Skip to comments.Re:"Mal and Val - not Ann and the Old Man" Any evidence Valerie Sarruf is Obama's mom? (vanity)
Posted on 08/01/2012 11:18:33 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
click here to read article
I don't remember any claim or evidence that the second document was an “original entry transcript” which would be the first transcript for SADO at U of WA created to record the 1961-62 school year. IIRC it was just an earlier transcript image which could have been from any time prior to the migration of the system to a fully electronic transcript database, which generated the very recently produced computer printout.
As I pointed out, the second photo image has some computer output in the upper left which looks much more advanced than 1962 to me so of course it would not look like the original entry document but, rather a printout on custom forms from a partially automated system circa 1970’s, IMO. Onto this custom form (typical of that era with the HS transcript courses tightly programed to be recorded at the top, IIRC) some manual notations were made with a typewriter which the computer database hadn't yet been programmed to incorporate, that being the additional degrees at U of HI in the lower left.
IMO, it is obvious that the second transcript likely produced from a partial database conversion around 1970 and the updated with a typewriter over several years later would NOT look like the original entry transcript that you agree it does not look like.
BTW, who would possibly be motivated to forge such an extremely complicated and labor intensive document composed of mixed computer and typed elements and incorporating fields for the HS courses at the top showing Mercer HS, etc.? This makes the Bomford BC look like child's play!
Arguing against a forgery is that the latest computer printout from the U of WA matches the record on the older one. It is a state institution and all transcript processes are tightly controlled.
There is no motive, IMO, for Obots to forge something to try to place SADO in Seattle when her being in Seattle in Sept of 1961 destroys the “Dreams” narrative. And SADO at Seattle is confirmed by the INS docs. There is no motive that I can see for Obots to forge the INS docs which corroborate SADO at U of WA, as does the U of HI transcript. SADOs full HI transcript, not just the letter from the registrar, because Pastor Manning put it up in his most recent video...the one where he says Barry's dad can't be FM Davis because his real dad is THE DEVIL!
IIRC, Mary Toutonghi is a Caucasian Anglo who married a Lebanese man who through six degrees of separation is linked to Valerie Sarruf, who is claimed to be the mother of Barry in the mysterious Mal-Val narrative.
What is most peculiar is that Mary's only role in the Mal-Val narrative is to have been the babysitter in January 1961 not for Barry (supposedly her distant relation) but for the REAL i.e. original Barack Obama II, sometimes referred to as BHO2...who has grown up to be the man now known as Roman Obama, but at birth was an unknown son of BHO Sr. and whose mother was an unknown additional wife of BHO Sr. named Anna S. Obama thus matching the Polk registry for 1961, but she was not Stanley Ann, but rather Ann or Anna, the Asian lass seen sitting next to BHO Sr. at the Nachmanoff's party.
Bottom line, Mary Toutonghi does babysit her distant relative, Barry, but rather a totally unrelated unknown son of BHO Sr. who mysteriously comes to Seattle in 1961 INSTEAD OF Barry in the Mal-Val narrative.
This is stream of consciousness, not evidence, IMO! Ant it appears to be totally disconnected from whether Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf are Barry's parents.
If there is no public link and it has been released then that means someone is sitting on the info and doesn't want the general public to know what has been learned or else this has all been a ruse.
There's only so many ways this can go.
And yet you say this...
...I doubt if either you or the writer of this thread will ever see it.
You imply the information provided to "the proper parties" will never be released to the general public as you doubt I will ever see it.
Since you seem to be so "in the know" then tell me...is there, or isn't there, a plan to eventually release the information to the public?
I'm not asking what is known, I'm only asking if it will ever be presented to the public.
Or am I not privy to that know that either?
Bottom line, Mary Toutonghi does NOT babysit her distant relative, Barry, but rather a totally unrelated unknown son of BHO Sr. who mysteriously comes to Seattle in 1961 INSTEAD OF Barry in the Mal-Val narrative.
Fixed it. That is what I obviously intended.
Obviously not or maybe you're just too stupid to figure it out?
I'm smart enough to know recognize that you won't answer a benign question.
Funny how some people believe that everything can only be proven with links.
I'm not asking you to "prove" anything with a link. I'm asking you to "provide" a link if the info is in the public domain. You won't provide a link so the info is not available to the public.
Apparently "the proper parties" don't feel the public needs to know what has been found and turned over to them by the "researchers" as there is no public Internet access.
Or perhaps they don't find any merit to what was turned over to them and they won't release the info for fear that they'll be seen as fools for believing what was presented. I don't know. I can only speculate.
If there is no public Internet link even after it has been released to "the proper parties" then that means someone is indeed sitting on the info and they don't plan to release the info at this time. Whether or not it will be released in the future is the question you won't, or can't, answer.
In your own words...maybe you're just too stupid to figure it out, even when it's spelled out for you.
lol, you remind me of...
Go on, you can say it. Don't hold back now!
You've, basically, already called me stupid and that hasn't phased me so comparing me to someone else won't phase me either.
Just say it.
Thanks, thats very nice of you, but this entire issue goes further back than you could be aware of. Someone I will not name circulated via private mail, a number of items of research material that was to remain private. That person had offered to keep research results off site for safe-keeping.
Instead, the results were circulated (WITH MY SCREEN NAME STILL ATTACHED)to a ping list of over a hundred people. And the information those messages contained was used to denigrate me and the research group of nine freepers who remained nameless throughout and will continue to remain nameless.
When this rotten deed came to light, my original reaction was to close down the entire effort, and wipe all our results.
To be then told THIS IS OUR COUNTRY was the last straw.
Ultimately, maybe even unwisely, I decided to fight back. The material our group collected, much of which has not been published here, is in the safe hands of a number of people, AND WE ARE STILL ADDING TO IT.
So Seizethecarp and Hoosiermama, and LucyT, aside from the plain ridiculous charges against me that I am a subversive -there are NINE freepers whose names you will never know, who contributed. And THEY know how far off the truth of the matter you are.
But I am a make lemonade sorta guy...the three of you have done more to draw attention to what is probably going on, than I ever could without you, so keep it up.
432 posted on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 9:21:43 AM by Fred Nerks
Please note, little jeremiah, your name appears only because it was to you that I replied, not that you were in any way implicated in what I had to say, and hoosiermama it would seem you may have had a change of heart, because you have been very polite to me of recent date. But regret fully, Seizethecarp seems to have swallowed the accusation that I AM A SPY with such zeal, it's quite breathtaking. And Philman, I really thought you had more sense, but the way you attacked me over the ridiculous images of the nude model showed me, you have the same bees in your bonnet that Seize has. I'll try to tell you again. Our research materials were compiled for the purpose of handing them over to someone who could access more searches than we could, our material could in no way be conclusive, WE PROVIDED LEADS that show a PI or a posse WHERE THEY SHOULD BE LOOKING. And as they do that, during which process we don't even expect them to contact us, there'll be NOTHING revealed here. Got that? So frikken BITE ME!
NOW WHY ON EARTH WOULDN'T WE TRUST YOU? I SUGGEST YOU ASK THE PERSON WHO SENT YOU THE PRIVATE MAIL THAT SET YOU OFF. IT'S BAD ENOUGH NEEDING TO KEEP SOURCE LINKS FROM THE PRYING EYES OF OBOTS - BUT TO BE DOUBLE CROSSED BY ONE OF YOUR OWN AND TOLD 'IT'S MY COUNTRY' THAT WAS TOO MUCH.
And now, you may carry on with your usual programming, because heaven help me, the one thing that stands out like a sore thumb is NEITHER OF YOU HAVE PROVIDED ANYTHING ORIGINAL, IT'S JUST GRIPE, WHINE, ACCUSE AND BELITTLE AS YOU GO. AND WHEN I DO TRY TO BRING SOMETHING NEW TO THE TABLE, I'M ACCUSED OF THREAD HIJACKING. NICE BUNCH YOU ARE.
Seize, get off my back, go away, do some research, bring back something interesting, your spittle and spite is dead BORING. You'll do yourself an injury, your hatred isn't healthy.
Oh I get it- you are an obamabot
Ok then, show me Stanley Annes signature on the registration book when she should have entered the hospital to give birth ! OH WAIT they wont let any one see that book
OK show me a hospital bill- oops none again
OK so you have records of her travel - it would have been odd for a very pregnant girl to get on a flight from kenya to USA and then travel to seattle a few days after giving birth
So... You have verbal accounts from friends and relatives? show them
I guess that phony birth certificate(s) he presented (twice) were just for fun... and he spent $3million in lawyers fees to keep the issue out of court because he had extra money he didnt feel he needed...
ANd the records indicate a shotgun wedding? thats interesting - I didnt know type of wedding was listed on the form- can I see that please?
Mr. K, when Rush today played the clip of Harry Reid demanding Mitt Romney release tax records, I called Mitch McConnell's office and gave the young lady the long version.
We know nothing of Hussein.
Everything he's said, every document, every supposed eyewitness account, all false.
Let him produce his transcripts of Occidental, Columbia, Harvard. All the documents relating to birth, marriage, citizenship.
All we have are photoshopped photos and forged documents, witnesses whose stories change--
And, David, you show Corsi was given forged documents--completely outside the authentic format, demonstably so.
We are given some dog and pony show of an airlift that didn't airlift a guy who admitted in 1962 he hadn't been in Kenya for seven years.
We've got Ayers in Dreams saying one thing but Maraniss (as Rush phrased it) "tried to help" and only succeeded in showing "Obama made stuff up"--
--which is not accurate: Ayers made stuff up.
The Genevieve who Hussein admitted didn't happen--gee, could we tell from Balloon-Head with her in the photo?
Some cling to the official propaganda like Ishmael to Queequeg's coffin in Moby Dick.
Others have Ahab's obsession with the white whale vis-a-vis Frank Marshall Davis and woman in high heels who isn't SAD.
There is a reason the puppet must be protected from exposure.
And yet in these pages he is revealed.
First...STOP YELLING! That's what "all caps" is...you yelling! I may be partially deaf, but I'm not blind.
Second...Nobody sent me any private mail that divulged anything and nobody's mail "set me off".
There have only been one or two times in my entire history here that I've ever revealed anything that was sent to me in mail and that was only to expose the denigrating thing that the retreaded troll had said in private. So you can BITE ME in that regard. I don't divulge squat if I'm asked not to.
I don't get a lot of mail to begin with so your assumption that I received something is BS. In case you didn't know I'm not exactly "liked" around here as I have a tendency to speak my mind no matter what and some people have an aversion to that so my "list of correspondents" is rather small. Except for alerts by LucyT and Brown Deer my mail is very limited. I predict that those may stop as well now.
Third...I've conceded that I understand the desire to keep the information obtained close to the vest.
All I'm asking is if the information is ever going to be released to the public! I don't give a flying "you know what" if I'm told beforehand or not. I don't care! The public deserves to eventually be told what was found, don't they? Or is it that it was all useless info after all?
I thought that asking such a thing was harmless and yet I see panties getting all bunched up over such a benign question.
And as time runs down it seems more and more likely that the information isn't going to be released to the public and that's a shame as none of the work that has been done will see the light of day. The objective was to prevent a second attempt at office for this man, wasn't it?
And Philman, I really thought you had more sense, but the way you attacked me over the ridiculous images of the nude model showed me...
You need to provide a link to that. I believe we disagreed on the picture of the two young boys.
And if you're so petty as to hold a grudge against someone for one disagreement then you're a pretty pathetic example of a human being.
Seems that you're the one that's having a hissy fit.
Wrong again. I'm merely wondering why such a benign question is causing you such angst.
So you believe that there was never any information available to the public until 20 years ago?
Have I intimated such a thing?
It's not me, moron.
You're right. I'm a moron for thinking that you would answer a benign question.
So you've yet to tell me...who is it that I remind you of?
I went to bed shortly after that reply. I was in sore need of my beauty sleep. I’m one ugly cuss.
Just like the day you asked me if I was trying to out a FReeper.
The tenor of your reply revealed your attitude then as well.
The material our group collected, much of which has not been published here, is in the safe hands of a number of people...
What exactly do you mean by "much of which" (not "all of which") hasn't been published and it's not here?
(rhetorical and illustrative of how a curious mind might function so there is no need to actually answer)
Since something, judging by your words, is published then you're implying that it's available to the public. And if something is "published" where is it published? Is it in a book or magazine? Is it on a website?
I don't get it. Or are you using the wrong words to express your thoughts?
“But I am a make lemonade sorta guy...the three of you have done more to draw attention to what is probably going on, than I ever could without you, so keep it up.”
Very well, then. Here is a cross-post of a Mal-Val “researcher” narrative subsidiary claim which is that not only was Stanley Ann never in HI before 1963, but she never graduated from or even attended Mercer High in 1960!
By removing Stanley Ann from their secret narrative it would seem that Barry is protected from exactly his most vulnerable point of exposure and that is “Where was Stanley Ann when he was born?” Intentionally or unwittingly, the Mal-Val narrative PROTECTS Barry from what the most competent credentialed forensic researchers have found which is that Stanley Ann graduated from Mercer in 1960, went to Hawaii to the U of Hawaii that fall and became impregnated by a man of African heritage and that she was in Seattle at the U of WA with baby Barry beginning in Sept. 1961. Period.
But I digress. Here is the Fred Nerks contribution to the Mal-Val “remove Stanley Ann as Barry’s mom” narrative”:
I dont know if you noticed, but the entire point of the exercise goes back to the very first group image I posted on this thread; I wanted to know if anyone else could see what we could see, that it was impossible to be certain that Stanley Ann Dunham actually did -
a. Attend Mercer Island High School
b. Graduate in 1960.
From what we can see, its possible she was there when she was 15, according to the image supplied by her good friend Maxine.
There are more images to come from screencaps when we can convert them to post here. It aint over until its over, stay tuned.
1,445 posted on Friday, August 03, 2012 2:30:48 AM by Fred Nerks (Fair Dinkum!)
...the entire point of the exercise...
Is "the exercise" a fact finding mission or a mission to divert?
Just curious as the words you use are curious.
Sure I have, but you're too ignorant to figure it out.
Once again...prove it, don't just say it.
“Instead, the results were circulated (WITH MY SCREEN NAME STILL ATTACHED)to a ping list of over a hundred people. And the information those messages contained was used to denigrate me and the research group of nine freepers who remained nameless throughout and will continue to remain nameless.”
I am surprised to see you re-post this claim. I am on the LucyT ping list and I never saw “the results” you say were circulated.
I did, however, see you and David together reveal your claim that Valerie Sarruf was Barry’s mom, if that is part of what you call “the results”!
“...And, Lorice, as you say, first cousin to Faud, is first cousin once removed to Faud’s daughter Valerie; and is thus first counsin twice removed to Fauds grandson by daughter Valerie and we all know who he is.”
Look at this, I found an image of that Valerie, she played a part in a TV series named The Avengers in the UK in an episode from the 1962-1963 series:
The part she apparently played was Anna Rosas. If you click on that name on the page, it shows the photograph.
THE AVENGERS LINK
294 posted on 07/10/2012 3:14:22 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Fair Dinkum!)
What you quoted was: ...much of which has not been published here...
What part of the word "not" don't you understand?
I understand that "not" published here means it, potentially, was published elsewhere. Or else, again, the wrong words were used to convey what was meant.
Why don't you let the author of those words answer for themselves?
Sure I have, but you're too ignorant to figure it out.
Once again...prove it, don't just say it.
It's just an "exercise" after all, isn't it?
Of course there are truths amongst the lies...you just have to learn how to see beyond the lies. The biggest and best lie is the one that tries to tell us that the little boy on the left is someone named 'David' -
But you and I and a few thousand others...know who the two little boys really are, and why, after years of looking, no one can find 'David' - BECAUSE HE'S ZERO!
