Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent Social Security Number.

Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States Due to His Lack of U.S. Natural Born Status

(Lafayette Hill, PA – 12/07/11) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama on August 21, 2008 challenging Obama’s lack of “Constitutionally Eligibility” to serve as President of the United States stated that Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not using a fraudulent or stolen Social Security Number. Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was legally assigned Social Security Number xxx-xx-4425. Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not Constitutionally Eligible to serve as President of the United States due to his lack of being a “Natural Born” United States Citizens as a result of him being born in Kenya and his mother not being old enough to confer Natural Born citizenship status upon him and his Adoption / Acknowledgment by Lolo Soetoro in the Country of Indonesia, making Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro an Indonesian Citizen.

Mr. Berg stated, “I am pursuing the eligibility questions regarding Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro. My goal is to pursue the issue in each and every state in the United States.”

Mr. Berg continues, “I am repeatedly contacted about Obama’s use of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 and the word on the Internet that the number in use by Obama was originally assigned to Jean Paul Ludwig born in 1890 in France, who is now deceased. All over the Internet there are articles and posts that Obama stole Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number and Obama is using Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number fraudulently. There are also posts all over the Internet that Obama is using a deceased person’s Social Security number. This is NOT true. Mr. Berg continues, “when false information is put out on the Internet and filed in our Court’s, it takes away from the factual issue that Obama is not Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States. False information regarding the eligibility of Obama makes the question into the lack of Constitutional eligibility of Obama serving as our President a laughing stock.”

The Social Security death index is located on the Web at http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi. The Social Security death index has the death records, along with Social Security number, of every person in the United States ever assigned a Social Security number who has died.

A simple search of the name “Jean Paul Ludwig” born in 1890 returns no results. See the print-screen attached hereto. A simple search of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 returns no results for a death of any individual using that number. A simple search for “Jean Ludwig” returns several deaths, but only one in that name born in 1890, and as can be seen, the Social Security number of this particular Jean Ludwig does not match, nor is it similar to Obama’s Social Security number xxx-xx-4425. See the copy attached hereto:

Berg continued, “Simple searches show that the information pertaining to Obama’s Social Security number being previously assigned and that Obama is using a fraudulent Social Security number is false information and does nothing more than discredit the true questions into Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro’s Constitutional Eligibility to serve as our President of the United States.”

Questions have also been raised regarding the fact Obama’s Social Security number was issued out of Connecticut instead of Hawaii and that Obama never resided in Connecticut. The state and/or office that issued a Social Security number and/or card is not always the same as where the person the number being assigned to resides.

A brief look at the history of Social Security numbers available through Social Security at http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/firstcard.html shows that the State who issues a Social Security number does not have to be and may not be the state in which the person resides.

Since the Social Security Board did not have a network of field offices in late 1936, it contracted with the U.S. Postal Service to distribute and assign the first batch of Social Security numbers through its 45,000 local post offices around the country. Of these 45,000 post offices, 1,074 were also designated as “typing centers” where the cards themselves were prepared. The procedure for issuing the first SSNs were that the SS-4 application forms were to be distributed by the post offices to employers beginning Monday, November 16, 1936. These forms asked the employers to indicate how many employees they had at their place of business. Using the data from the SS-4 forms, the post offices then supplied an SS-5 form for each employee and these forms (on which the assignment of an SSN was based) were to be distributed by the post offices beginning Tuesday, November 24, 1936. The completed SS-5 forms were returned to the post office where an SSN would be assigned and a card typed with the name and SSN. This step could happen on one of several ways. The person could return the card in person and wait while the “typing center” prepared their card, or they could hand the form to their local letter carrier, or they could put it in the mail. Once the SSN was assigned and the card typed, the local letter carrier then returned the card to the place of business as a piece of regular mail. The record of the SSN assignment was sent to Social Security headquarters in Baltimore, Maryland, where the master file of SSNs would be kept.

So the first card was issued, sometime in mid-November, 1936, somewhere in one of 1,074 post offices to someone whose identity and SSN are unknown. In theory, the first card should have been issued on November 24th, but there have been reports of cards showing earlier dates. It is not clear whether the cards with earlier dates were actually issued on that day or whether some post offices predated some of their cards. If the 45,000 local post offices followed their procedures, no cards could have been issued before November 16th, and none should have been issued before November 24th. But here again, there is always the possibility that some local post offices failed to follow their instructions. The best we can say with certainty is that the first SSN was issued sometime in mid-November 1936. In any case, on whatever day the first card was issued, hundreds of thousands of SSNs were probably issued on that same day, so many people had Social Security cards issued on the very first day they became available.

