Posted on 07/30/2010 1:53:46 PM PDT by Nachum
Interesting findings.
It is up to Zero to prove he is a natural born citizen, not Ms. Taitz to disprove it. Zero has already publically admitted that he was born a British citizen, as were most if not all of our Founding Fathers. Our Founders did not regard themselves as natural born citizens and wrote an exemption for them into our Constitution; that exemption has expired and cannot apply to Zero.
The only thing quixotic about the case overseen by Judge Lamberth is his finding. There is nothing foolish or capricious about pointing out facts admitted by Zero that prove he is not Constitutionally qualified to hold office. It is sad to see a federal judge have such disregard for the law of the land.
Judge Carter undoubtedly displayed courage at Khe Sahn, because he certainly displayed none in his courtroom. The act of 69 million people in a popular election does nothing to amend or void our Constitution.
Judge Land is another unpatriotic moronic coward. Just because opposing candidates failed to question Zero’s Constitutional qualifications does not negate those Consitutional criteria. Just because Congress appears happy with The Usurper doesn’t amend or void our Constitution. And impeachment is a political proceeding; Ms. Taitz filed a legal action.
Finally, I find it interesting that Ms. Taitz’s detractors here side step the facts and law in favor of ad hominem attacks. If conservatives are not willing and able to rally around the undisputed fact of Zero’s natural-born British birth and our Constitution, America is no more.
Obama doesn’t have to prove anything. The state of Hawaii has confirmed his birth there. He’s been in office for a year and a half. 71 lawsuits challenging his eligibility have all failed.
Here’s what the Governor of Hawaii said on the issue and she’s a Republican who delivered one of Sarah Palin’s nominating speeches at the Republican National Convention. Haven’t you noticed that NO nationally known Republican has joined any of the Obama eligibility lawsuits or even submitted a friend of the court (”amicus”) brief in support of any of the Obama eligibility lawsuits?
““You know, during the campaign of 2008, I was actually in the mainland campaigning for Sen. McCain. This issue kept coming up so much in the campaign, and again I think it’s one of those issues that is simply a distraction from the more critical issues that are facing the country. And so I had my health director, who is a physician by background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records of the Department of Health, and we issued a news release at that time saying that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that’s just a fact. And yet people continue to call up and e-mail and want to make it an issue. And I think it’s, again, a horrible distraction for the country by those people who continue this. ... It’s been established. He was born here.”—Governor of Hawaii Linda Lingle (R)
FOIA Release: Stanley Ann Dunham’s Passort Applications
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=12736
Posted on | July 31, 2010
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/FOIA-Release-FINAL-7-29-10-pp-1-41.pdf
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/FOIA-Release-FINAL-7-29-10-pp-5-7.pdf
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/FOIA-Release-FINAL-7-29-10-pp-8-9.pdf
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/FOIA-Release-FINAL-7-29-10-pp-10-11.pdf
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/FOIA-Release-FINAL-7-29-10-pp-12-14.pdf
Apparently, due to legal technicalities too complex to understand, POTUS is the one civil service position in the USA that you cannot be fired from for lying about your qualifications???
Apparently, due to legal technicalities too complex to understand, POTUS is the one civil service position in the USA that you cannot be fired from for lying about your qualifications???
NbC 31. Jul, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Some interesting notes:
in the first 4 pages of the FOIA release, page 4 shows Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah) crossed out as “amend to exclude/include children”. This should lay to rest the idea that Barack had been adopted. However what does the annotation mean? A nick name?
Nor is there any evidence that Dunham became an Indonesian citizen.
So far it lays to rest some myths and raises one interesting question: Who/what is Soebarkah(sp)?
Found at ObamaConspiracy
***
Me: “This should lay to rest the idea that Barack had been adopted.”
I don’t know, Berg has made a convincing case that Lolo adopted Barack.
BTW, the divorce papers between Stanley and Lolo cite one eighteen years old child Lolo was legally responsible for ... that would be the bastard-in-chief.
Page 7, Section E, Place of Marriage: “Molokai, Hawaii.”
Something was written before “Molokai” and was scratched out. What was that?
MAN alive! I didnt know that I had so many Freeper friends!
Lawyers and donkeys all.
Bullfrog
Because, Lord knows, that woman needs help....
Well, one thing's for sure -- Orly has never set foot in the land of "Is REAL".
May God heal her of the mental illness which afficts her.
And as a politician, Obama enjoys watching his opposition being tarred by association with the Birther crackpots.
1967- Government Inquiry – Barack Hussein Obama – Born in the US and Stepson of Lolo
“He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii.”
“He [word stricken out with xxxx’s] is considered the applicants stepchild”
He = Obama
applicant = Lolo?
Does this mean Obama legally adopted by Lolo?
Sorry to ask the obvious.
Amen.
And may she be shown the door quickly that she may suffer no further humiliation.
Considering the fountain, that water is actually golden springs.
Chris Strunk says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM
Strunk is in opposition to a summary judgment filed by the DOJ in my case Strunk v DOS et al.
DCD 08-cv-2234 seeks further disclosure in regards to DOS spoliation of documents in regards to my request under FOIA the passport and related records of Stanley Ann Dunham et al..
I have been awaiting these records and more since October 2008 when I first filed a FOIA request related to my active case in New York Supreme Court where the records will be used when the disposition of the Summary Judgment is complete;
Hopefully, I will receive the additional records that exist from 1960 onward too.
Clearly when the DOS release is combined with the US Customs and Immigration service release to Ken Allen amounting to about 90 pages shows that Lolo Soetoro and Ann Soetoro were having difficulties that would only explain the removal of BHO from her passport in 1968
especially since the Indonesian Government in Soetoro’s words, any American, was in jeopardy there in Indonesia due to the anti-American feelings”
is shown at page 103 of
attached to the U.S. Government memo of January 12, 1966 with pages marked 000077 through 000080
therein at page 000078 regarding Lolo Soetoros request for a INA section 212(e) waiver and two year extension for his stay in the USA with Ann Soetoro,
(that according to the US Government document of August 6, 1968 all three returned to Indonesia on July 20, 1966);
Soetoro states:
“Most importantly, anti-American feeling has reached a feverish pitch under the direction of the Indonesian communist party, and I have been advised by both family and friends in Indonesia that it would be dangerous to endeavor to return with my wife at the present time.
Of secondary importance is the fact that my wife does not yet speak Indonesian,
Not only would she be forced to cut short her college education, but she would be left in a position of isolation in the community,”
It appears from the cross comparison on both the Customs and DOS FOIA released documents that
on October 20, 1971 Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro (SADS) and BHO (a.k.a Saebarkah Soetoro) together boarded Pan Am Airlines Flight 812 unaccompanied by Lolo M. Soetoro in Djakarta Indonesia
and arrived in Honolulu Hawaii on October 21, 1971
and sought entry into the USA on an expired Passport issued July 19, 1965
according to the DS 1423 Form for REQUEST BY UNITED STATES NATIONAL FOR AND REPORT OF EXCEPTION TO SECTION 53.1, TITLE 22 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
with use of the expired Passport of July 19, 1965 shown as page 6 of
It is important to discover whether or not based upon SADS’ August 13, 1968 Passport Renewal Application to DOS shown as page 3 and 4 of
SADS excluded Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO)from her Passport of July 19, 1965;
and therefore, left no way for BHO
who is presumed to also have the right to an Indonesian Passport under Lolo Soetoro
to reenter the USA with SADS except by use of the expired July 19 1965 passport.
That Declarant
among other items of interest in the analysis presented by Dr Corsi in his Worldnet Daily Article (WND)
takes issue with the insinuation that the 1965 edition of SADS passport was only good for 3 years when in fact it was to expire July 18, 1970 according to the actual reference by the US Government shown in the upper right corner of the application located at page 3;
however in August 13 1968 SADS made an early application to renew the 1965 to remove BHO (a.k.a. Saebarkah Soetoro) from her own passport.
At that time, Lolo Soetoro was in a difficult effort with the State Department and US Customs and Immigration to obtain reentry into the USA and needed to reflect Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO) as an Indonesian for his own safety.
That Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO) according to his own writing in 1971 would re-enter back into the USA to live with his Grandma Madelyn Dunham
Except for the fact that the Exception request for use of the expired July 19, 1965 passport
without use of an American passport as Saebarkah Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen
which he was also entitled to an Indonesian Passport made without being on SADS renewed Passport of August 13 1968
made it easier for Saebarkah Soetoro / BHO to travel and obtain a renewed Indonesian Passport,
rather than a British or even Kenyan passport that would be more difficult to explain or obtain to the Indonesian Government
(having a USA passport there in Indonesian would dangerously expose Lolo Soetoro to government scrutiny since BHO was born in Kenya not the USA was adopted by Lolo Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen).
Thereafter 1971, Saebarkah Soetoro living in the USA went to the Indonesian Embassy in Hawaii
to obtain or renew the Indonesian passport
as part of his college funding program
and that in 1981 through 1984 was then used while attending Columbia University
to enter Indonesia, Pakistan and Afghanistan
while working for Zbigniew Brzezinski then of the Scholl of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council with the Carter Administration and Reagan Administration transition.
