Posted on 02/07/2010 9:15:33 PM PST by butterdezillion
Here’s some new information – haven’t even added it to my blog yet.
According to http://uspolitics.about.com/od/senators/a/barack_obama.htm , Axelrod started videotaping Obama in 2003 for footage that he later used in Obama’s January 16, 2007 announcement that he would run for the presidency.
According to the UIPA responses received by Terri K and myself and the retention schedules for receipts, Obama’s amendment happened sometime between September of 2006 and January of 2007, since those records are to be retained for 3 years and receipts for fees to amend Obama’s vital records were denied to Terri K in September of 2006 and no longer existed when I requested them in January of 2010.
IOW, the DOH has revealed that in the last 6 months before Obama announced his run for the presidency he amended his birth record in Hawaii. That amendment was before the Factcheck COLB was printed in June of 2007 so if that COLB was legitimate it would definitely have had note of the amendment. So the Factcheck and Fight the Smears COLB’s are definitely forgeries and not just a COLB printed before the amendment was made.
Again, my conclusions are entirely based upon what the Hawaii Department of Health has stated in official responses to official UIPA requests and the laws, rules, and regulations which govern the records and statements they have made. If we take Hawaii at its word this is the natural conclusion we would make.
The certificate number and filing date that are mismatched according to the Nordyke certificate numbers and filing date confirm this also.
I haven’t checked this out yet, but the documentary requirements to amend a birth certificate 45 years after the birth would be hard to come by. What kind of evidence would be sufficient to prove that a record in existence for 45 years and never corrected before had been wrong all along? What would a person legitimately correct 45 years after the birth – after having used that birth certificate for 45 years whenever documentation was needed and never challenging the facts contained on it?
That’s a question I was hoping either lawyers or law enforcement people here could help me with. At this point it seems that criminal charges can only be filed by DA’s, AG’s, US attorneys, or local law enforcement. And that inability of the public to MAKE SURE that the laws are enforced is dangerous.
We have so many civil lawsuits it’s surreal. But when there is blatant evidence of criminal activity it seems like our hands are tied. Somebody PLEASE correct me. Tell me I’m just misunderstanding and this country is really in much better shape than it appears.
Many thanks to both of you ladies for your hard work and timeless efforts. May all that is hidden be revealed . . .
Maybe we should be looking for a name change in Chicago six months or more before he ran for office.
Years ago a friend of mind found out when she was about to be married that the name she had used her entire life was not her name. Her “father” was in fact a step father who had not legally adopted her. She therefore had to go through a name change before she could get a license to marry.
AS messed up as his mother was who knows what he was told. Remember he even said in the book that the BC told him things he didn’t know or something like that.
I think any Citizen can bring a Criminal Act to the attention of a DA, and if the DA doesn’t act, the Citizen can apply to the Court to force the DA to take action. Something to check on. I’m UK so can’t help more.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/793367
I have a friend that had a similar situation. Her father had abandoned them when she was small, her mother had divorced him and remarried. My friend had no memory of her real father. They all used the stepfather’s last name. When she was in high school, her bio father came looking for them. He caused real trauma, insisting that she return to using his name but also demanding custody of the son. He did not want her, just the son but insisted she use her legal name not the stepfather’s. He would not allow adoption at that time. When she turned 18 she had her name legally changed. As for the son, thankfully, he did not get custody.
And empty suit was born out of treason. By whom? When? Who will be the patriot to expose it?
Thanks.
Bookmarking for checking out later.
It probably would take court action to force something. At this point we’re waiting for funds and Hawaii legal counsel before we can sue the pants off of everybody in Hawaii. Even at that, our judiciary is so corrupt that even court action might not get the right stuff to be done. I’d be very curious to know whether Obama or his entourage was in contact with judges in Hawaii while he was there at Christmas time.
