Posted on 09/21/2009 5:37:18 PM PDT by rxsid
Thanks for the ping!
But she only claimed to have his “vital records”.
Not her first statement. She claimed to have the original birth certificate, but gave no indication as what it said or if it matched the COLB. NADA
She got banned. I tried for a while to contact her, if she got reinstated then HOORAY! I wish I had looked again for her!
....... Oh so you are saying every illegitimate kid of a British father can’t claim British citizenship? Riiiight.
Wait and See at this point...
TANKS,ya’ll,,,
We mite be gitin’ to the Good part...;0)
Well click on her name and see. She’s still here
You better read the law. Start with my profile. The marriage was Void Abinitio. Read up about VOID marriages and ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN.
Also, Obama would not have been a Kenyan citizen either. The only way he can get Kenyan citizenship is to go over there and live and some other various requirements BECAUSE he was not a British citizen.
Yes, I think so. But Hawaii is between a rock and a very hard place. They got told not to release a damn thing. Regardless of the law, in violation of the law. In many ways, Obama and his minions play hardball. I am sure that Fukino et al got the message loud and clear. I remember MissTickley saying that she thought Fukino was trying to help her. Mostly by how she answered. With out ever saying so, she let her know that she wasn’t asking the right questions. Fukino and Hawaii want out of this mess.
And its a mess alright. There is a big nasty hairball attached to the way Hawaii gave out Birth certificates, which could lead up to and include an effort to defraud the US Welfare system. They got grants for welfare babies, and there were LOTS of E. Asians coming to the islands. There is a reason why Hawaii was so lax about it. It didn’t happen on accident.
No. It's the same name that is in the newspaper announcement.
Some things it could be:
Name was changed from Obama to Soetoro and then back again recently. This first change could theoretically change a foreign birth to Hawaii birth as HRS §§338-17.7, 338-20.5 would seem to allow for that. That would mean that the birth was initially admitted to the Hawaii DoH as a foreign birth and they still put out an announcement to the papers for it. I guess that would be possible.
Changed the father's race from "Arab" to "African".
Added the father because he was left out of the original BC.
Changed the date of birth. If he wasn't born in a hospital that declared an official date and time of birth, then someone could swear to a different time, date or place later on and have the birth certificate amended.
Unless the guy in the White House isn't the same character referred to in the newspaper announcements, though, it should be believed that his name was Barack Hussein Obama at the time of his birth.
Sounds good, but just because she allegedly looked at a document for the purpose of making a public statement doesn’t necessarily mean that the documents exist for that purpose, and there may be other statutes which prohibit their release. So you may have a potential conflict between two statutes. It’s worth attempting however.
Are you saying that you are a specialist in British law of 1961? Please give me some links, I would love to read up on it.
Assuming, of course, that the images of the newspaper announcements weren't created later.
bump for later
You don’t have to believe me. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Start with MY PROFILE. There is a document there from the UK Border Agency.
Chill zippy, its not like I am calling your information or knowledge into question. I just asked for more info, you want to be bitchy about giving it then I will write you off as a troll.
“Chill zippy, its not like I am calling your information or knowledge into question.:
ROFLMAO. That is exactly what you did.
You can do the research or not. You can believe it or not.
But the people who refuse to acknowledge this issue look suspect.
Are you referring to this:
“2.2.4 Polygamous marriages
2.2.4.1 The courts did not have jurisdiction to grant a decree of
nullity in respect of polygamous [the term includes
potentially polygamous] marriages until 29 June 1972,
when the Matrimonial Proceedings (Polygamous
Marriages) Act 1972 was enacted. However, the effect
of this Act is to allow the courts to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any polygamous marriage, irrespective of the
date on which it was contracted.”
I know there is more, I read it. However, that would be for a UK court to decide, and clearly that hasn’t happened. There is a Divorce Decree in Hawaii that would likely make this a very sticky issue in UK, and it would require documentation that Obama Sr. Was officially legally already married in Kenya. I have not the foggiest idea if that is provable or not. No clue.
Now that being said, unless it were adjudicated in UK, I think it safe to say that that issue has not been dealt with, and would be up to UK to decide if he were British or not based on the issue of Polygamy. I am pretty sure Obama would like to avoid THAT particular trial, because again it would require the release of his birth documents, and require discovery, which is the ultimate point of all of this.
I don’t care where Obama was born, I don’t care who his parents are or if they were white pink yellow green magenta or blue. I want to know if he is constitutionally eligible for POTUS and there is only one way to find out. FORCE DISCOVERY.
Thats the goal here, FORCE DISCOVERY.
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.