Found at ThePostEmail
What other judge are you accusing me of making an ad hominem attack on? Or, is it just your style to toss about accusations aimlessly?
If it is not Zero's responsibility to prove his qualifications for office, then who's is it? Traditionally the national party offers a written certification; the DNC failed to do so last time around. I wonder why that is?
Seventy-one lawsuits but not one has acknowledged what Zero has -- that he was born with UK citizenship and is, thus, not a natural-born US citizen. Not one has even asked to see evidence of US citizenship, something the average citizen in this country often has to provide just to land a normal job. Then again, you conveniently ignore Zero's own admission of dual citizenship birth. I wonder why that is? Facts are pesky things, aren't they? Any legal ruling that fails to examine the law and the facts is a sham.
Pardon me if I don't accept lack of action by Republican politicians as reason to ignore Zero's admission of UK citizenship birth, which cannot be questioned with the stipulated facts at hand. I don't measure justice by what Republicans do or don't do. Do you? By the way, you may have noticed that the mainsteam media is poised to call anyone who questions Zero's qualifications as a racist. It's amazing how well the Democrats and mainstream media have trained Republican politicians to dance, or not, to that tune. In fact, I see the mainstream media has conditioned you to think this is an issue of birthplace. It's not; it's an issue of Constitutional qualification. Note that the mainstream media, like you, never brings that subject up. You, like Zero, have mastered the straw man.
I'm well aware of Gov. Lingle's cited statement. The problem is that statement does not square with the facts. Check the original press release resulting from the Hawaiian health director's supposed search -- it mentions no hospital, and mentions nothing about where Zero was born. I believe it only says the department does have his long-form birth certificate. Read Hawaiian law -- one does not have to be born in Hawaii to have a Hawaiian birth certificate; and, Zero was adopted which could have resulted in an altered birth certificate. Regardless, his location of birth is moot -- he has freely admitted being born with a natural allegiance to the UK and Kenya.
Judge Carter conveniently ignores that Zero's qualifications were questioned before he fraudulently assumed office. He fails to admit that an office attained fraudulently becomes a nullity once the fraud is demonstrated. The demonstration is Zero's own admission to being born a citizen of the UKC. The law does not allow one to benefit from one's own wrongdoing. Thus, Zero's fraudulent term in office is a nullity.
What other judge are you accusing me of making an ad hominem attack on? Or, is it just your style to toss about accusations aimlessly?
If it is not Zero's responsibility to prove his qualifications for office, then who's is it? Traditionally the national party offers a written certification; the DNC failed to do so last time around. I wonder why that is?
Seventy-one lawsuits but not one has acknowledged what Zero has -- that he was born with UK citizenship and is, thus, not a natural-born US citizen. Not one has even asked to see evidence of US citizenship, something the average citizen in this country often has to provide just to land a normal job. Then again, you conveniently ignore Zero's own admission of dual citizenship birth. I wonder why that is? Facts are pesky things, aren't they? Any legal ruling that fails to examine the law and the facts is a sham.
Pardon me if I don't accept lack of action by Republican politicians as reason to ignore Zero's admission of UK citizenship birth, which cannot be questioned with the stipulated facts at hand. I don't measure justice by what Republicans do or don't do. Do you? By the way, you may have noticed that the mainsteam media is poised to call anyone who questions Zero's qualifications as a racist. It's amazing how well the Democrats and mainstream media have trained Republican politicians to dance, or not, to that tune. In fact, I see the mainstream media has conditioned you to think this is an issue of birthplace. It's not; it's an issue of Constitutional qualification. Note that the mainstream media, like you, never brings that subject up. You, like Zero, have mastered the straw man.
I'm well aware of Gov. Lingle's cited statement. The problem is that statement does not square with the facts. Check the original press release resulting from the Hawaiian health director's supposed search -- it mentions no hospital, and mentions nothing about where Zero was born. I believe it only says the department does have his long-form birth certificate. Read Hawaiian law -- one does not have to be born in Hawaii to have a Hawaiian birth certificate; and, Zero was adopted which could have resulted in an altered birth certificate. Regardless, his location of birth is moot -- he has freely admitted being born with a natural allegiance to the UK and Kenya.
Judge Carter conveniently ignores that Zero's qualifications were questioned before he fraudulently assumed office. He fails to admit that an office attained fraudulently becomes a nullity once the fraud is demonstrated. The demonstration is Zero's own admission to being born a citizen of the UKC. The law does not allow one to benefit from one's own wrongdoing. Thus, Zero's fraudulent term in office is a nullity.
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.