I’ve already asked seizethecarp the point of his exercise multiple times since he opened this thread, but still haven’t gotten an answer. So what’s your point?
I don’t have to prove your ignorance. It’s quite obvious to most anyone.
I've seen things here.
Then show me what you have seen here. Enlighten me instead of denigrating me.
Why haven't you?
Because I do have a life and I'm not on here all of the time, nor do I see every reply made. Doh!
And what is fact and what is conjecture?
There's no point following conjecture and all I've seen to date is conjecture and opinion.
If it was meant to be taken together then the sentence would have (or should have) been constructed in a manner different from that in which it was.
If it were to be taken in the manner you indicate then it should have been composed thusly...
Of course there are truths amongst the lies...you just have to learn how to see beyond the lies and the biggest and best lie is the one that tries to tell us that the little boy on the left is someone named 'David' -
A sentence standing alone is to be taken as such...a separate sentence.
Notably, you aren't doing that.
Now me, people have met me in person and in Texas so I have proof through witnesses and photographs taken at several events that I actually live in Texas.
And you, you don't even have a State flag on your home page despite the many years you've been here. All you have is a US flag. Where are you from, if I may ask?
The point of this thread was stated by me very clearly,IMO in my article that opened the thread and I have quoted the last sentence back to you already. Here are the last two sentences again:
In my opinion, the best evidence that Valerie Sarruf is NOT Barrys 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 Obamas mother with or without Malcolm X being his father.
British Columbia and several other provinces had province-wide universal hospital care by 1950. The federal government jumped in starting in 1957. I don’t know what the policy was for aliens, but I do remember some people talking in the mid 60’s about having got free hospital delivery by going to Canada. (Not just for draft dodgers.)
It’s just a thought.
“So while we have briefly touched on the topic of the thread, what evidence is there that the woman on the left, Valerie Sarruf, gave birth to baby Barry, her son by Malcolm X, according to the Mal-Val narrative?
Where could she and Malcolm X have been together in 1960, the most likely time of the conception. Is there any evidence?”
If Obama is a year older than he now says, and his own web site originally admitted that fact, then he was likely born in 1960 and conceived in 1959. Where would Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf have been for Obama to have been conceived in 1959? Egypt? Africa?Certainly Malcolm X was there. Wonder if Val was too?
“Malcolm X had visited the United Arab Republic, Sudan, Nigeria, and Ghana in 1959 to make arrangements for a tour by Elijah Muhammad. After Mecca he visited Africa a second time, returned to the United States in late May, then flew to Africa again in July. During these visits he met officials, gave interviews, and spoke on television and radio in Egypt, Ethiopia, Tanganyika, Nigeria, Ghana, Guinea, Sudan, Senegal, Liberia, Algeria, and Morocco. In Cairo, he attended the second meeting of the Organization of African Unity as a representative of the Organization of Afro-American Unity.”
Is there evidence that she took time off to have a baby from her academic/theatrical/movie career?
“February 21, 1965, as MalcolmX prepared to address the Organization of Afro-American Unity in Manhattan's Audubon Ballroom, “ According to Martha Trowbridge, someone who looked like Valerie was present when Malcolm X was shot and also filmed at his funeral. Was that Valerie (the actress), or the nanny (but Martha said she worked on a newspaper)? Confusion reigns.
What would Malcolm X's motive be to have a baby with a Christian white woman and then turn the baby over to communists when in 1960 he was NIO in good standing?
“Malcolm X later said that seeing Muslims of "all colors, from blue-eyed blonds to black-skinned Africans", interacting as equals led him to see Islam as a means by which racial problems could be overcome.”
How and when could the baby have been transferred from Sarruf’s home turf of England at least since 1962 and out to Hawaii? Wouldn't anyone have noticed a missing baby?
Obama seems to have gone to Indonesia at a very young age, quite when he went there and where he was before seems a mystery.
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.