Once the SSN records were received in Baltimore they were grouped in blocks of 1,000 and the master records were created. On December 1, 1936 the first block of 1,000 records were assembled and were ready to start their way through the nine-step process that would result in the creation of a permanent master record and the establishment of an earnings record for the individual. When this first stack was ready, Joe Fay, head of the Division of Accounting Operations in the Candler Building, walked over to the stack, pulled off the top record, and declared it to be the official first Social Security record. (This was the first point in the process where there was enough control to designate an official first card–it would have been impossible to try and identify the first card typed in one of the 1,074 typing centers around the country.) This particular record, (055-09-0001) belonged to John D. Sweeney, Jr., age 23, of New Rochelle, New York. The next day, newspapers around the country announced that Sweeney had been issued the first SSN. It would be more accurate to say that the first Social Security record was established for John David Sweeney, but since master records were invisible to the public and the Social Security card was a very visible token of the program, the newspapers overlooked the nuance. And so John David Sweeney, Jr. is the closest thing we have to the first person to have received a Social Security card–although his status is more symbolic than actual.

So now that I have given a bit of history, how in the world could someone be issued a SSN in 1890, when the first batch of social security numbers were NOT issued until 1936? According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

(V)=(Verified) Report verified with a family member or someone acting on behalf of a family member. (P)=(Proof) Death Certificate Observed.

You can now order the SS-5 Form for deceased individuals directly from the Social Security Administration online at https://secure.ssa.gov/apps9/eFOIA-FEWeb/internet/main.jsp.

The Social Security number is a nine-digit number in the format “AAA-GG-SSSS”. The number is divided into three parts. The Area Number, the first three digits, is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1973, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the office code in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1973, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant’s mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, neither prior to 1973, nor since.

Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving south and westward, so that people on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality are exhausted, new areas from the pool are assigned, so some states have noncontiguous groups of numbers.\

The middle two digits are the group number. The group numbers range from 01 to 99. However, they are not assigned in consecutive order. For administrative reasons, group numbers are issued in the following order: 1.ODD numbers from 01 through 09 2.EVEN numbers from 10 through 98 3.EVEN numbers from 02 through 08 4.ODD numbers from 11 through 99

As an example, group number 98 will be issued before 11. •The last four digits are serial numbers. They represent a straight numerical sequence of digits from 0001-9999 within the group.

Berg continued, “Soetoro/Obama’s social security number was NOT stolen from an individual born in 1890 who is now dead. Attached is a screen shot from the social security death index, running Soetoro/Obama’s social security number. If in fact, Obama was using a stolen number from a man born in 1890, who died, it would be showing in the Social Security Death Index. As you can see from the attached picture, no death’s are returned using Obama’s number. Anyone can check the Social Security Death Index (SSDI) by going to http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/.

Berg continued, “The Social Security office in the state of Maryland issues Social Security numbers and cards for people residing all over the United States. Just like in the 70′s, local Social Security offices were and continue to be back-logged, thus Maryland issues the numbers and cards as do other less busy Social Security offices. The state that issued the SSN number and card is not always and does not mean the person had to reside in that state.

Berg continued, “The Birth Certificate issued by Obama on national Television, is believed to be a forgery – it is NOT a long form Birth Certificate. Even if Obama could produce a long form Birth Certificate, which is highly doubted, it fails to answer the questions into Obama’s adoption and/or birth acknowledgment in Indonesia.”

Berg said, “I have received many calls claiming Obama could not have lost his U.S. citizenship by his mother’s acts of expatriation. In part this is true, however, the Nationality Act of 1940, revised 1952, Section 318(a) states, “A former citizen of the United States expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents and who has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents may be naturalized upon filing a petition for naturalization before reaching age of Twenty-Five [25] years and upon compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws with the following exceptions: (b) No former citizen of the United States, expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents shall be obliged to comply with the requirements of the immigration laws, if he has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents, and if he has come or shall come to the United States before reaching the age of Twenty-Five [25] years. (c) After his naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status as if he had not been expatriated.”

Berg continues, “Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act, as you are swearing allegiance to another Country. Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, which is why he had to stop in Indonesia first. Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia. Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan. Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams From My Father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro. In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA [Freedom of Information] request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama.”

