Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate Surfaces

[Aoresteen]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

If the document is authentic, this is a REAL problem for the country.

It looks real enough.

Here is the actual court filing:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=3583

[admin edit]I removed the hyperlink from the second link in this post. Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer. See my post in this thread, Dan[/edit]

[Pete]

The problem I have with the document is that it is dated 1964.

So it is an "official copy" of his 1961 birth.

That means it has been sitting around for something like 45 years. Looks to have been folded and kept in a desk drawer.

Who has been holding it and where was it sitting for all that time? The story does not say much about that.

Obama's relations in Kenya do not appear to have that nice of quarters. I would not expect it to have been so well kept if it was one of them.

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by Pete

The problem I have with the document is that it is dated 1964.

So it is an "official copy" of his 1961 birth.

That means it has been sitting around for something like 45 years. Looks to have been folded and kept in a desk drawer.

Who has been holding it and where was it sitting for all that time? The story does not say much about that.

Obama's relations in Kenya do not appear to have that nice of quarters. I would not expect it to have been so well kept if it was one of them.

I agree! I was reading the article earlier and while I wanted to be optimistic that it was the real mccoy, I am in the "wait and see" mode. How did Orly get it? Who was the source? Why did it sit for 3 yrs before it was "sealed" and signed in 1964 (for a 1961 birthdate)? While the current regime ignore it or will they blast it?

[Aoresteen]

My guess is that someone requested the COPY of the birth certificate.

I was born in 1952 but my birth certificate is a certified copy dated in the 60's that I need to enlist in the Army. The orginial had been lost by my parents.

I am also taking a wait and see position. A rogarty letter has been requested. My guess is that President Obama's lawyers will fight tooth and nail to prevent the rogatory letter from being sent to Kenya for verification.

The MSM will NOT cover this development.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Saoirse

..... Why did it sit for 3 yrs before it was "sealed" and signed in 1964 (for a 1961 birthdate)? ......

1960s - thats before copy machines.

I had to get a "copy" of my 1950s BC in the 70s and it was some kind of ugly black negative kinda' thing.

If it is a true copy then a copy of the BC was requested in 1964. The data from the file copy was copied onto the new form and the official signed his name that it was a true copy of the original.

The problem I have in all this is the people pushing this should do a little more research to back up their story. What was happening the winter of 1964 where Obama would need a copy?

Obama was just a regular kid up until the 80s. Why would anyplace in the world be keeping records of him? Why would the Kenyan family? Why would his 1/2 brothers and sisters?

Must have been good paper and good storage.

It has fold marks but I don't see any acid stains. The fold marks apper to be as if done to put in a shirt pocket. Unusual for storage but could have been done to move it.

[Richard]

Concur with Pete for the following reasons:

• The State of Hawaii has officially stated they have an official certificate of live birth for BHO

- vs -

• A registration filed 3 years after the fact
  
• By a father seeking to assert paternal control (still an issue which goes on quite frequently among American women who marry foreign men)
  
• In a country for which the bribery of officials and questionable authencity of 'official' documents is internationally famous
  
• From a mysterious, unnamed source who fears for his life

Did they also request Taitz's help to transfer $10,000,000.00 to her safe, American bank account?

Certainly nothing questionable about that document.

Richard's $.02

[Saoirse]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Pete

1960s - thats before copy machines.

The problem I have in all this is the people pushing this should do a little more research to back up their story. What was happening the winter of 1964 where Obama would need a copy?
QUOTE]

That was when his mother filed for divorce and was advised by her attorney to have the certificate in the event she requested child support or would need welfare later on.

Judge Samuel P. King who granted the divorce – last I heard was retired and alive (for now) in his 90s in Hawaii -- MAY or MAY NOT have asked to see the Marriage Certificate. BUT, I bet Judge King asked to see Obama JR's Birth Certificate to confirm Ann's claims that Obama SR was in fact the father. That is “standard” policy to have a Birth Certificate in case the mother asks for child support from the father (or Welfare) later after the divorce. Judge King probably told Ann to produce a birth certificate before or at trial, which would have been sometime in mid- to late-February 1964 HAD Obama SR answered his notice that was sent to Cambridge.

Sourse: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2306640/posts

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Saoirse

...That was when his mother filed for divorce and was advised by her attorney to have the certificate in the event she requested child support or would need welfare later on.......

Would it have been easier to just get the HI one than write off to Kenya. But let's just say she did - or he did. If it was filed as part of the divorce then it would be a public record. Divorce files are public unless sealed by a judge.

So lets just say the papers were not filed with the divorce papers - just held by either the mother of father. They are both dead, and dead since before Obama was a somebody. Did Obama's mother's parents get her papers when she died? Who got them when they died. Would whoever got them "fears for his life"? His dad's copy? Would it survive to this day?

I think there is something fishy going on but to head off down this trail I need more information.

[dr. mabuse]

Undecided as of yet. BHO is so cagey about it. He KNOWS what would shut up his detractors and he could do it with a phone call and yet does nothing. All from a man who has a clear history of taking time away from his job to answer "slights" from detractors.

Doesn't look like a photostat.