I also think it is suspicious that Rep. Neil Abercrombie resigned his US House seat in December order to be able to campaign for the governor’s position in Hawaii. I believe he is way ahead in the polls. I think he may have been dispatched to Hawaii to do the proper threats and scrubbing. Wish we could have somebody put their eyeballs on his tracks for a while...
Doesn’t everyone traveling to another country have to show a passport, even the President of the United States? What does it say now?
It might be wirth emailing Factcheck and the others who have published this forgery, pointing out the potential 14 year jail time, and asking whether they would like to fess up now, and get a reduction of sentence?
Did Axelrod truly begin filming in 2003 for an internet video 4 years down the road? Or did Axelrod, in 2007, gather together video of the previous 4 years?
Our founders did to prevent divided loyalties just as we're seeing from the Kenyan. But, hey, let's just throw out the Constitution, sing a round of kumbayah and have a group hug so everyone feels good.
Perhaps. Perhaps not.
The BC is the foundation of everything. He has to produce it for his school records (his is the only BC missing from his kindergarten class), his driver's license, passport(s), etc. Every piece of paper he put his dob on would be subject to inspection. He can't have that.
OTOH, if the BC was the only document that was sealed, then even CNN would be zeroing in on it. As it is, with EVERYTHING under lock and key, then he can play the BC off as a red herring and who knows what the real zinger might be. He's laughing at us because he knows there's no way anyone can get through 50 years of documents as opposed to just the one bc.
All that aside, daddy was Kenyan/British making the usurper ineligible.
* An amended birth certificate will be prepared upon receipt of an affidavit of paternity, a court order establishing paternity, or a certificate of marriage establishing the marriage of the natural parents to each other, and payment of any fees.
Michelle has his balls locked up so they're still around, so we're left with only the parent information which could be changed. There's no reason to change Ann but there's every reason to delete Obama Sr. from the picture. That takes away the Kenyan/British citizenship and allows him to become a
******* drum roll, please ********
Natural Born Citizen.
Ta Daaaa!!!!!
He would have to sneak away with his kindergarten record because that has his original unamended bc with Sr. listed as daddy. He has to lock up his Indonesian records so sent US Congressman Eni F.H. Faleomavaega (from Samoa - who knew we had one of those so less likely any questions why he took a trip) down with a bag of money to obtain those records for the US "national archives", cough, cough. Then he has to lock up his school days at Punahou because he "won a scholarship" to attend and that would have required birth and parental information. Same goes for all his college records and state-side and foreign scholarships. And his passport(S), and so on and so on.
Now comes the task of finding which court and judge issued the changes.
“The Jerk”
Steve Martin, “I was born a poor black child.”
Yes, the certificate number carries through no matter what changes are made.
BTW, Eligibility Ed struck last night on a related thread and just as I clicked on this reply he’s baaaack. Morning, Ed!
That’s just a weird coincidence. ;’)
Thanks bitt.
The HI long form BC does NOT have a field for the race of the infant. It only has fields for race of father and mother separately (fields #9 and #14). So the HI BC is silent as to the race of the newborn.
HI DOH has released vital record indexes for both the marriage of BHO Sr. to Stanley Ann and for the birth of BHO II, who is obviously (in HI) the legal child of that legally recorded marriage.
Based on these two HI vital record indexes, I would say that there is near zero chance that a different Caucasian father appears on an HI BC implying Caucasian race of the baby when combined with Stanley Ann's race and that this infant somehow subsequently became named BHO II.
See Blaine BC (authentic or not) for an example of the fields on a long form.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2366539/posts?q=1&;page=42
Note that in field #9 "Race of Father" it has "Negro - African". Critics often claim that the short form COLB is a hoax because it has "African" for race on it when "Negro" would be expected, but notice how the Blaine BC provides a means by which African could be there if the short form picked up the second word in the "Race of Father" field #9 from the long form.
I've had that wacky thought before, myself.
Exchanged at birth?
Twins?
"Who the heck is this person?" -- indeed!
STE=Q
bttt
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.