Berg said, “Despite the above however, Indonesia required Obama/Soetoro to do a bit more upon his 18th birthday. In fact the Indonesian law gives until the age of Twenty-One [21]. Soetoro/Obama would have had to sign an Affidavit relinquishing his Indonesian citizenship and said Affidavit had to be sent to the Indonesian Government before reclaiming any U.S. citizenship he may have once held.

When it comes to the citizenship of individuals in other countries, we are prevented from interfering, Hague Convention 1930. During the late 60′s all the way up until 2006 Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship. In 2006, Indonesia changed their laws to permit dual citizenship; however, Indonesia has had its battles with enforcing their new law permitting dual citizenship.

From the legal research we have done, it appears that Barry Soetoro [a/k/a Barack Obama] became an Indonesian citizen. When Soetoro/Obama was approximately four [4] years old his parents divorced and thereafter, Soetoro/Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia. Evidence points to the fact that Lolo Soetoro either signed a government form legally ‘acknowledging’ Soetoro/Obama as his son or ‘adopted’ Soetoro, either of which changed any citizenship status Soetoro/Obama had to a “natural” citizen of Indonesia.

At the time Barry Soetoro was in Indonesia, all Indonesian students were required to carry government identity cards or Karty Tanda Pendudaks, as well as family card identification called a Kartu Keluarga. The Kartu Keluarga is a family card which bears the legal names and citizenship status of all family members.

Soetoro/Obama was registered in a public school as an Indonesian citizen by the name of Barry Soetoro and his father was listed as Lolo Soetoro, M.A according to the Indonesian school records. Indonesia did not allow foreign students to attend their public schools in the late 1960’s or 1970’s, and any time a child was registered for a public school, the child’s name and citizenship status were verified through the Indonesian Government. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Chapter 13, Law No. 62 of 1958 (all citizens of Indonesia have a right to education). There was no way for Soetoro/Obama to have attended school in Jakarta, Indonesia legally unless he was an Indonesian citizen, as Indonesia was under tight rule and was a Police State. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Law No. 62 of 1958. These facts indicate that Obama/Soetoro is an Indonesian citizen, and therefore he is not eligible to be President of the United States.

Under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son, it deems the son, in this case Soetoro/Obama, an Indonesian State citizen. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 62 of 1958 concerning Immigration Affairs and Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata) (KUHPer) (Burgerlijk Wetboek voor Indonesie).

Furthermore, under the Indonesian Adoption Law, once an Indonesian citizen adopts a child, the adoption severs the child’s relationship to the birth parents, and the adopted child is given the same status as a natural child and the child takes the name of his step-father, in this case, Soetoro. See Indonesian Constitution, Article 2.

The Indonesian citizenship law was designed to prevent apatride (stateless) or bipatride (dual) citizenship. Indonesian regulations recognized neither apatride nor bipatride (stateless or dual) citizenship. Since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship; neither did the United States (since the United States only permitted dual citizenship when ‘both’ countries agree); and since Obama/Soetoro was a “natural” citizen of Indonesia, the United States would not step in or interfere with the laws of Indonesia. Hague Convention of 1930.”

As a result of Soetoro/Obama’s Indonesian ‘natural’ citizenship status, Soetoro/Obama could never regain U.S. ‘natural born’ status, if he in fact he ever held such, which we doubt. Soetoro/Obama could have only become ‘naturalized’ if the proper paperwork were filed with the U.S. State Department, after going through U.S. Immigration upon his return to the United States; in which case, Soetoro/Obama would have received a Certification of Citizenship indicating ‘naturalized’.

Berg continued, “Regardless, we have been unable to locate any records indicating that Soetoro/Obama attempted to and/or actually did take the proper steps through the State Department in order to be here in our Country legally”.

Further, there is no evidence that Soetoro/Obama ever ‘legally’ changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama – therefore his legal name is still ‘Barry Soetoro’.

Berg does not seem to be doing his own research and is acting on hearsay. First of all, the SS INDEX contains ONLY names of deaths AFTER 1961 or so. Nothing is found on the indexes prior to this time. One would need to get the data directly from the SS Admin.

Just because Berg cannot locate a posting of a death BEFORE 1961 on the Index does not prove that there is no death of someone with the # searched for. If the original owner of the number 042-68-4425 was not found by Berg, then that merely means that the legitimate owner died BEFORE 1961.

