Posted on 12/18/2008 10:08:27 AM PST by dascallie
( Really...who in the world is this phantom we have elected president?)
Investigator casts doubt on Obama's birth residence-- Neighbor believes family didn't live at address in newspaper announcement
Posted: December 16, 2008
Baro sent a team of investigators to Honolulu to explore records regarding current residents of Kalanianaole Highway and to track down residents back to 1961.
Baro's investigators were unable to locate any current or past resident of Kalanianaole Highway who could recall Obama or his family living at the address listed in the Sunday Advertiser announcement.
Baro also sent investigators to the newspaper offices to examine files, but the Advertiser could not confirm who actually placed the ad.
According to Baro's affidavit, Beatrice Arakaki affirmed she was a neighbor of the address listed. She has lived at her current residence of 6075 Kalanianaole Highway from before 1961 to the present.
Moreover, Arakaki said she believed that when Obama lived with the Dunhams, his grandparents, the family address was in Waikiki, not on Kalanianaole Highway.
Baro was able to determine the previous owners of the residence at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway – the alleged address of Obama's parents when he was born – were Orland S. and Thelma S. (Young) Lefforge, both of whom are deceased.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Satanistic. I can’t think of any other way to describe someone who actually approves of live birth abortions. Someone who would think nothing of having a live, fully developed baby lay cryng and dying in a medical refuse bin like a bit of trash.
Hell has a special place reserved for one such as that. A special roasting spit with their very own nametag emblazoned above it. The personalized touch, dontcha know.
Below is the is the absolute best argument I’ve seen explaining the problem.
They are also arguing Barry didn’t legally change his name to 0 which prevents running in WA state. Bolding at the end is my emphasis:
Smmary Of Arguments
December 10, 2008
Broe v. Reed
Washington State Supreme Court
Cause No. 8-2-473-8
[…]
Many of the cases challenging Sen. Obama’s citizenship status have been dismissed for “lack of standing.” Plaintiffs in Broe v. Reed claim standing pursuant to the authorization given them by the legislature of Washington in RCW 29A.68.020(2). This statute creates standing for Plaintiffs to challenge the election of a candidate who has been elected but was ineligible at the time of his election to run for the office.
[...]
Federal Law, Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution provides: 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. […]
ARGUMENTS
Barack Obama is ineligible for the office of the presidency because he is not a “natural born citizen” of the United States.
Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution provides:
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. “Natural born citizen” means a person born in the United States to parents that were both citizens, and to children born out of the United States to parents that were both citizens, provided that no citizenship would be allowed for a person whose father was not a resident of the United States. Act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, First Congress, Sess. II, Chapter 3, Section I, approved March 26, 1790, 1 Stat. 103.\
Compare with the Fourteenth Amendment:
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. “Natural born citizens” continues to mean a person born in the United States to parents that were both citizens, and arguably to people born outside of the United States to parents who were both citizens, provided that the father was a resident of the United States. The Amendment also provides that persons “naturalized” and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens [not “natural born citizens”].
THEREFORE, at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment, you were either a “natural born citizen” or, if you had citizenship, it was obtained through a process of naturalization, as established by federal Acts of Naturalization, Immigration and Nationality. A child born overseas, of an American citizen and a foreign national is not a “natural born citizen,” and the child’s citizenship can only be established by a process of naturalization.
A child born in the United States of an American citizen and a foreign national is also not a “natural born citizen” if the child obtained citizenship of another nation automatically at the time of his birth.
The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): “Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent [italics added] if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth [italics added].” The legislative history of the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant, according to the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment, exclusive jurisdiction. A subject of the British Crown, for instance, could claim that jurisdiction was proper only under the Crown.
Barack Obama has failed to establish that he is an American citizen. Barack Obama readily admits the following facts:
1. He was born in 1961.
2. His mother was an American citizen.
3. His father was a Kenyan citizen.
To establish American citizenship, Sen. Obama must prove one of two things:
1. He was born on American soil, and was not subject to any other jurisdiction;
2. He was naturalized pursuant to the immigration laws of the United States.
At the time of his birth, he was automatically a British citizen, pursuant to the The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5). Consequently, the United States did not have exclusive jurisdiction, and he is disqualified from automatic citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. He has failed to demonstrate that he was actually born in Hawaii.
