt it but I’m not a Lawyer. His position in Federal Law seems sound.

Alright, if you read the Amendment you will realize that it has regard to Voting Rights and Rights under the Law and nowhere does it contain either a definition of the term Natural Born Citizen, or even of the term Citizen, it assumes that anyone reading it knows what a Born Citizen is and what a Naturalized Citizen is and it does not distinguish between the two in terms of rights in any way. Since I assume that Senator Obama is one of the two my argument is unaffected.

The only respect in which the XIVth Amendment deals with probable Natural Born Citizens lies in Section 3 where, for very good and sufficient reason it deprives a large group of formerly Natural Born Citizens of eligibility for any variety of Public Office whatsoever, unless a 2/3 Vote of Congress reversed the loss of Rights.

The Presidency and Vice Presidency are specifically NOT mentioned in this Provision because it was considered to be self evident that nobody who had served the Confederacy in any way could EVER qualify under Article II of the Constitution. I take it that nobody finds it surprising that those who had taken on another Allegiance and actually made War against the United States were excluded in this way.

Governor Schwarzenegger, George Soros and Rupert Murdoch are as much Citizens under the XIVth Amendment as Senator Edward Kennedy, Bill Gates and Katie Couric, or Senator Barack Hussein Obama. Of these seven people three are Eligible for POTUS, three are Ineligible for POTUS and one is of Undetermined Status.

Of these seven people the birth parentage, the parental marital status of, the full legal name of, the birth and subsequent citizenship of, the educational record, etc, etc, etc of six, is publicly available and verifiable, but of Senator Obama we can say nothing with legal certainty and that is unacceptable.

The truth is this, whatever caused the initial problem was not Senator Obama’s fault, his mother probably caused the problem in the first place and she is dead.

What is his fault, assuming that he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, is that he has deliberately concealed his background, obscuring a thousand details that should be a matter of Public Record.Obama seems to have lied about his background in print and in person persistently for nearly twenty years. This would make him unfit to be President even if he is Eligible under Article II, which I think him not to be.

There seems to be presumptive evidence of violation of various Federal Campaign Finance Laws and Regulations, and there seems to be, at the least, evidence that he has associated with persons guilty of Corruption on a systematic basis.

In an article which I have yet to finish I shall argue that there is evidence to suppose that Senator Obama has broken the Logan Act repeatedly and recently.

In short, on the preponderance of evidence Senator Obama should step down now from seeking the Presidency and submit himself to some form of Legal Inquiry on a voluntary basis and before he is compelled so to do. He should also apologize to the American People and to his own followers.

A Candidate should prove their Eligibility on the preponderance of evidence but Senator Obama has not only not provided evidence he seems to have actively blocked any attempt to find it. This seems to be clear evidence of culpability, or of his belief that he is culpable.

Now since Ponahu is quite an expensive place and since the people there did not know the Dunhams they almost certainly asked for some evidence for the Registration.

Why would the writer think that Ponahu wouldn't not know the Dunhams? Barry's grandmother was a vice president of a bank!

Had his MATERNAL grandparents been opposed, I doubt that Madelyn Dunham would be speaking to him or that she and Stanley would have helped to raise him.

What planet is Texas Darlin' from?

If you thought your daughter was marrying the wrong man, would you take it out on the child, your grandchild?

How could you possibly feel justified in punishing the child because you disapprove of one or both of his or her parents?

Something is seriously wrong with this. One starts out with a real question that may have some relevance to the real world.

Then one stumbles into a lot of loose ends and inconsistencies, and holds them up as evidence of a conspiracy.

One gets caught up in all that, but the loose ends may just be the usual inaccuracies and imperfections of life.

In any event, whether I'm right or wrong about the big picture, would you take differences that you have with your son-in-law out on your grandchild?

And I don’t think it is all that important. The only things important to me in this entire scenario are:

1) The COLB is forged. He must be removed from office for that malfeasance.

2) What is he trying to hide via the forgery.

I think it is. You see, she was in an islamic marriage. You can’t file for divorce from an islamic marriage in an American court. It has to be in one that recognizes Shariah Law.

Women and children are possessions in Islamic Countries. A woman can’t initiate divorce. A woman can’t travel without permission from the man. A lot of this background is really not making sense.

You can’t file for divorce from an islamic marriage in an American court??

You most certainly can. The US doesn’t recognize sharia law. Muslim women get divorces here.

>>>Muslim women get divorces here.

When they do that, they have a surrogate of sharia law with them.

I’m not sure the USA was up to speed with sharia surrogate in the 80s.

Ok, then maybe I have only part of a story. But I’m repeating what a person told me that is a sharia surrogate.

Can the U.S. courts perform a divorce that was not performed in the U.S.?

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.