Charles Kerchner really spins off the road and into a tree in his latest missive posted on Mario Apuzzo’s blog [the preceding hyperlink points to a saved copy of the article, since it has since been revised since the publication of this article] upon the theme of the Stanley Ann Dunham passport FOIA Documents. I daresay he will rewrite it after he reads this.
Before I get to what Kerchner says, let me briefly identify the documents under discussion:
- “P1” is a passport renewal application for Obama’s mother dated August 13, 1968, extending her passport until July of 1970.
- “P3” is an application for an amended passport to “change to read in married name.”
Look at what Kerchner says:
The record starts with a “RENEWAL” application filed in 1965 due [to] her name change after marrying Lolo Soetoro at Molokai Hawaii on March 15, 1965 per page marked “P3” of the released documents.
This is wrong in 3 ways:
- While the cover letter mentions an application from 1965 that could not be found, the renewal application is dated in 1968, 3 years after her marrying Lolo Soetoro. The document “P3” is not a renewal, but an amendment (look at the title of the form).
- The amendment (which is the “P3”) document appears to have been made in 1967 according to the hand-written notation on the right side, not 1965. 1965 is the date of the original passport application.
- The “P3” could not have been a renewal because according to the law at that time, a passport was good for three years and could be renewed only once for two additional years. Since the 1968 application (document labeled “P1”)Â was a renewal (it is so marked) the 1965 application three years earlier had to be an original application. The “P2” document states clearly that her passport (which apparently had expired the year before) was issued in 1965.
Next, apparently in deep paranoia mode now, Kerchner continues:
The carefully worded cover letter implies earlier years records have been purged for some reason. Since passport records are filed in files by name and not in boxes or files by year, this does not make sense. It sounds to me like HI officials (or whoever controls them) are now instructing the U.S. Passport Office how to obfuscate and parse sentences in cover letters to allow them to not provide what one asks for and yet not be lying.
What the cover letter really says is: “Many passport applications and other non-vital records from that period [1965] were destroyed during the 1980s in accordance with guidance from the General Services Administration.” How is this parsing or hiding anything? The letter says they found 6 responsive documents that they released in full. How do you parse that into hiding something? And exactly how does Kerchner know how applications are filed?I know for one thing, the Department of State is not going to dig into 20-year-old boxes to file something alphabetically. [In the 20-employee business I used to work for we filed invoices alphabetically and at the end of the year we put them all into YEAR BOXES.] Trying to maintain alphabetic order on large sets of data over decades is ludicrous.
Then Kerchner says:
There was obviously a passport issued to Stanley Ann (whatever name she used to get it) prior to 1965. I was under the impression that passport records kept and filed by name were kept virtually forever.
Here it may be appropriate to parse the State Department cover letter carefully. They said that the passport applications were destroyed; they did not say that the passport records were destroyed. The State Department, on their web site, says that they hold passport records back to 1925. Strunk in his FOIA only asked for applications. 👿
While it is possible that Stanley Ann Obama had a passport prior to 1965, there is no evidence, not even a hint, that she did, and here Kerchner’s use of the word “obviously” flies in the face of reason.
Kerchner repeats his earlier misfire by saying:
This file indicates via the 1965 renewal application that Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama had a passport issued to her prior to 1965 and she was applying to RENEW it. Since a passport was good for 5 years that means she likely got her first passport in late 1960 of early 1961.
But in the 1960’s a passport was good for THREE years, not five, and it could be renewed for an additional TWO years. The renewal in the file at the 3 year mark (1968) proves that the original passport was issued in 1965, not renewed in 1965. The renewal application was dated August 13, 1968. There is no 1965 document in the file. The cover letter says it was destroyed, and it could not have been a renewal since the 1968 application was for a renewal.
Kerchner sums up with this bizarre bit:
Children legally adopted at age 5 and under have their new citizenship governed by the international Hague Convention Treaty on adopting children of which the USA is a signatory. That is likely why Obama alludes to his being age 6 when those Indonesian records are discussed in regards to when his step-father “adopted” him and saying that the adoption occurred in Indonesia. I think that story is more false direction and misinformation type data put out by Obama to throw one off the true trail.
Indonesia was not a signatory to the Hague Convention Treaty, so I don’t know whether Kerchner dreamed this up himself, or just cribbed from Phil Berg. I also don’t know what he imagines is a statement from Obama that he was adopted in Indonesia (Kerchner conveniently doesn’t say). It is ironic that the very case, Strunk v State, that deals with this very FOIA request is the one in which the US Department of State said:
To the extent this paragraph alleges that Lolo Soetoro is or ever was President Obama’s father by birth or adoption, that allegation is denied.
Those are Commander Kerchner’s words…
Thanks. Corrected.
You might want to correct the part about page 3. The box that states “RENEWAL” is clearly checked.
The tilte of the document on page 3 reads;
Department of State
Foreign Service of the United States of America
Application for “RENEWAL” “AMENDMENT” “EXTENSION”
Again; the “RENEWAL” box is clearly checked
You have the wrong document. Kerchner refers to the page “Marked P3”. The document marked P3 begins on page 6, That is the amendment.
I know this is OT, but I notice your website obamareleaseyourrecords.com redirects to a page urging people to sign Chalice Jackson’s petition, demanding the President’s resignation. Her petition website says that she expects to reach 100 million signatures by July 23, eight days ago. How close did you come to that goal?
So, in 1967, feels compelled to amend and pay a filing fee to the State Department to provide notice her married named is Stanley Ann Soetoro, married 3/15/65. And this is after she applied for or renewed her 1965 application.
And we won’t find out what name was on the 1965 application/renewal because it and all copies have been destroyed.
This sounds like a name game.
Barack didn’t renounce his citizenship, Barry Soetoro did. And we can’t see Barry Soetoro’s papers because Barack, who has never been Barry Soetoro, objects.
Stanley Ann Soetoro should be the name used on the 1965 passport application, but we’ll never know because it’s been destroyed. Yet, if Stanley Ann Soetoro was used on the 1965 application, there wouldn’t be a need for a 1967 amendment to change the name to Stanley Ann Soetoro.
Apparently, Stanley Ann Dunham renounced her US citizenship and Stanley Ann Soetoro never renounced her US Citizenship
Please take your meds and go to bed. Your ravings make no sense.
It is a rather remarkable coincidence that this evening we are discussing Stanley Ann Dunham’s passport documents, including a name change due to marriage, when my wife was earlier today filling out a passport amendment form for a name change due to marriage.
The reason I mention this is that there is a discussion as to why Dunham used two different locations for the marriage, Molokai and Maui, on different documents. This parallels the discussion my wife and I had regarding where she should say was the “place of name change.” She wanted to put the place we got married, and I argued that it should be the place where the marriage license was issued. Molokai and Maui are only 10 miles apart, by the way.
She clearly signed a document stating she never naturalized to any foreign nation.
Not page 3 but P3. P3 starts on be page 7, while P1 starts on page 3.
That is just birther noise. It has no relevance to anything.
Might also be worth noting that although Maui usually refers to the island, it is also the name of a county. Most of the island of Molokai is in Maui County.
Read; P1 states “Date of Issue: July 19, 1965”
Read… Read… Read…
Who is Barry Soetoro,
What? It must be one of those invisible paper using invisible ink that disappears when it comes in contact with air.
On June 29, 1967, she request passport F 777788 have the name amended to Stanley Ann Soetoro. On August 13, 1968, she requested a renewal of F777788 as Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro.
Oct 21, 1971, she arrives in Hawaii with an expired passport and Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro requested an exception. A report is written for Stanley Ann Soetoro and the bill is sent in care of Stanley Dunham.
Is it possible Stanley Dunham renounced her citizenship and when confronted about it, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro said, “That’s not me. Stanley Dunham is my dad?”
WhoDaFlockIsSoeBarkah,
It’s so nice of you to give us a first look at how the birthers will bring the crazy with regard to these records…
Whirr goes the birther goalposts.
Every time I read comments like that I have to shake my head, and wonder what is going through the writer’s mind. More logically disjoint arguments.
Where did you come up with “a report is written”? What kind of report? For what purpose is that report written? For the passport applications? For citizenship renunciation?
No. You have to formally renounce your citizenship in person.
From the US State Dept Bureau of Consular Affairs: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
Stanley Ann renewed her passports several times. Each time she did so, she had to sign the form stating this (wording as found on Stanley Ann’s applications):
Now, perhaps I am full of silliness, but the gov is going to check renunciations before granting a passport. And, even the gov would recognize the difference between Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro and Stanley Dunham! Why? Because renunciations must be in person.
You can’t enter the US with an expired passport! You would have to go to the embassy to get the issue fixed.
I have no background to rely on, but it looks like the waiver was granted by an immigration officer in Honolulu (bottom of form). Otherwise how could the date of entry be on the application for waiver?
The waiver is discussed at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/94671.pdf and the provision invoked is mainly used for family emergencies.
I wrote in the article:
It didn’t take long. The article has been substantially rewritten. Kerchner raises one interesting point, one which I also noticed but didn’t comment on, that Kerchner hangs his impossible hope that the 1965 passport application was a renewal. I’ll write about that later.
No.
Have you taken your meds yet?
From what I have been able to determine.
” § 53.2 Exceptions.
A U.S. citizen is not required to bear a valid passport to enter or depart the United States: …
(h) When specifically authorized by the Secretary of State through appropriate official channels to depart from or enter the United States, as defined in §50.1 of this chapter. The fee for a waiver of the passport requirement under this section shall be collected in the amount prescribed in the Schedule of Fees for Consular Services (22 CFR 22.1).”
But this was based on “31 FR 13546, Oct. 20, 1966, unless otherwise noted.”
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title22/22-1.0.1.6.35.html
Which isn’t current.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title22/22cfr53_main_02.tpl
Ҥ 53.3 Attempt of a citizen to enter without a valid passport.
The appropriate officer at the port of entry shall report to the Department of State any citizen of the United States who attempts to enter the United States contrary to the provisions of this part, so that the Department of State may apply the waiver provisions of §53.2(h) and §53.2(i) to such citizen, if appropriate.”
Which “is current as of July 29, 2010.”
“§ 53.2 Exceptions.” has no reference to the law, however that isn’t relevant to Dunham’s case in 1971. The equalivant could be § 53.2(7).
Page below page marked P2; Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro requested an exemption for the requirement to have a valid passport to entry the US.
A report was filed by Immigration officer Leonard Soon with Director of Passports, Washington, D.C. for subject Stanley Ann Soetoro.
Stanley Ann (Dunham) (Soetoro) or (Dunham Soetoro) filed an amendment in 1967 to change her name on her US Passport to Stanley Ann Soetoro.
Why is that? Her married name should have Stanley Ann Soetoro in 1965.
In 1965, Stanley Ann’s married name was Stanley Ann Soetoro. If the 1965 application is an application for her first Passport, then why did she amend her Passport in 1967 to change the name to Stanley Ann Soetoro?
In the ’60s, passports were good for three years, then renewed every two.
The President’s mother applied in 1965, renewed in 1968, didn’t renew in 1970, needed a waiver in 1971. Q.E.D., Mr. Hutz.
Re this Soebarkah nonsense: it proves that there is no such person as Barry Soetoro. Even though it is crossed out if Stanley Ann’s son had been named Barry Soetoro this is what she would have entered (and probably then crossed out). She obviously knew her son’s name at the point to be Barack Hussein Obama. Another case closed.
Koo Koo for Cocoa Puffs. A marriage certificate is just that a certificate that indicates that two people are married. Legally changing ones name is something totally different. Yes, their are women who keep the their original last name, and their are men who take the last name of their wife. When you return to earth let us know.
Actually it’s Coo Coo for Cocoa Puffs. That’s a fail in Berferstan.
For non-Hague Convention Country adoptions the adoptees passport expires in two years. Stanley Ann and Lolo were married in 1965 and immediately began adoption proceedings. After two years, 1967, the adoption was finalized and Stanley Ann amended her Passport to change her name to Stanley Ann Soetoro.
Most likely, the reason we can’t see Stanley Ann’s 1965 application is because it has indentifying information about Barry Soetoro, prospective adoptee of Stanley Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro.
“Indonesia was not a signatory to the Hague Convention Treaty, so I don’t know whether Kerchner dreamed this up himself, or just cribbed from Berg.”
Cribbed from Berg. The idea that Obama lost his US citizenship when he was supposedly “adopted” by Lolo Soetoro is a key cornerstone in Berg’s claims and filings. It overlooks the facts that under US law, his citizenship could not be revoked or renounced as a minor, and under Indonesian law, citizenship could not be granted due to both the US citizenship AND the fact that he was too old under Indonesian law.
Curiously enough, these documents destroy another cornerstone of Berg’s cases – his claim that Stanley Ann Dunham lost her US citizenship upon marriage to Lolo Soetoro. This is proof that not only did she not lose her US citizenship, she actively maintained and updated her US passport during her marriage.
Except that the natural parents of a child are not considered to be “adoptive” parents. Since Stanley Ann Dunham was the biological child of Barack Obama, II, she wouldn’t be listed as a “adoptive parent” or Obama as her “prospective adoptee”. It would be a simple “mother -child” listing.
Which is academic, since under Indonesian law Obama would have been too old to be granted Indonesian citizenship as an adopted child. Even if US citizenship could be renounced by or for a minor child, which it cannot be under US law.
It’s nice that the State Department has given the birthers a shiny new toy to play with for awhile. This is like giving a wailing baby who won’t stop crying a pacifier. Meanwhile, in the real world, this in no way effects PBO’s natural born citizen status.
coo·coo (ko̵̅o̅′ko̵̅o̅′; also ko̵ok′o̵̅oÌ…)
coo coo for cocoa puffs: “a strictly medical term, used to describe a patient or person that has delved into a realm of irrational, illogical and/or crazy thought processes.”
koo koo for cocoa puffs :”Completely insane.”
Sometimes reading birther speech make you wonder you want to shake your head. The other times it is just shock by the insanity of their comments.
Pick you poison.
I’ll pick me poison.
There is no logic in birther logic, because they can’t even follow their own though process.
Keep in mind that in SvenSpeak “most likely” has a meaning completely at odds with common English usage. From context, it appears to mean something like “I dreamed this up without any good reason to think it’s true and I’m gonna keep saying it even if it’s proved wrong.”
The Department of State said that they had found 6 responsive documents and that they could be released “in full.” If there were some identifying information that could not have been released, the information would have been redacted from the released documents.
The Sheriff has a tell.
The State Dept is taking the Glomar Response to a new level by citing an obscure regulation promulgated by GSA on records destruction of passport applications approximately 20 years old. If it weren’t so serious, it would be laughable.
So are we on our second version of Barry and the Pirates?
This whole matter is the farthest thing from being serious. President Obama was born in Hawaii. He is a natural born citizen. He is the lawful president of the United States of America.
All this biographical information about his mother is certainly interesting in that it sheds some light on the president’s early life. Biographers will undoubtedly study these documents.
But there is no constitutional crisis. There is no doubt about the president’s legitimacy. No rational, sane person believes that there is. No constitutional scholar (and Orly Taitz isn’t one) questions the president’s right to hold office. No shred of constitutional authority, or statutory or case law exists that supports birther theories.
Birthers are simply isolated loons, and the only people paying attention to them are: 1) the politicians who are alternately pandering to them and trying to push them away, and 2) the sane people who enjoy laughing at their clueless braying.
In contrast, if birthers weren’t so serious, they wouldn’t be so laughable.
Too bad for you that the Lolo Soetoro records drive a stake through your theory that he adopted Obama in Hawaii.
Jerome Corsi is already spinning it on WND.
Can you post a link?
Here it is:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=186677
The goalposts aren’t even in the stadium any more. They turned up in a used car lot 10 miles away!
What adoption? There is NOTHING in any of these records to indicate that Lolo Soetoro adopted his stepson.
The spin from the Post & Fail – Stanley Ann Dunham is now Obama;s “alleged” mother!
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/01/inconsistencies-found-in-passport-applications-released-by-state-department-for-obamas-alleged-mother/
And if Stanley Ann isn’t his mother the President is supposed to look so much like her father HOW???????
Corsi and WND are so pathetic that whatever they write is not even worth lining a birdcage with….The article was rife with speculation and innuendo and lacked any kind of fact whatsoever…
From WND….
The controversy continues
A prominent array of commentators, including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Lou Dobbs, Peter Boyles and WND’s Chuck Norris and Pat Boone have all said unequivocally and publicly that the Obama eligibility issue continues to be legitimate and worthy.
Longtime New York radio talker Lynn Samuels did the same.
“We don’t even know where he was born,” she said. “I absolutely believe he was not born in this country.”
WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “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.”
Some of the lawsuits question whether Obama was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.
Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers and his appointment of lawyers to defend against all requests for his documentation.
While his supporters cite an online version of a “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii as his birth verification, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.
Even worse look at what Strunk writes….
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 http://www.scribd.com/doc/35245956/Strunk-s-DOS-and-DHS-FOIA-Responses-DCD-08-Cv-2234-and-Ken-Allen-s-DOS-and-DHS-Responses-AZDC-09-Cv-373 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 http://www.scribd.com/doc/35245956/Strunk-s-DOS-and-DHS-FOIA-Responses-DCD-08-Cv-2234-and-Ken-Allen-s-DOS-and-DHS-Responses-AZDC-09-Cv-373.
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 http://www.scribd.com/doc/35245956/Strunk-s-DOS-and-DHS-FOIA-Responses-DCD-08-Cv-2234-and-Ken-Allen-s-DOS-and-DHS-Responses-AZDC-09-Cv-373 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.
Miki Booth says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 11:28 AM
…and to add to the passport intrigue, CIA Columbia trial uncovered Stanley Ann’s 5 year stint in Karachi, Pakistani working at the Asia Development Bank while staying at a five-star hotel. That record is obviously scrubbed by the CIA as well since she was involved in laundering money to fund the mujahadeen and taliban push back in Afghanistan against the Russian invasion. BO/BS travelled to Pakistan during the same time frame 1981-83 on a KENYAN passport posing as a businessman. He was NOT at Columbia University – they gave him cover.
Keep up the good work, Sharon, let us never stop probing!
Starla says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Mrs. Sharon Rondeau, I just visited http://www.CitizenWells.wordpress.com and I read these interesting comments here regarding this subject that perhaps you and your readers should see:
(1) “Sharzie // August 2, 2010 at 9:22 am
I am doing some family genealogy research and I just got a copy of my grandmother’s passport application from 1927. They keep these applications forever. There is something on this “destroyed” one that they don’t want us to see!!!!”
* * * *
(2) “Pete // August 2, 2010 at 9:22 am
They don’t want us to see the truth. The truth would set this people and this nation free. Funny how the Elementary School records for Obama registration–which are public record-are destroyed’ or missing’ as well.
Pete”
* * * *
(3) “Pete // August 2, 2010 at 9:56 am
CW,
I don’t know why I didn’t catch this before. The Federal government just made a statement that Obama’s mothers old passport records were destroyed in the 1980′s.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=186677
Now, why on earth would they destroy the passport records in the 1980′s of someone whom was still ALIVE AND TRAVELING OUT OF THE UNITED STATES. This is an ACTIVE file, they don’t destroy active passport records on live people, they don’t even destroy them on dead people.
Pete”
* * * *
—————-
Mrs. Rondeau replies: Of course, because the records would most likely show that she was out of the country before and after August 4, 1961. Then Obama’s cover would be blown.
TexomaEd says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 12:26 AM
Could Soebarkah be Obama’s real last name? I recall that Miss Tickly theorized that Obama had been adopted as an infant by Ann Dunham. And then subsequently either she or one of her bloggers put up some photos of Indonesian men who resembled Obama.
misanthropicus says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 10:38 AM
I was always intrigued by this possibility – and comparing photos of Stanley and dba Obama at different ages I wasn’t able to detect any of those “family” things that generally can be found in children/ parents pictures, even in diluted form (other that their shoe-sized chin) –
And today, while going through the web, I found in the WND story covering this issue a photo with Stanley in Indonesia, dressed, in a long shot –
And what is interesting here is that Stanley (in her 40-s) appears a rather short, stocky type – none of her physical features having transferred to dba Obama whose physique has been always of a lanky boy, and later man –
Very interesting photo, indeed, and if Stanley’s and Barry’s juxtaposed photos would be shown to a neutral, unsuspecting party, I’m 100% certain that the hypothetical person would not infer from the photos any blood relationship between the two –
The adoption theory also can explain Stanley’s disconnectedness as “mother” – hasn’t she dumped Barry in a few years, continuing her existence alone, with not much curiosity for her “child”?
This c*ap only continues because Obama is a “public person” & thus cannot sue these numskulls back to into abject poverty.
I love the adoption fiction. Exactly how was an 17 or 18 year old going to adopt an infant then? And if she did, it would be adopting an American infant- no 17 or 18 year old is going to be able to have adopted someone from another country.
This once again shows that Birthers are more interested in smearing the President and his family than anything else.
It is quite common for non-Hague Convention adoption proceedings to begin in the host country and finalize in the destination country. Adoptions are not instantaneous and could take two or more years to finalize. While pending, Lolo and Stanley Ann referred to Barack as Lolo’s stepson; as opposed to “prospective adoptee pending final adjudication.”
And yet still no evidence… All we have is speculation and the more data becomes available the harder it is to maintain the speculations.
By the time Obama made it to Indonesia, he could not be adopted under Indonesia law.
bummer
Why are birthers so fascinated with adoption? It would have no impact on the President’s citizenship. Since we know that his mother never took Indonesian citizenship, why would she make her son an Indonesian citizen. It defies logic. Afterall, according to Birther lore, Grandma Dunham went through all that trouble to fake his Hawaiian birth in the first place. Why throw it away 6 years later? The birther mind is one big contradiction.
Obama should have Press Sec Gibbs hand out several pages of black construction paper to the press. When the press asks, “What’s this?”
Gibbs can respond, “It’s Barack’s redacted long-form birth certificate.”
misanthr – must be some kind of moron. He never even mentions whether the President might look more like his father then his mother. Hasn’t he ever heard of genetics?
Some people just don’t see the family resemblance. They just see a Caucasian with an African-American child and that is where their brain stops. It could be to much television and not interacting with people from difference communities that is the root of the problem.
gorefan, I don’t know what misanthr is looking for in pictures, but I would agree with your assessment.
Do you have actual proof of that? Anything referring directly to this by a real authority or just your imagination?
Wow. Just wow.
The delusions of the Post & eFail, WND and Strunk are just beyond belief. It just boggles the mind how much hate can drive people so far off the ledge of reality…
LMAO! And what’s this new “Saebarkah Soetoro” fictional boogey-man person they are now trying to invent… hilarious if it wasn’t so bat-sh*t “stoopid”…
The three of them are more interested in “fanning the flames.” Pure hatred will make people believe the impossible. These birthers believe that they are skeptics. They don’t do one things skeptics do, and that is independent research.
Thanks Dr. C and Another Bird for the info on passport exceptions.
____________________________________________________________________
I see that some are bringing up the Soetoro adopted Obama non-sense again. There isn’t any proof that this occurred; it is supposition.
A few years ago I was dating a Muslim man from Egypt, who had become an American citizen. He wanted children, as do I. But I have to adopt; my uterus isn’t very cooperative and I knew this before our relationship began. My relationship with Gamal ended because Islam isn’t adoption friendly. The Western idea of adoption doesn’t exist within Islam.
In many middle eastern countries and with Muslim families, adopting a child simply means that you take on the responsibilities of providing for that child in the orphanage or in school. Adopted children don’t come to live with their adoptive families. Parents who adopt are much more like a sponsor than a parent for the children that they adopt.
I found this to be odd, until I discovered that Islam isn’t very adoption friendly.
In Islam, parent/child relationships are blood bound. Islam is very, very clear about this. The idea that a Muslim man would take on the legal role of a parent to the child of another Muslim man who is still living is absurd. This doesn’t mean that a child can’t be raised by someone that isn’t their blood relative. Mohammad was “adopted” in the Islamic custom.
The guardian/child relationship has specific rules under Islamic law, which render the relationship a bit different than what is common adoption practice today. The Islamic term for what is commonly called adoption is kafala, which comes from a word that means “to feed.” In essence, it describes more of a foster-parent relationship. Some of the rules in Islam surrounding this relationship:
* An adopted child retains his or her own biological family name (surname) and does not change his or her name to match that of the adoptive family.
* An adopted child inherits from his or her biological parents, not automatically from the adoptive parents.
* When the child is grown, members of the adoptive family are not considered blood relatives, and are therefore not muhrim to him or her. “Muhrim” refers to a specific legal relationship that regulates marriage and other aspects of life. Essentially, members of the adoptive family would be permissible as possible marriage partners, and rules of modesty exist between the grown child and adoptive family members of the opposite sex.
* If the child is provided with property/wealth from the biological family, adoptive parents are commanded to take care and not intermingle that property/wealth with their own. They serve merely as trustees. http://islam.about.com/cs/parenting/a/adoption.htm
Islamic regulations regarding adoption are generally distinct from practices and customs of adoption in the other non-muslim parts of the world like Western or East Asian societies. Contrary to what happens in the Western world, the social and jurisprudential understand is not that child formally leaves behind his or her identity as a member of his or her biological family and enters the one that raises them (the adoptive family). While raising a child who is not one’s genetic child is allowed and, in the case of an orphan, even encouraged, the child does not become a child of the “adoptive” parents. It is forbidden by Islamic law to adopt a child (in the common sense of the word). Instead, children retain membership to their original family. This is called in Arabic: kafala‎. This means, it is forbidden by Islam that the new father name the son after himself, and that the child is counted as a non-Mahram.[1] This can be sidestepped by having the child breast-fed by the adoptive mother in the first two years of life (see milk kinship).[2]> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafala
The idea that Soetoro, a practicing Muslim, would try to adopt Obama is not supported by any evidence OR by Islamic practices/law. NO Muslim man would legally adopt a child western sense) with a living father, regardless of the religion of the birth father.
Even if Soetoro did adopt Obama, believing that Obama had no living father, Obama’s last name would have never changed. Obama would have never changed his last name to Soetoro because of Islamic rules and law.
This is exactly what I’ve been saying: they simply cannot accept that a black man could be a legitimate president, without some kind of fraud.
It just doesn’t compute.
We’re like William Shatner trying to explain things to the Changeling robot, except they won’t self-destroy when confronted with logic.
Waiting on Orly to start issuing her value free screeds with the name and WND et-al to start demanding FOIA data attached fo this “new” name in 3….2….1….FAIL
So Stanley Ann is not Obama’s Mother? This would mean a 17 year old white girl marries an African man, and shortly there after adopts a biracial child on a student’s income?
Not that this matters, but Stanley Ann has unusual facial features. They clearly show up in the President’s face.
Sean, could you please explain the connection between your comment & mine? Thank you.
Sorry Sef, I was commenting on misanthropicus’ statement:
I was always intrigued by this possibility – and comparing photos of Stanley and dba Obama at different ages I wasn’t able to detect any of those “family” things that generally can be found in children/ parents pictures, even in diluted form (other that their shoe-sized chin) -And today, while going through the web, I found in the WND story covering this issue a photo with Stanley in Indonesia, dressed, in a long shot –
And what is interesting here is that Stanley (in her 40-s) appears a rather short, stocky type – none of her physical features having transferred to dba Obama whose physique has been always of a lanky boy, and later man –
Very interesting photo, indeed, and if Stanley’s and Barry’s juxtaposed photos would be shown to a neutral, unsuspecting party, I’m 100% certain that the hypothetical person would not infer from the photos any blood relationship between the two -The adoption theory also can explain Stanley’s disconnectedness as “mother” – hasn’t she dumped Barry in a few years, continuing her existence alone, with not much curiosity for her “child”?
It’s like the old joke: The woman says “I’m pregnant” And her not so smart Mom replies “Are you sure it’s yours?”
G, as you know those posters over at WND and the Post and Fail, expecially the one calling himself “misanthropicus” are hard core birthers. I used to debate him over at tROSL and he is way out there. No matter what evidence is released which supports the President, these individuals will spin it to meet their narrative that the President was not born in the US and the government was in on the conspiracy.
For example look at what Strunk writes…”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.”
First there is no Indonesian embassy in Hawaii. So it would be kind of difficult to renew a passport. Secondly there is no evidence that a person named Saebarkah Soetero ever existed, kind of like Steve Dunham and barry Soetero. But that doesn’t stop the ridiculous speculation. And then mixing in the CIA Rev Manning Fail is just icing on the cake. Delusional is the operative word of the day.
LMK has posted VERY IMPORTANT info. Dr. C, I think this is deserving of a separate topic & the appropriate kudos.
I believe that I posted on here a few months ago about Islam and adoption as well. The religion simply doesn’t accept adoption the way we do in the west, rendering all the theories about Soetoro adopting BHO as absurd. I am an adoptive parent and I remember how it struck an Islamic friend that I was going through the process. Then I did a little research and found the same conclusions as above.
Unfortunately, the birther community, instead of actually researching the topic, will be mentally masturbating to their conspiracy fantasies long after BHO is no longer president!!
Thanks for the information. It is always appreciative for people some research.
Cultures around the world have different definition of what constitute family and their relationships. This includes how a family can be extended.
Of course our friends over at the AGJ were not too happy with this evidence, which basically for most intelligent people prove that the President was born in Hawaii…But the comments are especially telling regarding their true feelings….
goldie wilbur Says:
August 1st, 2010 at 9:19 am
In my righteous anger I will say, please forgive me for this, I wish this woman had aborted her child. I hate abortion and God forgive me for saying, but it would have saved our Great Nation a lot of heartache and I just wonder, why oh why she even gave birth to him. It must have been predistined by Satan to have him born. He is really the spawn of the Devil, and God forgive me for these bad things I am saying. Each child in my opinion has a destiny to work out but this one??????GOD BLESS AMERICA
Phoebe Says:
August 1st, 2010 at 11:33 am
Goldie, you and I have said these things before, I hate BO and I have asked for God’s forgiveness just like you have! I don’t think an abortion was popular back then, I wish BO had been stillborn!! Then commie mommy wouldn’t have had anything to feel motherly about! No baby to take back to Hawaii or Seattle or wherever commie mommy went.
This scandal and coverup gets more astonishing on a daily basis. Bob, I sure hope you are right, I kindof feel that something will blow up sooner or later! It ALWAYS does, when there is so much being covered up and lies being told.
God Help Us All!
http://americangrandjury.org/stanley-ann-dunham-obama-soetoro-passport-application-what-is-obama-and-the-government-hiding#comment-37319
Larry M. Meyer Says:
August 2nd, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Patriots—I can’t even think of ANYTHING to SAY–BLATANT, COERCIVE, ILLEGAL, Probably TAMPERING with Government Documents!!
YOU and I Both know who is Responsible and WHY!!
This CREATURE that Inhabits our Capitol is BEYOND DEFINITION–every Description, Condition, Illness or Reasoning I think of is NOT ADEQUATE as an Explanation for WHAT, WHO OR???? O’BUMMER IS!!
The Nostradamus Quatrain is the closest thing-He is TRULY “THE ANTI-CHRIST!!!!!
live oak Says:
August 2nd, 2010 at 1:07 pm
I think of Kenya Boy as Satan in the flesh.
germak Says:
August 2nd, 2010 at 1:12 pm
He has done more in eighteen monrhs to destroy the “Civil Rights” movement than we can restore in 100 years! He has managed to divide us. We have now come to the line drawn in the sand. What are YOU going to do about it? I for one am ready to fight for my country. LIVE FREE OR DIE!
LOL! Great analogy!
Agreed. Kudos to LMK and thanks to her for sharing her personal story.
You are 100% on the mark. These people don’t care about reality. They are just driven by their disgusting and vile hate-based emotions. Truly sickening.
I don’t frequent the sites BL does, but it appears that some hospitals in birtherland are going to see some aneurysms soon.
Sef, agreed….To see the level of ignorance and hatred displayed by these individuals is scary…You have to wonder if these people are taking any kinds of medication….
G, you are 100% correct also. We have been saying for awhile that no matter what evideence is ever presented, these individuals would rather believe in fantasies about Kenyan births and government conspiracies. That combined with some of their latent and overt racist beliefs we can see are manifesting themselves in the comments on thoses sites…I like to repost the comments to remind everyone of the types of people the birthers really are.
Interestingly, in a couple of episodes of the TV series COLD CASE dealing with the racial conflicts of the 50ies and 60ies, because the offensive epithet “n*gg*r” could not or would not be used (even as an insult or a graffiti painted on a black person’s house), they used the made-up substitute CRITTER.
You see that now…Other phrases and words to make the overt racism seem more mainstream….However anyone reading some of the comments over at sites like Free Republic, CW, WND, and the Post and Fail don’t have to read for long to see what the posters are thinking and what they want to say….
More derangement from the Post and Fail…The disgusting things said about the family of the President has gone beyond reprehensible….This is just amazing….The hatred being shown by these nimwits…..
Chance says:
Tuesday, August 3, 2010 at 12:57 PM
I just read some of the comments on Am Thinker site. Different scenarios of who O’s father is.
Information revealed that S. Ann’s father was very fond of Obama Sr. Strange? My father would have been ready to kill a guy that just got his 18 year old daughter pregnant! My guess is this. Obama looks very much like his mother, who very much looks like her father. Father used to drug and drink alot with Frank Davis. Is it possible that Ann was raped by her father in one of his drugged up stupors. It could be possible and if it is true, is Obama then an NBC would have 2 citizens parents!!! Why else would Stanley like his son in law so much. It could only be b/c O Sr married Ann to give the kid a name and take the heat off of him.
SapphireSunday says:
Tuesday, August 3, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Checklt: Can you explain how you can tell this was proportional font? Is it because certain letters are squished or widened, as necessary, to make the line of type consistent in width? Therefore, it was produced on a computer (likely impossible in 1974)?
I noticed that page 79, the second page of a three-page letter written by Lolo, looks different from the other two pages. My untrained eye tells me it’s different, but maybe it’s not. Can you hazard an opinion?
Back to that letter of May ’74: S. Ann wrote that Lolo’s tax return was enclosed, but the tax return is noticeably absent from the released documents.
She was responding to a letter from the government that implied that Lolo improperly filed as a non-resident in order to get government benefits. SAD claimed that he filed as a resident; Lolo previously had told Mr. O’Shea that he didn’t know that he filed incorrectly–he had relied upon the help of a “friend” who worked at a bank. (Stanley or Madelyn?)
Ten days AFTER SAD’s letter to O’Shea, he wrote a letter to Lolo, in which it sounds as if he never received SAD’s letter “correcting” his mistake about Lolo’s filing status.
So one has to wonder if the letters crossed in the mail or perhaps there really was no letter written BY S. ANN SOETORO and sent by her to Mr. O’Shea on May 1, 1974. Note that both S. Ann Soetoro and Mr. O’Shea were in Hawaii, in the same city, while Lolo was in Djakarta.
btw, doesn’t S. Ann Soetoro’s signature on that letter look computer generated, too?
In any case, why did they redact Lolo’s tax return? Privacy? He’s deceased. As is S. Ann.
What government benefits was Lolo trying to receive? Could these be benefits for his non-resident alien “child”? Would it matter for tax purposes whether Lolo and/or Soebarkah was considered a permanent resident alien versus a non-resident alien?
Are they protecting the “privacy” interests of said child by redacting Lolo’s tax return? Did Lolo claim Soebarkah as his child on that tax return? Under what name was that child claimed on the tax return? Barack Hussein Obama II? Wanna make a bet?
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/01/inconsistencies-found-in-passport-applications-released-by-state-department-for-obamas-alleged-mother/comment-page-1/#comments
Of course, Strunk has gotten this wrong. The documents clearly show that only Lolo went to Indonesia in 1966. Stanley Ann and Barack didn’t go there until late 1967.
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;
Strunk is wrong again; it’s clear that the 1965 passport was good for only three years and it was renewed for two years in 1968.
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
Strike three. There is no evidence that Obama traveled with his mother on that flight.
And of course everything else is a figment of Strunk’s imagination.l
Thanks all!
In today’s Huffington Post there is an article on infertility and Islam. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/02/infertile-muslim-parents_n_668073.html :
After six years of infertility treatment and no successful pregnancies, Dilnaz got a phone call from her husband’s cousin in Pakistan, who already had three sons with another on the way.
If his wife gave birth to another boy, the cousin offered to let Dilnaz and her husband adopt him. Adoption, after all, has a long and respected lineage within Islam. The Prophet Muhammad himself was orphaned and raised by an uncle, and he later adopted a son.
Dilnaz called about 20 lawyers before she finally found one who said it could be done.
“Shariah law doesn’t allow for adoption if there’s a possibility of a living parent,” said Judy Stigger, who coordinates a handful of adoptions from Muslim countries each year as director of international adoption at The Cradle, an adoption agency in Evanston, Ill.
Islamic law does, however, allow something closer to permanent foster care. The child must know who his or her parents are and retain their name.
“For infertility, informal adoptions are looked upon favorably because this is your blood,” said Najma Adam, a social work professor and therapist who is herself Muslim. Her parents, in fact, gave her sister to an aunt and uncle who couldn’t have children of their own.
“I know my parents did it because they really just felt compassion,” Adam said.
Six months after Dilnaz got the first phone call, she and her husband got another one. “Congratulations,” the cousin told them. “You have a baby.” The cousin’s family brought the child to the U.S. when he was six months old.
Yet even that religiously acceptable solution became complicated three years later, when Dilnaz became pregnant with a son of her own. Some elders asked if she would be returning the adoptive son.
“I just felt like a boulder hit me,” Dilnaz said. They asked, “Why aren’t you giving your first child away? Why isn’t he going back to Pakistan? You don’t need him anymore.”
The article is fascinating!
Doc. C, if you are interested, I am happy to help put together more on Islam and adoption. It pretty much kills the “Soetoro adoption” myth. The birthers will still spin it, but they have no evidence, and are always claiming that a good Muslim without a son would have adopted Obama. Uh, no. Unless adoption records are found, there is nothing to this story (and never was). In addition, Indonesia would not have allowed Obama to be adopted since he had a living parent (two actually). The law in Indonesia for that time would need to be found, but I am confident that Indonesia would have denied any attempts by Soetoro to adopt Obama.
Channeling yguy: How could all 3 “return to Indonesia” if Barack & Stanley Ann had never been there before?? Apparently yguy is not Strunk.
Well done! I’m sure that Sven will dream up some explanation from his fertile imagination, but the entire adoption scenario has always been too implausible to be taken seriously.
if i’m not mistaken in “Barry and the Pirates”, chapter 14 “the Dragon Lady’s Curse”, sven has already written about obama sr returning to hawaii to sign adoption papers. of coarse there is no documentation of this or any other evidence to support the claim but……. what are you going to do ?
BL – Your actions and willingness to spend time on those vile sites to keep us updated is very much appreciated! If I haven’t said it directly before, thank you for all of your time & effort on this and keeping us informed. I’ve always felt that vigilance of the vile is absolutely necessary.
Thanks again LMK for more excellent info. I do hope that Dr. C takes you up on your offer – maybe even let you “guest blog” here and write a whole post on the topic.
Ya sure. Just send the text via the contact link.
The beginning of Obama is an Indonesian Refugee … I did not and still do not believe a parent would put a 10- year- old on an International flight and hope the kid successfully clears customs. But, if the US Embassy in Jarkarta is informed an Indonesian child with American grandparents has been orphaned or abandoned, then it’s an all expenses paid trip back to Hawaii with an escort to make sure the child clears customs and is delivered unharmed to his waiting grandparents.
Five years later, a Connecticut NGO is applying for Barack’s SSN on his behalf.
Thus, the reason for Stanley Ann’s expired passport. She’s supposed to be dead or missing. She couldn’t go into the US Embassy and renew her passport when the US State Dept is hurriedly processing Barry’s expedited Refugee status and travel docs.
Stanley Ann was very courageous.
Dunno. My friend Deep Birther was rather impressed by the FOIA. He called it a “smoking gun” in favor of Obama.
No problem. I agree. It is essential to keep informed regarding the birthers and what new fabrications they have decided to come up with….Although sometimes reading the vile commentary does make me wonder about some people….
Sven you have missed your calling. Write a novel-fiction you know. Goodness knows you have a very active imagination.
So the Airline personnel would not take care of an American child returning to the US to his waiting grandparents?
Thank you Sef. The problem is that some folks cannot accept that another culture would have its own set of customs and values. Therefore, they will pursue this idea of western adaption.
My daughter has a friend whose parents put her on flight from San Francisco to Tokyo by herself when she was 7 years old.
But in Sven’s world ‘refugee’ is clearly the more obvious answer.
More birther nonsense from the Post and Fail…
Jon Carlson says:
Tuesday, August 3, 2010 at 5:40 PM
Circa 1982 color photos were required for passports. Not any resemblance between high school Stanley Ann and the passport Stanley Ann.
I put her handwriting samples from high school days on a webpage with her high school photo:
http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/Annwriting1.htm
She makes a closed small t in high school writing samples while signatures on altered docs have a large loop in the small t.
On a linked page, Polarik, the document expert, comments on the writing on the divorce papers.
None of the early Obama’ photos is legit. Stanley Ann photos after high school are mismatches for the real thing. Everything out there is altered or forged or missing. The first family is a bunch of orphans!
http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/TheFirstBunch1.htm
Polarik says:
March 11, 2009 at 10:15 am
“All Ann Dunham signatures a total mismatch for Ann Dunham writing samples circa high school days. View the samples with source links.”
When I first viewed the signatures on the divorce papers, I had not seen Ann’s writing on her photo and in the yearbook. Those would be typical samples of a left-handed writer — but, in a much later photo of Annas an adult, she has a pen or pencil in her right hand.
The only way for the divorce signatures to match those on the photo and yearbook would be if (a) Ann had an injury or neuromuscular disorder to her writing hand, and/or (b) she switched from writing lefty to righty.
However, even with people who are ambidextrous, signing with either hand produces similarities in the structure of the handwriting.
When I first viewed the divorce paper signatures, I found them to be very deliberate in their execution, with the Soetoro signature seeming even more forced.
In contrast, there is an even and consistent flow in her writings on the photo and yearbook.
The basic structure of a person’s handwriting at 18 would be the same at 28, especially one’s signature. Signatures are very resistant to change unless a person deliberately wishes to change them and spends several hours per day until he or she can write it without thinking about it.
Personality changes can also affect handwriting just as physical changes can.
The most notable discrepancies are in the way she signs “Stanley.”
In her photo and yearbook signatures, the “S” is always disconnected from the rest of the name. There is also evidence of separating initial capital letters from the small case letters in her yearbook comments.
The second most distinguishing feature is found in how she writes a case “t” in lower case. In the high school samples, the upper part of the “t” has no loop, but is a solid line, with the base being an inverted “v” shape.
In all of the divorce paper samples, all of the “t’s” have large loops their upper part.
All of the capital “S’s” in “Stanley” are separate in her high school signatures, but connected as a continuation to the loop in the “t.”
The other striking think about the divorce paper signatures are their similarities. No two signatures by the same person are ever identical. These signatures are way too similar to have been made freely and normally.
Couple that with my initial impressions of the divorce paper signatures looking “slow, deliberate, and forced,” and what you get are enough signs to suspect that forgery was involved.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/01/inconsistencies-found-in-passport-applications-released-by-state-department-for-obamas-alleged-mother/#comments
So now they are handwriting experts. I love that part about “Document Expert Polarik”. It isn’t out of the ordinary for people to change their signatures when they are adults compared to high school. Nor is it out of the ordinary for those to change it when they leave elementary school. I used to write my signature in full cursive like my mother did when I was younger. After High School I made my signature more like my fathers.
Plus what evidence do we have that Stanley Ann changed her “handedness”? Maybe we are dealing with a mirror-image Stanley Ann.
Do you mean similar to the Star Trek “Mirror, Mirror” eposide where there was the alternate universe with an evil Federation and bad Kirk and Spock?
Oh. My. God.
She was replaced with her duplicate from an evil parallel universe – the pictures have been altered to hide her goatee (all evil duplicates have goatees). I’m sure Dr. Polarik can make up… Er. I mean find some evidence of this! Tell Orly to send up the Birther Signal!
The birther signal is hard to see in the sign its just one big asshole
Have you spotted the Heart of Gold around here lately?
Last I saw it Zaphod had hitched a ride to Asgard… I like the Bistromath better anyway.
Where is Doctor Who when we need him!?
Dr. Conspiracy,
If this name should be something different please do not be offended. You note with passing that the state departments statements that it ‘destroyed’ unimportant passport records. From people that have done research into relatives in the past, and my own experience, this rings as ludicrous. Now, remember that the person in question, whom they claimed they destroyed the records for in the 1980’s, was still alive and living and working outside the United States. This ‘claim’ is beyond rational reason. You don’t destroy passport records on a living breathing US citizen, whom is travelling. I don’t need to tell you this is beyond plausible, to believe this is utter stupidity. However, I suspect that you, claiming to be intelligent, have already checked to see if your passport records (or that of your friends) were destroyed in the 1980’s to verify this ‘claim’.
What I find interesting about the ‘cauterization’ of the records is that they failed to account for why Obama’s third grade friend has a picture of him while he was supposed to be in Indonesia according to the ‘released’ documents. You think with all the Obots, and the Justice Department, and those guys whom already went into Obama’s passport records, that someone would have realized that Obama was in school in Hawaii when he was supposed to be in Indonesia! ROFLOL
Finally, just between you and me, can you go ahead and post Obama’s Hawaii public school registration records—-this is public domain and must be on record, so we can see what his mother used as proof of birth to register him into the school which we clearly have photos for. Since you don’t believe in this Conspiracy, you should have no problem with this task and have it up for me. This should end this discussion quickly so everybody can just quit wasting time, don’t you agree?
justasking
Which third grade friend has a picture of Obama while he was supposed to be in Indonesia?
Nobody has claimed that all passport records were destroyed. The government says that passport applications were being destroyed as they were considered to be non-essential records. The records filed in the Strunk FOIA case include a message from the State Department dated February 6, 1985 which states that among the documents being purged were “routine passport applications for native born citizens.” That would include Obama’s mother, of course. The plan was to destroy such documents covering the years 1920-1968, Whether they actually got to 1968 is unclear. At the time of the message, they had purged the records through November, 1961 and they were working on the records from December, 1961 through 1965.
However, I suspect that you, claiming to be intelligent, have already checked to see if your passport records (or that of your friends) were destroyed in the 1980′s to verify this claim’.
You’re assuming that Doc C. filed a passport application prior to 1968. We don’t know this to be the case. Also, he cannot check the records of his friends without their permission, unless those friends are deceased. In any event, we don’t know that Doc C. has any friends who applied for passports prior to 1968.
What I find interesting about the cauterization’ of the records is that they failed to account for why Obama’s third grade friend has a picture of him while he was supposed to be in Indonesia according to the released’ documents.
It’s a well-established fact that when Obama was in the third grade, he traveled back to Hawaii for an extended visit with his grandparents, whom he had not seen since he was six years old. During that visit, he attended elementary school for one semeseter at Noelani Elementary School. No one has ever claimed that he was in Indonesia at this time.
Finally, just between you and me, can you go ahead and post Obama’s Hawaii public school registration records—-this is public domain and must be on record, so we can see what his mother used as proof of birth to register him into the school which we clearly have photos for
.
If you believe that Obama’s Hawaii public school registration records are in the public domain, you are not very well informed. Why don’t you try ordering them yourself, and see how far you get?
It’s here:
http://newsone.com/obama/news-one-staff/obamas-3rd-grade-photo-sent-to-him-by-classmate/
Except he wasn’t “supposed to be in Indonesia.” He was on an extended visit with his grandparents. and while there he attended third grade at Noelani Elementary School.
Justasking is Justanothertroll.
It is funny how they circle in, drop off a birther talking point or two, then after getting soundly thrashed with contradictory facts, they retreat back to the safety of moderated birther blogs where never a contradictory voice is heard- their version of an Orwelian paradise.
as stated above, not public records. also, i don’t know how they handled it in the 60’s in hawaii but so far i haven’t been asked to show any proof of citizenship to enroll my daughter in school.
well, what do you know. honolulu school district does require a birth certificate, passport or student visa.
Cowardice.
They didn’t support the records of the passport – they destroyed the records of routine paperwork submitted to apply for the passport. Once a passport is past its expiration date there certainly is no reason to keep that information on hand — why would any agency need to have the documentation supporting issuance of an expired passport?
Because obviously Obama came back to Hawaii at some point in the interim, probably for an extended visit. The documents that were released tell nothing about his travel back and forth. It is likely that Obama was sent back to live with his grandparents for a period of weeks or months when he was young– perhaps because of his mother’s concern over the quality of his schooling. After all, they moved him from one school to another in Indonesia — perhaps they weren’t happy with what he was getting and decided to try out the public schools in Hawaii in the interim — but in the end decided to bring him back to Indonesia and work to prepare him to meet the entrance requirements at the prestigious private school he ended up attending in Hawaii from 5th grade onwards.
No, those records are protected by FERPA, as anyone with half a brain would know. Of course they are NOT “in the public domain” …. even if they still exist. (And despite all the hype about “permanent records” — public schools do not keep enrollment records on hand forever.)
Which would be wrong. I didn’t get my first passport until the 1990’s.
Fairly certain schools ask for proof of age- i.e. BC’s- not proof of citizenship. Considering the rarity of copying machines in the 60’s- its incredibly unlikely that the school records would show anything more than a check mark that the age had been verified.
You may find it ludicrous, but that’s what the State Department official in charge of records retention said.
As for the Hawaii school record, if the Indonesian record doesn’t show the documentation source, why should the Hawaiian? Back in the old days, you could do quite a lot without documentation. Those were simpler times. I didn’t even get a copy of my birth certificate until I was in my 40’s and that was for a passport.
But the question is Batguano, did they require it back then?
I vaguely remember having to bring my birth certificate to register for school after we moved from Phoenix to Tucson when I was starting the fourth grade. As proof of age, not citizenship. The same to register for Little League. I think my driver’s license sufficed for getting into University, but I can’t recall that (it was the 60’s after all, and you know what they say, if you can remember the 60’s, you weren’t there… 🙂 )
True enough. I got my driver’s license and social security card without one. None of schools (college and graduate) I ever attended asked for one.The only time in my adult life (since I’ve never let my license expire or lost my SS card) I ever needed a birth certificate was to get my passport.
http://obamarecords.com/?p=130
http://theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm#PreSchool
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=100613
Dr. Conspiracy,
In response to the above. You must register your child for school, with a vaild birth certificate. See above references. BTW, just go and try to get your child into a public school without a birth certificate, or for that matter into little league. These ARE public record documents (his grades are not) and they are ‘lost or stolen’. Even in 1960’s you had to provide a birth certificate for public school education. Those records are still available for everyone in Obama’s class—EXCEPT OBAMA. Your statement that these are not public record, are false.
Conspiracy is a bunch of people getting together to ‘make truth’, something like the cabal that did the Journolist and websites like Huffington Post, Snoopes, and Fackcheck which were all funded by Soros or affiliates.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/08/journolist_update.html
The Journolist cabal, and the numbers of internet sites, blogs much like yours, that were clearly 1)taking money to blog and support a ‘political agenda 2) Giving false information and attacks for political agendas 3) ‘spinning’ true information to minimze damage, truly represents a Conspiracy.
Journolist, Huffington Post, The DOJ, Snoopes, Factcheck, and many, many, many other journalists and bloggers have attempted to bury this story. Yet, the Obama eligibility refuses to die, simply because even public documentation is tainted, altered, or just ‘missing’. We now know that a conspiracy exists, that was proven by Journolist cabal, What has that conspiracy involved, whom was accepting money, whom was on the list to subvert facts, what connection to the Obama eligibility, those are the real questions that remain unanswered. That is probably why 2/3 of the Journolist members and most of the communications are still ‘not released’.
Justasking
Just Asking – again, your words betray that you aren’t “just asking”, but are merely a propaganda concern troll spewing BS. Your little screed here is complete nonsense and is another useless and weak attempt at concern trolling.
First of all, Snopes & FactCheck have been around for years and years. They are not politically motivated – but simply driven on checking into stories and using facts and evidence to debunk lies, rumours and urban legends.
Second, the DOJ…I assume you are referring to the “Department of Justice”. Wow, you are really off your meds here. For one thing, they are a government organization, not a news organization….so your lumping them in with the others you mentioned is just so illogical and unrelated that it simply makes no sense.
You are just mad at all these organizations because you are pushing fantasy nonsense and they have revealed that your myths have no basis to them. The only deceivers are folks like you.
For you to claim that this blog in any way makes money or has political backing behind it is laughable. The point of this blog is clearly listed and quite simple – following, investigating and debunking conspiracy theory that is related to Obama. So far, just about all of it has turned out to be utter nonsense or fantasy speculation completely unsupported by reality. Therefore, all we end up with is junk to debunk. Such as the nonsense you try to peddle.
Journalistic sties aren’t trying to “bury” any story. If they don’t report on it that often, it is simply because all of the birther stuff is such a nonsense joke that it is rarely worth commenting on at those places. Here, that is what we talk about all the time.
Finally, you need to stop making stuff up. You state that “public documentation is tainted, altered, or just missing”… but there is no credibility to support what you just said. Someone blocking out a field on a scanned image because they think they shouldn’t display the info to the public is not actually “altering” any actual documents. Nor is there any evidence of any “tainted” documents…whatever that means in your fevered imagination. Finally, when privacy laws state that you have no right to access other peoples info, that doesn’t mean that such info is “missing”, just that you are not entitled to it. Likewise, when you make up unsupported scenarios and request documents that don’t exist – that doesn’t create a missing document either, as the document in question never existed in the first place.
I’m Justasking Justasking for proof that Soros funds any of those sites…..
Soros has become the big boogyman to the conspiracy-addicted right wing nuts. They see him everywhere.
I reported on Soros’ involvement in January of 2009.
But seriously, if Soros were funding the Obot sites, I would expect them to be a lot slicker in appearance.
You’re a deeply disturbed person in need of immediate medical attention.
Justsaying.
clearly Justasking is being paid handsomely by Soros to portray the birthers as irrational and uneducated.
Hey, where can I sign up?
A new PJ member, Miss Meh, just posted a link to a White House video where a copy of the President’s passport is shown, Guess what, it is issued by the USA and shows he was born in Hawaii.
http://www.politijab.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=4638&view=unread&sid=636605aec63f16bc761a020d3e2378ae#unread
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtUkeVHfj5w&feature=player_embedded#!
Actually, proper credit should go to PJ’er mimi. She posted the link earlier today in another thread on PJ.
For a historical perspective on how Obama became President, can we see his Form SS-5 Social Security application?
Hi Sven,
Please take a pill, and call your doctor in the morning.
Better make that a birther control pill! LOL, right? Right??
It would be interesting to compare it to Bush’s. Sven, where can I see Bush’s?
Oh, the good ol’ days are gone but not forgotten.
I remember with Obots used Barry Soetoro’s Indonesian school record as proof Obama was born in Honolulu, HI.
And now Obama denies he was ever Barry Soetoro and he objects to a FOIA request to see Barry Soetoro’s records on file with the US State Department. Yet, there is a picture of “Barry” attending school in Hawaii in 1969 even though the Obama narrative is that he was in Indonesia from 1967 to 1971.
I’m starting to get the feeling Obama doesn’t like Barry Soetoro.
Dear Sven,
I suggest coffee, lots and lots of coffee in the morning before you post anything, your post is only surpassed by Mad Ole Orly’s legal briefs in it’s disconnect from reality. Poor soul……
Sven who is the Barry Soetoro person. The main proof of Barack Obama’s birth is Obama’s vital record about his birth in Hawaii’s Department of Health. So, It is hard to determine if you are just suffering from not enough sleep.
Sven,
That “feeling” you’ve got is called dementia; better see you doctor before you start wandering around in your underwear.
Start?
This is Sven.
Zoinks! Way to activate my gag reflex.
That’s his job interview photo.
I can’t help but wonder if your IP comes up Massachusetts. Regardless, I don’t think there is a medicine in the world that can help you…and there is no plastic surgeon in the world who can fix that nose.
When did Obama deny that he was ever known as Barry Soetoro when he lived in Indonesia? Please provide a link to your evidence.
he objects to a FOIA request to see Barry Soetoro’s records on file with the US State Department
When has Obama objected to any FOIA request? Please provide a link to your evidence.
Yet, there is a picture of “Barry” attending school in Hawaii in 1969 even though the Obama narrative is that he was in Indonesia from 1967 to 1971.
When has Obama ever said that he never returned to Hawaii to visit his grandparents while he was in the third grade? Please provide a link to your evidence.