Barack Obama has submitted the following to establish his birth in Hawaii:
1. A Certification of Live Birth (not a Certificate of Live Birth) purportedly from the state of Hawaii;
2. The affidavit of an Hawaiian official who claims that he has seen a “birth certificate.”
While these may be legally sufficient to register a birth in Hawaii, neither is sufficient to establish that he was born on American soil.
Hawaii, under HRS 338-17.8 allows for the registration of births to parents who gave birth while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii [emphasis added] and who declare the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
Because HRS 338-17.8 exists, a Certification of Live Birth in the form provided by Barack Obama is insufficient to establish native birth. Instead, he must produce a Certificate of Live Birth, which sets forth his name, his mother’s name, his father’s name, the hospital where he was born, the attending physician, and which includes his mother’s signature, the attending physician’s signature, and the signature of another witness.
As a matter of law, there is no official Hawaiian “birth certificate” – there is only the Certification of Live Birth, and the Certificate of Live Birth.
As of the present moment, Barack Obama has not produced a single piece of evidence demonstrating that he was born on U.S. soil. Even his birth announcement in the Hawaiian press is inconclusive, given that he was born in August of 1961, and the article was published in August, 1962, and at that time, his father was already back in Kenya.
Corroborating evidence as to his birth and citizenship allegiances could be established by the production of his passport, and his college transcripts, none of which can be obtained because Barack Obama has hired several law firms to make sure that such records remained sealed.
In the meantime, informal polling of the hospitals in Hawaii have received responses from all of the hospitals in Honolulu reporting that they have no records for Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack’s mother, or Barack Hussein Obama. On the other side of the world, however, Barack’s paternal grandmother has stated that she was present at his birth in the Coastal Hospital of Mombasa, Kenya. The Kenyan Ambassador to the United States has said that a memorial is being placed at the site of Barack Obama’s birth in Mombasa, Kenya.
In addition, because Barack Obama was adopted by his mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, he obtained Indonesian citizenship as well. Because of his multiple citizenships, Barack Obama does not have automatic citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Barack Obama has never demonstrated that he was naturalized as an American citizen, which requires a residency period, a test, and an oath of allegiance.
Barack Obama is not qualified under 8 U.S.C. §1401(g). In 1986, Congress amended the statute, replacing the phrase “ten years, at least five” with “five years, at least two.” Pub. L. No. 99-653, § 12, 100 Stat. 3655 (1986), now codified at 8 U.S.C.§ 1401(g). The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act also replaced the “residence” requirement, found in the earlier Nationality Act of 1940, with a requirement of “physical presence” for transmission of citizenship to a child born abroad. See Drozd, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 155 F.3d 871 at 87( 2nd Cir.1998) (citing to the Nationality Act of 1940, ch.876, § 201(g), 54 Stat. 1137, 1139). That change in language “compel[s] a strict adherence to the plain terms of the Act.” Id. Further, the change from “ten years, at least five” years to “five years at least two” applies only to those born after 1986. U.S. v. Flores-Villar, 497 F. Supp. 2d 1160, 1162-64 (S.D. Cal. 2007) aff’d, 536 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2008). The amendment had no retroactive application that would change the legal analysis for Senator Obama.
Barack Obama did not qualify for automatic citizenship under the INA of 1952. Barack’s mother gave birth at age 18. The INA of 1952 simply disqualified children that were born to mothers who were less than 19 because of the five years of continuous residency requirement after age 14. Because Sen. Obama has not established that he was born in the United States, he cannot claim automatic citizenship, and can only establish his citizenship by means of naturalization (process described above). There is no record of Barack ever naturalizing as an American citizen.
BARACK OBAMA HAS NEVER ESTABLISHED THAT HE IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. Barack Obama did not run under his legal name Barack Hussein Obama is not the legal name of the candidate, and Sen. Obama has failed to produce any evidence of a legal name change from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama. Sometime in the 1960’s, Barack was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, and obtained the legal name Barry Soetoro and Indonesian citizenship. When a person is adopted, a new birth certificate issues in the name of the adopted father, establishing the legal name of the child in the name of the father, and establishing the citizenship of the child in the citizenship of the father. Barack Obama has never produced a single piece of evidence demonstrating a legal name change from his adopted name Barry Soetoro to his name at birth, Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is in direct violation of Washington statute RCW 29A.24.060(3), which provides that “no candidate may . . use a nickname designed intentionally to mislead voters.” Barack Obama’s candidacy is a violation of WAC 434-215-012, which requires that declarations of candidacy contain the following affirmation:
I declare that this information is, to the best of my knowledge, true. I also swear, or affirm, that I will support the Constitution and laws of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington. Senator Obama either failed to sign such a document, or has misled the Secretary of State as to the affirmation in paragraph 2 of the required Declaration of Candidacy which declares that “and, at the time of filing this declaration, I am legally qualified to assume office if elected.”
Really? Sez who? Rome's control of the Egyptian coast line ended about 2,700 sailing miles short of Mombassa.
Or are you claiming that Rome conquered the lands all the way up the White Nile, to Lake Victoria, and then swung East to conquer modern day Kenya? Funny how all the ancient historians neglected to mention that campaign. Who was the Roman General that lead it, Derangus Maximus?
Now, I’m going to have to go check it out for myself....If wron gi will publicly stand corrected. Roman, not specifically jew, though, right ?
Boderline? LOL. This birther stuff crossed that border and taken up permanent residence in tinfoil hat land long ago.
So did Palin
An affidavit is a statement made under oath and attested to by a notary public, who is an officer of the court authorized to administer an oath and to attest that a statement was made under oath. The document that is linked in the article is a draft of an affidavit, but it is not notarized.
The investigator apparently never traced the chain of title of the place where the Obamas were supposed to have lived, according to the birth announcement. He simply says the property was owned by some people who are now dead. When did they buy it? When did they sell it? To whom did they sell it? This information is all a matter of public record, but apparently he didn't bother to look it up?
Nor did he apparently look up the chain of title of the house next door, whose owner says she lived there since before 1961. Trust, but verify.
The statement also wanders off into all sorts of conjecture and speculation by the investigator based (admittedly) on no facts. A cross-examination of this inveastigator on the contents of this statement would not be very pretty.
Acts 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come.
I’m curious as to what believers on FR think this is.
I have a guess but it is just a guess.
The sun in scripture usually means symbolically the gospel.
(I think the gospel and the twisting of it has truly darkened it.)
It is interesting that Islam’s symbol is a cresent moon.
(It is a bloody religion.)
There are lots of parts and pieces to the final Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. I think alot has happened in history but I think the final stand is alot of the signs coming together all at one time.
Just curious since some of you are discussing the anti-christ.
Actually in all honesty Prince Charles most closely resembles this man. It is rumored he is of Jewish blood and that he has converted to Islam which was not the religion of his fathers. He also has a HUGE hand in the corporations of the world...or economics. I think he loses it on the charismatic points..but who knows, the fullness of his time has not yet come.
see Solar and Lunar Eclipses in 2014/15
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
Joel 2:31 "The sun will be turned into darkness And the moon into blood Before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. Also see Joel 2:31
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
LOL ..you sent the link twice. I don’t know...interesting.
None of us know the exact way this will all transpire nor the day or the hour.
It is interesting to get other thoughts though.
oops two different references. Joel says the same thing as Acts.
Peter is quoting Joel starting in Acts 2:14.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
I think it is interesting if you think about it.
Sun..gospel..Isaac
Moon..Islam...Ishmael
Destined to war.
Do you know anything about John Houge and his thoughts about the prophcies of Nostradamas? His book “Nostradamus and the Antichrist: Code Named MABUS”
[mabusbk]
Can he be taken seriously?
http://www.hogueprophecy.com/nostradamus/mabus.htm
Wouldn’t a will have gone to probate by now?
[mabusbk]
Can he be taken seriously?
Nostradamous is interesting, butI have never heard of John Houge.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
the Holy Word of G-d
is fully trustworthy.
I agree.
http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/chief-justice-of-supreme-court-john.html
Obama ain’t home yet.
Thank you for your interesting post.
Even if Obama was born in Hawaii, he is obviously hiding something, otherwise he would produce his birth certificate. Actually he is hiding most of his history.
Because Obama is keeping most of his life a secret he is a prime target for blackmail. Why doesn’t this alarm the citizenry?
The tax assessor’s office would have a record of who owned that address during the applicable time period. It would likely take a manual search because of the date, but it could be done. That would lead to a deed, to a name, to a person who could be directly asked about it.
An investigator, lawyer, court reporter, title abstractor, anyone familiar with public records could do this on site in an afternoon.
The other leg work that needs to be done is to check public records in Massachusetts, California, and Chicago for any records relating to a name change from Soetoro to Obama - again - because it likely happened, if it happened, in the 80’s when things were still manually indexed. In most states, a name change will show as a recorded judgment the same place deeds are recorded. Also, in some states, a publication of the notice of change of name is required.
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.