My 1957 original BC or copy (1965) doesn't have any acid stains in the folds. Been sitting in a cedar chest pretty much the whole time.

I asked a retired nurse and she said in the dinosaur days sometimes hospitals had a clerk "type" a "copy", stamp it, sign it and mail it out.

[Dozer523]

This one looks good but the one he produced doesn't.
Okay. Maybe this is just too much effort.
Time to move on.


OMG! did I really say MoveOn?

[Sten]

President Joe Biden, 3 words that should scare you all..

[Richard]

Some interesting points of analyses regarding the latest 'official' document for all the 'birthers' out there.

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

'Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate
David weigel, Washington Independent, 3 Aug 2009

On Sunday night, the online community of “birthers” erupted after Orly Taitz released a photo of a “Kenyan birth certificate” for Barack Obama. The “birther” movement quickly divided between the credulous — people who believed that the new certificate was genuine — and skeptics who believed that their movement was being taken for a ride.

This story needs a little bit of prelude. Last year, as the bloggers at ObamaConspiracy remember, Philip Berg included an obviously forged birth certificate with his lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee. (The certificate was Canadian and signed by “Dudley Do-Right.”) Foreign birth certificates, unlike, say, American passports, are prime targets for forgery — few people stateside know what the real ones look like, and the penalties for forging them are basically non-existent.

So here it is: the “certified copy of registration of birth” that Orly Taitz obtained and is submitting as evidence in her lawsuit on behalf of Alan Keyes. The most obvious problems:

- It records Barack Obama Sr’s age as “26.” Obama Sr was born in 1936; his son was born in 1961.

- Its publication date is February 17, 1964, but it purports to be a document of the “Republic of Kenya.” Kenya did not become a Republic until December 12, 1964, a year after it won independence from Great Britain.

- It’s signed by “registrar E.F. Lavender.” Earth Friendly Lavender is a kind of detergent, and government officials who use vanity initials on official documents are, to put it mildly, rare.

- The kicker? The image is part of the extremely ill-informed conspiracy theory that Obama was born in Mombasa—conveniently, one of the more Muslim parts of the country.

This has always been a red flag for conspiracy theorists, so it deserves some explanation. Barack Obama Sr. was born and educated in Nyanza Province, in southwestern Kenya, on Lake Victoria. This is the area where Obama’s family lived and continues to live; Sarah Obama, the step-grandmother of the president, lives in Nyang’oma Kogelo, a small town in the province. But Mombasa is a city on the Indian Ocean, a thousand miles to the east. It didn’t even have an international airport until 1979. And the city wasn’t even part of Kenya when the future president was born. Mombasa was a part of Zanzibar until December 12, 1963, when it became part of the newly independent Kenya.

The new forgery? Why, it claims that the president was born in Coast General Hospital in Mombasa.

- As some FreeRepublic posters have pointed out, the document contains a number that’s either a humorous coincidence or a wink by the forger. It’s number 47,044. Barack Obama, 47 years old, is the 44th president of the United States.

So what’s the likeliest story here? One popular theory right now is that the document was faked to discredit the “birther” movement. That wouldn’t be surprising: another document that circulated over the weekend was a “certificate of birth” from “Kenya colony,” and its creator tipped his hand, telling readers that it was a “work of parody.”

http://washingtonindependent.com/534...th-certificate

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Pete

The problem I have with the document is that it is dated 1964.

So it is an "official copy" of his 1961 birth.

That means it has been sitting around for something like 45 years. Looks to have been folded and kept in a desk drawer.

Who has been holding it and where was it sitting for all that time? The story does not say much about that.

Obama's relations in Kenya do not appear to have that nice of quarters. I would not expect it to have been so well kept if it was one of them.

I have my great great grand fathers Civil War discharge. It's dated about ten years afterward. I took it to a "historian" and asked why, he said he probably need a copy of a discharge to obtain land given to Civil War veterans.

I'll wait for the Keynan "historians" to weigh in.

I've said this before, I can only think of two reasons you don't show the public your birth certificate, one is that you were not born in the US, the other is someone elses name in the block for "Father", is different than what your mother always told you.......

[Pete]

I'm tellin' ya my wife still says it's cause the real BC lists him as "White".

[Richard]

FWIW - Section 1, Article II of the U.S. Constitution states:

Article II: “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.”

But Obama is natural-born citizen, even if he were not born within this country's borders, since one parent was a citizen at the time of his birth. As a congressional act approved on 26 March 1790 states:

Congress: "And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."

http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llsl/001/0200/02280104.tif

Another congressional act in 1795 issued a similar assurance, though it changed the language from "natural born citizen" to just "citizen."

But the State Department clarifies the issue, saying that the 1790 language is honored under section 301(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. And even "IF" he was born outside the US - which I personally don't believe to be the case - this is the law as it is applied to:

• Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
  
  
• Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Mother: A child born abroad out-of-wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother may acquire U.S. citizenship under Section 301(g) INA, as made applicable by Section 309(c) INA if the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the child's birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year.

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

Guess there's no chase as exciting as a wild goose chase - or a Loch Ness monster chase - or an Area51 UFO chase - or...

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02