And too, Berg is incorrect concerning the first three numbers, “424” not being ONLY issued in Conn. Berg has lost a lot of credibility with me for his ignorance with SS numbers. As a long time genealogist I refute Berg’s silly statements. I defy Berg to find any other person in America to be issued a SS # from a state that he was not resident of, or a native of. Else Berg has to PROVE that Soetoro MOVED TO Conn and set up residence there or was EMPLOYED THERE.

Berg is incorrect and in error when he implies that Soetoro is NOT USING A STOLEN OR FRAUDULENT SS #.

"Berg is incorrect and in error when he implies that Soetoro is NOT USING A STOLEN OR FRAUDULENT SS #."

I agree. Berg sets up a number of previously debunked claims and speculation as straw men and then he claims that the fact that these particular claims were false or unsubstantiated proves that Obama is not using a bogus SS#.

Berg fails to refute or exclude the most obvious type of SS# identity theft PERFECTED BY BILL AYERS, a known intimate associate of Obama.

Ayers admitted that he would search public records and graveyards to find the names of deceased infants and young children who died BEFORE EVER RECEIVING an SS#. These deaths would never show up in the SS death index. So when Ayers (and perhaps Obama) assumed one of these identities and duped Social Security into issuing a new Social Security number by claiming to be a child who had died, it would not show up in the SS death index either until and unless death documents were faked and sent to SSA.

Berg ignores the possibility that Obama obtained an SS# in the name of a dead baby and then started using that number and in the early 1980's and perhaps also the name of that baby when convenient (Harrison J. Bounel?).

If Obama taking a dead baby's birth identity to obtain an SS# were true, E-verify would fail to confirm a match between Obama's name and his number (TRUE) and the number would not show in the death index (TRUE) because the already dead baby would not have ever been recorded as having dies subsequent to Obama creating a SS# for the baby. If the Selective Service database was not cross-checked against the SSN database in the 1980s (or ever) Obaam's SSN even if created using a dead baby identity could still match if that were the SSN under which Obama registered for Selective Service (it does).

See:

"Abracadabra! 'Obama's alias' vanishing quickly from Web"

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=336889

This time-honored technique of baby identity theft has been used extensively by KGB-trained Ayers and Dohrn and most recently by Russian spies of the current Russian KGB-successor agency. Several of the Russian spies caught recently had been living for years in the USA using identities they created by fooling Social Security into issuing new SS#s to them in the names of dead children they had found.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/11/01/fbi_says_russians_were_a_new_breed_of_spy/?page=1

"The operation's codename, Ghost Stories, stems from a number of the spies using a technique known among counterintelligence investigators as "dead doubles" -- taking the identities of people who have died. Tracey Lee Ann Foley, Michael Zottoli, Donald Heathfield and Patricia Mills all used the technique, Figliuzzi said."

See also Canadian baby identity theft (probably operates the same way with baby death not showing up in Canadian version of social security death index):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/30/donald-heathfield-alleged_n_631058.html

"TORONTO — A Canadian man said an alleged Russian spy stole the identity of his dead younger brother.

"The FBI said a man accused of being a Russian agent assumed the identity of Canadian Donald Heathfield, who died at six weeks of age in Montreal in 1963."

I’m into genealogy too. Berg’s statement is flawed because he neglected to search the entire Hawaii index.

“According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT.....”.

I suspect that he may have searched only Hawaii SS deaths who were issued Social Security numbers by Connecticut. Notice from his image of the SS death index(first name is Capocci, Patsy)that he was viewing names 1 - 20 of 500. There are 225,426 deaths listed in the ancestry.com index for Hawaii, not 500.

You might be interested in some comments over at citizenwells in regard to Berg’s poorly researched report......

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/12/10/blagojevich-rezko-obama-patrick-fitzgerald-justice-department-near-perfect-crime-obama-protected-delayed-prosecution-of-blagojevich-rezko-behind-bars/#comment-219947

Jonah | December 12, 2011 at 3:27 pm |

I linked to Rootsweb’s SS Death Index in an earlier post (December 11, 2011 at 6:38 pm) so that folks could duplicate the search that Phil Berg made to get the “evidence” in his report that most Hawaii SS cards were issued by Connecticut.

http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi

I looked there today and the site is no longer available on free Rootsweb’s service. If you didn’t go there yesterday, it’s too late now. Here’s the message you get……

“Due to sensitivities around the information in this database, the Social Security Death Index collection is not available on our free Rootsweb service but is accessible to search on Ancestry.com. Visit the Social Security Death Index page to be directly connected to this collection”

It was available last month, last week and yesterday but not today. Who has the power and wherewithal to cause Rootsweb to withdraw free availability to the SS Death Index????

I had searched the index with entries in the “State” and “Issued By” boxes, Hawaii for State and Connecticut for Issued By. My results were identical to Bergs list on his report at – - -
http://obamacrimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Obama-Press-Release-12-07-11.pdf

I emailed a screenshot of my search to cw so he can verify it.
++++++++++++++

Jonah | December 12, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
Yo,
I’ll try to answer your questions. Just give me some time. First of all, Berg has misconstrued the data provided by Rootsweb’s SS Death Index. I’ll get to that later. However, I have found no connection between Obama’s SS # and Jean Paul Ludwig so if someone does, please tell me. Their SS numbers are different. They both resided in Hawaii and their SS#s were issued through CT. That’s all I know of about that issue.

Name: Jean Ludwig
SSN: 045-26-8722
Last Residence: 96816 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Born: 17 Feb 1890
Last Benefit: 96816 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Died: Jun 1981
State (Year) SSN issued: Connecticut (1951)

Going back through my old research, there was a man named Thomas Wood, born in 1962 and died in 1981. His SS# was issued in CT and was one number off from Obama’s.

Name: Thomas Wood
SSN: 042-68-4424
Last Residence: 06111 Newington, Hartford, Connecticut, United States of America
Born: 15 Jul 1962
Died: Jul 1981
State (Year) SSN issued: Connecticut (1976-1977)
MORE LATER

Quote from Berg.....

“According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972”.
###

Oh my! If you take a good look at Berg’s list, there is so much to dispute! Aside from the misspelling of residence (should be residents).

First of all, Berg’s list was only a small portion of the entire SS Death Index for Hawaii. I pulled up the entire Hawaii list before rootsweb pulled the plug. The Index was sorted according to SS# and consequently grouped by state.
I researched further the four people you mentioned and discovered they all lived in Connecticut through adulthood.

I found an obit for Highkin which says that he was born in CT and died in HI.
Harry R. Highkin – Honolulu Star-Bulletin, The – (Aug/20/2007)
Aug. 16, 2007
Harry R. Highkin, 89, of Kailua-Kona, a California State University at Northridge professor emeritus and plant physiologist, died at home. He was born in New Haven, Conn……..

And 3 of the 4 people were issued SS#s prior to 1951, not 1972 as Berg stated. I find it difficult to believe that an attorney presented such shabby evidence. Surely someone else did the actual research.
#####

All four deceased Hawaii residents had previously lived in CT as youths through adulthood. That would explain why they had CT issued SS#s.

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/daniel-frawley-sentencing-december-20-2011-rezko-partner-deposition-reveals-rezko-payment-to-obama-companion-security-link/#comment-220023

SSA will remove approximately 4.2 million records from this file and add about 1 million fewer records annually.

Why can’t I see the Social Security Number? If the Social Security Number is not visible on the record index it is because Ancestry.com does not provide this number in the Social Security Death Index for any person that has passed away within the past 10 years.

this was not the case before last month. All SSNs were shown!

IMPORTANT NOTICE
The National Technical Information Service (NTIS) has been notified by the Social Security Administration (SSA) of an upcoming important change in the Death Master File data. NTIS, a cost-recovery government agency, disseminates the DMF data on behalf of SSA.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: CHANGE IN PUBLIC DEATH MASTER FILE RECORDS

We receive Death Master File (DMF) data from the Social Security Administration (SSA). SSA receives death reports from various sources, including family members, funeral homes, hospitals, and financial institutions.

Q: What change is SSA making to the Public DMF?

A: Effective November 1, 2011, the DMF data that we receive from SSA will no longer contain protected state death records. Section 205(r) of the Act prohibits SSA from disclosing state death records SSA receives through its contracts with the states, except in limited circumstances. (Section 205r link - http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0205.htm)

Q: How will this change affect the size of the Public DMF?

A: The historical Public DMF contains 89 million records. SSA will remove approximately 4.2 million records from this file and add about 1 million fewer records annually.

REMINDER: DMF users should always investigate and verify the death listed before taking any adverse action against any individual.

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.