And "African" was not used for birth certificates for US Vital Statistic regulations reporting in 1961. See yellow highlight.
ping!
Txe COLB didn’t pass txe test.
"... Madsen says intelligence agencies around the world have scrutinized the birth certificate and decided it’s fake because of one word on the document. The word “African” was used to designate the race..."In other words, all one has to do to disprove his theory is to find ONE other Hawaiian BC/COLB from that year that lists a parent's race as "African", and his whole theory goes down the toilet. Shouldn't be too hard.
OTOH, proving his theory is impossible, because you'd have to examine EVERY SINGLE BC/COLB and show that the ones involving blacks ALL used the terms "Black" or "Negro". Best of luck with that.
I don’t really want to join, so I don’t know what evidence he gives that world intelligence agencies have actually said this.
But his earlier work was sound. And there are other problems as well.
I will make one point, however, that needs to be considered. This is not a BC but a COLB. We don’t know how much the Hawaiian clerks may have meddled with it. Is it supposedly a copy of the original long form, or since it is a COLB, did they update it?
I ask, because “African” is one problem, and the name of the hospital is another. I didn’t have that name back then, but only after a merger took place, years later.
Also, Kenya was NOT the name of the country back then. It was British East Africa, a British Colony.
So, that’s three things at least that use later language rather than the language of the time. Is that because the Hawaii department fiddled with it? Or did they just invent it at some point?
This writer lists zero sources and rests his claim that Obama Sr.s race is listed on the cert. as African, not black or negro.
Big deal.
In addition, author claims Obama is gay, had his gay lover killed, and now the author himself is on WH Death list.... and has sources in intelliegnce agencies around the world.
Please, time to be back on the Thorazine.
Within 24-hours of the release of the long form Certificate of Live Birth on April 27, intelligence agencies from Britain and China to Germany and Russia examined the document and concluded............ it was a forgery based on the fact that Barack H. Obama Sr.’s race, listed as “African,” was a monumental error,................. considering that not only the United States, but other English-speaking nations described Africans and those of African descent as either “Negroes” or “blacks” in 1961.
Interesting.....I caught that also when I read it...hummmm.
I still want a more detailed report than just a missed spoken word.
Also, his bio is BS, and he usually writes for very left-wing “Progressive” and the “Village Voice”
Big time fruitcake.
It was kind of them all to move so quickly and to immediately report their findings to him with no diplomatic concerns or long lasting arguments with the other portions of their governments and executive leaders before releasing their conclusions to him.
This must be one powerful man.
Not a single source is cited for all those "agencies" that the author references.
Whether ttue or not, the article is TRASH.
How long you been 'round these parts anyway?
Curioser and curioser. If the determination that this is a fake holds up, it will be fake #2 on the BC issue.
Again, though, the salient issue isn’t the BC, it’s the issue of citizenship and eligibility. According to the Constitution, a “natural born” citizen (a requirement to be eligible to be POTUS) is one who was born in America of American citizens. Obama’s BC confirms that his father was not American, he was African (according to the BC, and Kenyan according to Obama and a whole bunch of folks), so he is unqualified on those grounds.
But, let’s confuse the issue more with Obama’s adoption by Barry Soetero. That made him Indonesian. Strike two!
Finally, there are his numerous SSNs, and the issue of what passport he traveled on during his visits to foreign countries as a teen and young man. Strikes three and four!!
He doesn’t meet the eligibility requirements set forth by Article II section 1 “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”
But, let’s delve further into the contentious statement “natural born citizen”.
Natural-Born Citizen Defined
One universal point most all early publicists agreed on was natural-born citizen must mean one who is a citizen by no act of law. If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law (naturalization for example), they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature - laws the founders recognized and embraced.
Under the laws of nature, every child born requires no act of law to establish the fact the child inherits through nature his/her father’s citizenship as well as his name (or even his property) through birth. This law of nature is also recognized by law of nations. Sen. Howard said the citizenship clause under the Fourteenth Amendment was by virtue of “natural law and national law.”
The advantages of Natural Law is competing allegiances between nations are not claimed, or at least with those nations whose custom is to not make citizens of other countries citizens without their consent. Any alternations or conflicts due to a child’s natural citizenship are strictly a creature of local municipal law. In the year 1866, the United States for the first time adopted a local municipal law under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes that read: “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
Rep. John A. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Bingham had asserted the same thing in 1862 as well:
“Does the gentleman mean that any person, born within the limits of the Republic, and who has offended against no law, can rightfully be exiled from any State or from any rood of the Republic? Does the gentleman undertake to say that here, in the face of the provision in the Constitution, that persons born within the limits of the Republic, of parents who are not the subjects of any other sovereignty, are native-born citizens, whether they be black or white? There is not a textbook referred to in any court which does not recognise the principle that I assert”. (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 407 (1862))
Bingham subscribed to the same view as most everyone in Congress at the time that in order to be born a citizen of the United States one must be born within the allegiance of the Nation. Bingham had explained years earlier that to be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty (remember the U.S. abandoned England’s “natural allegiance” doctrine). This of course, explains why emphasis of not owing allegiance to anyone else was the effect of being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
It should be noted this allegiance due under England’s common law and American law are of two different species. Under the common law one owed a personal allegiance to the King as an individual upon birth. Under the American system there was no individual ruler to owe a personal allegiance to.
The constitutional requirement for the President of the United States to be a natural-born citizen had one purpose according to St. George Tucker:
That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, wherever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. …The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box. Charles Pinckney in 1800 said the presidential eligibility clause was designed “to insure … attachment to the country.”
So, to review, according to many political theorists, the phrase “natural born citizen” used in the 14th Amendment means that to be elegible to be POTUS, Obama had “to be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty (remember the U.S. abandoned England’s “natural allegiance” doctrine). This of course, explains why emphasis of not owing allegiance to anyone else was the effect of being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” Since Obama’s father was NOT American and, therefore, “owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty”, specifically, Kenya, he does not meet the qualifications to be President.
We cab debate the BC issue until time ends, but the real issue resides in the definition of “natural born citizen”. That definition doesn’t include Obama.
Wayne Madsen is an absolute crackpot who used to write a bunch of leftist conspiracy theories till even they tired of him. I do believe Madsen had worked up a giant conspiracy that claimed Bush stole the 2004 election by paying secret operatives to alter the voting machines all over the country.
Are the die hard birthers really resorting to linking to Wayne Madsen? Seriously?
I informed our local morning talkshow about this very fact this morning and even gave a “shout out” to free Republic.Everyone knows this thing is fake.
To all the complainers:
I posted this as conspiracy and weird stuff — food for thought, not necessarily totally correct
Madsen has had some claims which are quite right, and some that aren’t. It is up to the astute Freeper to separate the wheat from the chaff.
He didn’t provide any evidence of the intelligence agencies confirming this, but it is a fact that “negro” was more likely used in 1961.
Whether Hawaii used the term or not.....?
VITAL STATISTICS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1961
VOLUME I- NATALITY
“Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics into white, Negro, American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aleut, Eskimo, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian (combined), and “other nonwhite.”
http://www.nber.org/vital-statistics/historical/nat61_1.CV.pdf
Hey, many of us have already come to the same conclusion!
Linkies to the “intelligence agencies’” statements, pleeeze!
And "African" was not used for birth certificates for US Vital Statistic regulations reporting in 1961. See yellow highlight.
Cheers!
