Skip to comments.Arpaio investigation: Obama might be Kenyan: Records that could document status mysteriously missing
Posted on 03/08/2012 10:14:04 PM PST by Nachum
Among the records missing for Barack Obama that would be available for an ordinary president are passport records, school records such as those from Punahou, Occidental, Columbia and Harvard, Harvard Law Review writings, scholarly articles for the University of Chicago, state bar association records from Illinois, Illinois state senate records, the marriage and divorce documents for his mother, his adoption records and others.
Now it has been revealed that the Cold Case Posse assembled by Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Ariz., cannot confirm yet that Obama was not born in Kenya and brought to the United States as a days-old infant for his birth to be registered in Hawaii.
The reason? Missing records.
Speculation has held that Obama actually was born in Kenya, and as the son of an American woman and Kenyan father, probably would not have been considered under any circumstances to be a natural born citizen of America, as the Constitution demands for presidents.
Its been revealed that the Kenyan government actually investigated that possibility earlier, without conclusive results.
Now Arpaios team, which was assembled to work on a volunteer basis after hundreds of constituents expressed fear that Obama was having his name put on the 2012 election ballot in Arizona using a fraudulent document, has reported that it checked to determine whether a young mother arrived in the United States from Kenya in the days after Obamas reported Aug. 4, 1961, birth date.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I assume you're talking about Executive Order 13489, which was limited to records produced by the White House during the Presidents term. It had nothing to do with the President's birth or school records, as those are already protected by existing privacy laws.
This is nothing out of the ordinary; it's been standard practice for every President since Reagan.
Vet:”The Diversion Continues.”
I would say this is a battle that can be fought on multiple fronts.
I don’t contest that Obama is NOT a NBC based on his Kenyan father, but the fact that he is also complicit in two forgeries is probably easier to bring to court. And our legal interpretations of forgery are much more resolved in the courts than the NBC issue.
In other words, being on the right side of things does not necessarily result in success. Our judicial system has shown this to be true on many instances.
Besides, the voting public has less understanding of the NBC issue because it involves actual deductive reasoning. Yet they understand the concepts of forgery and deception quite well.
But surely they would keep birth records indefinitely, at least the probably lifetime of the person.
Why would a hospital treat “birth records” differently from any other kind of medical records, for records-retention purposes? Hospitals aren’t a repository for birth records, the department of health is. Retaining 50+ years of records would be prohibitively costly; especially medical records, which tend to be volumonous and even more costly to retain (due to medical privacy/security issues).
That’s the best news I have seen in a long time. Celine Dion will never sing again.
Because medical issues tend to be transitory in comparison to the establishment by birth of a human life.
Again, hospitals are not repositories of birth records. Records concerning each birth are maintained by the department of health (or whatever it is called in your jurisdiction). The hospital records are not memorializations of the birth itself, but rather records related to medical care given before, during, and after birth. They are treated no differently than any other medical records, and would almost certianly not be retained after 50+ years.
They’ll never find documentation of where Obama truly came from. Doubt they keep good records in Hell.
Yes it was.
It didn’t fail, it was sabotaged.
Duh! Neither BC lists an address for the hospital.
Ooops. My apologies. I promise to always wear my glasses. LOL Perhaps I am just paranoid because I know the bc is fake. Sheriff Arpaio’s press conference really nailed it with highly-detailed analysis. That’s the problem, though.. the American public doesn’t want to deal with the finite details. What is your opinion of 0bama’s bc?
P.S. Look at the rubber stamp at the bottom of the bc.. “THE” is spelled “TXE” and incredibly, the “A” in ‘Alvin’ has a smiley face in it. If you look at a better copy of 0bama’s bc you can more clearly see it.
Here’s a higher resolution image of the bc: http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/assets/obamabirthcetgrab.jpg
Because one of his very first Executive Orders required that they be made unavailable...
Antialiased grayscale versus B&W binary bitmap — in the same word...
"Nothing to see here folks, just move along. The nice black man with big ears just doesn't have a past. Nothing to see, keep the line moving..."
Oh, c'mon you crazy birthers. Every copy machine does that if you push the OTT (obscure the truth) button. Everyone knows that the OTT function is default on all government copiers. :-)
Especially in Ann Dunham’s signature.. They found a sneaky way to add “0bama” into her signature.
son of a white American mother and a black African father
The Sheriff has been duped by the quacks from World Nut Daily. His case rests largely on those Photoshop layers found in the PDF the White House released. However, as this old video shows, those bizarre layers are just what you get when you scan an old BC and save it as an optimized PDF (you can also read about it here).
In any case, there isn't any point in the WH releasing a materially altered version of the document, since the original remains on file with the Hawaii Department of Health and could be produced if this thing ever comes to a head in court.
On the other hand, releasing a true but suspicion-arousing version (or failing to respond to birther complaints by releasing a 600-dpi flat scan) has the advantage of keeping the whole thing alive. As any well-trained community organizer knows, it helps to keep your opponents looking ridiculous and barking up wrong trees. That's why it took him until last April to release his long form he only did so when Donald Trump threatened to spread birtherism among independents who might actually be stupid enough to vote for him again. He'll be content to let the issue fester until another Trump comes along. If and when that happens, he knows he can prove what he needs to prove.
Bitmap pixelation results from scanning an image in 'B&W' where halftones are not captured; The portions of the image are either black or white with no in between.
Other 'anti-aliased' areas of the birth certificate are a result of a 'grayscale' or 'photograph mode' scan, resulting in halftone shades or GRADUATED TONES.
So, you have a scanned version of 0bama's alleged 'original' birth certificate that includes both of the above conflicting scan types. The ONLY way to explain this is that the certificate itself was modified and constructed using portions from multiple sources (more than just one). The halftone vs. bitmap issue is not a result of OCR either and I do believe Arpaio's Powerpoint presentation explained away your OCR theory too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGu9NDAw2Vg
Also, there is the problem of 'white clouds' around characters, along with red-shift/blue-shift ghosting too.. Arpaio's team explained these two types of artifacts too and it doesn't bode well for your argument.
Lastly, 0bama's bc is most CERTAINLY NOT A SCAN OF AN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT. It is a DOCUMENT BUILT IN PHOTOSHOP USING AT LEAST TWO SOURCE DOCUMENTS. Enough experts have proven this beyond any shadow of a doubt.
Did you hear about the guy who was present with 0bama at Bill Ayers' mother's house when she introduced 0bama as the 'guy we're trying to get an education for in the United States"??? Sheriff Arpaio's touched upon this at his press conference, so stay tuned..
And the registrar, “Ukulele” (U K L Lee) has always seemed as if the forger were thumbing his/her nose at us...
Or maybe it’s a real person and that’s a ‘V’ not a ‘U’.
So you think she is not a real person or the name doesn’t appear on other BC’s?
You bring up an inconvenient fact.
The U was actually a V. The signature is that of Verna K L Lee, who did indeed work at the Hawaii Department of Health during the relevant time frame, as this page of Lees from the 1961 Polk Directory attests: