Wall Street Journal via James Taranto continue propaganda lies.


[Ed. Updated 6:26 AM August 3, 2009. Many of you are asking for analysis of the new alleged Kenyan birth certification.  However, the back to back articles I have written about the Wall Street Journal’s blatant propaganda are too important to move from the front page today.  People need to be made aware they are being lied to by the press.  This new desperation to use big lie propaganda might possibly have something to do with the recent Kenya birth certification information.  But I would just remind my readers that this new Kenyan documentation has come to us in the form of a color copy of a color photograph.  The details in the document – names of Government officials, place of birth etc. – have not been independently verified.  Much more verification should have been done before bringing the document forward.  That being said, if it turns out to be genuine, it will be the single most important story in Presidential history as a Kenyan birth would mean Mr. Obama is not now and never has been a basic US citizen, forget the more difficult requirement of natural born citizen.  My research indicates he can never be a natural born citizen – even if born on US soil – since (he admits) his birth status was governed by Great Britain.]

The Wall Street Journal and James Taranto came under pressure after our article here yesterday revealed propaganda wherein they attempted to convince readers a statute exists which does not exist.

The Wall Street Journal – instead of owning up to the false reporting – has chosen to experiment with further propaganda by repeating the lie again.  And in doing so, they have taken the final leap from journalism to big lie propaganda.  Repeat the lie as often as you can and people will accept it as truth.  This is the tactic employed by the Wall Street Journal and it’s straight out of Jospeh Goebbel’s original playbook:

Goebbels rose to power in 1933 along with Hitler and the Nazi party, and he was appointed propaganda minister. One of his first acts was the burning of books rejected by the Nazis. He exerted totalitarian control over the media, arts, and information in Germany. In that position, he perfected an understanding of the “Big Lie” technique of propaganda, which is based on the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses.

The original propaganda lie stated by Taranto at the Wall Street Journal was this:

“Someone born overseas and after 1986, but otherwise in identical circumstances to Obama, would be a natural-born citizen thanks to a law signed by President Reagan.”

No such law exists. No such law was signed by Ronald Reagan.  It’s a lie.

If it weren’t a lie, the Wall Street Journal would answer by printing statutory code references and text which support its reporting.  But that’s not what happened because no such statute exists.  The Wall Street Journal made it up out of thin air.

And when we called them on it, instead of acknowledging that no such law exists containing the phrase “natural born citizen”, the Wall Street Journal chose to repeat the same lie again.  Here is the second lie.  It appears in yesterday’s follow up by Taranto:

“Other statutes have extended natural-born citizenship to some children born overseas to U.S. citizens.”

There isn’t a single statute in all of US law which extends “natural-born citizenship” to anybody.

No current US statute even uses the words “natural-born citizen”.

It’s shocking to see the Wall Street Journal come so far out of the propaganda closet.  They have taken that final step into fascism – a willing embrace of big lie propaganda.  And Joseph Goebbels would be proud.  The ministry of propaganda is here. 


193 Responses to “Wall Street Journal via James Taranto continue propaganda lies.”

  1. It’s a game of “cat and mouse” out there, folks.

    It’s great to research and be educated on ALL legal aspects.

    However, NEWS FLASH – aside from making the public aware and making “them” look like FRAUDS, it will NOT win the “War”

    “We” need to be CREATIVE (non-violent and without breaking the law or “we” are just as guilty).

    Think “outside of the box”

    Develop a strategy (procedure) and tactics (tools) that will not only win this “War” but also avoid anything like this (or worse) from EVER happening again!

  2. Shocked?

    I am not, the media has become nothing but propaganda for several years. We shouldn’t even be having this discussion if ‘investigative reporting’ was really going on.

    I truly hope, for the good of the country, the POTUS comes clean soon.

    [Ed. You make the very observant point that we no longer have investigative journalism. It’s given way to herds of individuals following one script… and op ed pieces. That’s it. Everyone has the same story. There’s not more Watergate type blockbusters. It’s all one newspaper.]

  3. Leo,
    I added your latest post here into the “comments” at WSJ for Mr. Goebbel, oops, I meant Mr. Taranto and his readers’ enjoyment…I hope you don’t mind.

    [Ed. I do not mind. Post my writings anywhere.]

  4. Leon Brozyna Says:

    Well, well, well – would you just look at this! Read it last night and was going to draw it to your attention but I got tied up on something else.


    And this morning I just saw your comments posted to that ‘story’. Looks like the media’s starting to catch on that it’s not about the birth certificate, but the parentage. And they still get it wrong. Other than Jefferson who was covered by the ‘grandfather clause’, I assume all the other foreign born parents were naturalized prior to the birth of their future presidential sons. Now I’ll rummage through your blog to find what you said about Chester Arthur.

    And if memory serves, during his campaign the media was quite enthused about the fact that Mr. Obama had such a rich, multicultural background – something not likely to happen to a natural born child whose loyalties would less likely be diluted.

    Leon Brozyna
    CW2, USA (Ret)

  5. Unbamboozleus Says:

    I just stumbled across this personal invitation from Glen Beck to be Constitutional Watchdogs.

  6. Cancel subscriptions, list WSJ advertisers (including those of their parent company FOX), bombard them with complaints, and quit using products & services.

  7. The key here is an extrapolation of the phrase “natural born citizen” in a manner that is not backed up by any plausible evidence.

    Leo, you make the argument that NBC is somehow related to “natural law,”

    [Ed. No, I don’t do that. NBC is national law. Natural law? What’s that got to do with being President?]

    and have inserted the idea that “statutory citizenship” disqualifies someone from being President, and that is simply not true.

    [Ed. I can’t think of any class of statutory citizens who would be eligible to be President. Please elaborate. If a citizen is natural born he doesn’t need a statute.]

    Not that any of this applies to the President – he was born in the United States and is clearly a “natural born citizen,”

    [Ed. The only thing clear about this is that your statement is wrong. There is no law or case which states that simply being born in the US makes one eligible to be President. What if Kim Jong Il were to get a North Korean woman pregnant in North Korea and then have the pregnant woman smuggled into the country to have the child on US soil? Do you honestly believe that child is eligible to be President? Answer this question before posting again.]

    but the Founders DID NOT exclude anyone who was a citizen at birth from being President, in fact, given the travel restrictions at the time it is unlikely that they would deny the children of American diplomats the right to be President.

    Can yo show us your evidence for the exclusion of “citizens at birth?”

    [Ed. Yes, read Wong Kim Ark. Justice Gray indicates quite clearly that WKA was not a natural born citizen despite having been born in the US.]

  8. Well at least Leo you are implementing the Jesus principle of responding with “It is Written” when Satan is trying to tempt him three times.

  9. MissTickly Says:

    Thanks for looking it over and giving me your opinion.
    We’ll see what happens.

    BTW it took six hours for me to get my router back up. Just weird.

  10. Besides the 9 e-mails to WSJ and 3 or 4 to Drudge, I just sent this one to Lou Dobbs. He seems to be the only journalist who is starting to make waves. Let’s get a groundswell of e-mails to Lou to encourage, support and educate him, folks!

    Dear Mr. Dobbs,

    By now you should be aware of the James Taranto propaganda at the WSJ whereby he is apparently playing lackey to Obama by declaring who a natural born citizen is. Obama can never be made what he wasn’t born as. Please expose this propaganda for what it is. Also, please read about this natural born issue by the following two attorneys at their blogs. They have done a real service to our country in explaining and documenting what and who is a natural born citizen: Mario Apuzzo at http://puzo1.blogspot.com and Leo Donofrio at https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com

    It would be absolutely amazing if you could get one or both of these gentlemen on your program. America needs to hear from them! Thank you and God bless you. Keep fighting, Lou, because you have no idea of the army behind you!

  11. There is a lot of honest ignorance out there about the specific, constitutional meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen.” But I think Big Media is committed to Obama and will persist as long as possible in denying the difference between natural-/native-born status.

    In so doing, Big Media is essentially justifying Obama’s commission of false swearing when he signed an Arizona “Candidate’s Nominating Paper” that said, “I am a natural born citizen of the United States.”

    The crux of the matter is that Obama, if pushed to the wall, can say, “Well, gee, I thought ‘natural born’ and ‘native born’ meant the same thing. In common usage, no distinction is made, and even reliable sources like the Wall Street Journal maintain that there is no difference. It’s all an innocent mistake.” That from a grad of Harvard Law who supposedly taught the Constitution at the college level.

    Leo and the WSJ are in a proxy fight right now for IMPEACHMENT.

  12. Tony Stark Says:

    The Wall Street Journal must think that most of its readers are just sheep who blindly trust in them to spoon feed them “facts.” The loss of any journalistic integrity among reporters and editors since the halcyon days of the Watergate scandal is a big reason why so many newspapers are losing subscribers and folding up; there are far more reliable and truthful sources of information on the Constitution and law with regards to Obama’s lack of NBC status available such as Leo’s blog.

  13. Those of us who care about truth, the law, our Constitution and the blood shed by our founding fathers in the creation of this sovereign country, which was snatched from the Crown, we need to look within ourselves to see how firm are our convictions. I have decided for myself that I will never give up, give in, roll over, accede to or acquiesce to the rule of ungodly men who seek to rule by dictate and not by law. I pray my convictions and actions can be (and should be) lawful. The question remains: if the very foundation of our law is ripped out from under American citizens and we no longer have the rule of law, how can we respond “lawfully”?

    As an aside, here are two interesting articles on the NBC issue written by two gentlemen who I do not believe have a law degree, but nonetheless, they get it!

    J.B. Williams article at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13295

    and the “Gunslinger’s article at http://gunslingersjournal.blogspot.com/2009/07/answering-anons-question.html

  14. Kal says to be creative and think outside the box, so here goes:

    The Joint Chiefs request that Obama establish as a fact that he is a natural born citizen–in the constitutional sense of that term. Obama’s attorneys hold secret meetings with the Joint Chiefs, Congressional leaders and the Supreme Court in which it becomes clear that Obama cannot establish the requisite fact. Obama is persuaded to resign and to accept deportation to Indonesia, sans Secret Service.

    Joe Biden’s tenure is untenable because it depended on Obama’s fraud, so Nancy Pelosi takes over the White House and comforts the nation like a good mother should.

    Now the Democrats can claim two great trophys: first black prez and first woman prez–is that a great political party or what?

  15. Leo

    When you get a moment read* today’s WSJ comments on Taranto’s latest column, by “Joe the Blogger.” He ( maybe it’s you?) narrows the wiggle room considerably. Please let us know what your take is on his effort.

    *4-5000 words or I’d sent it along.

    [Ed. Joe the Blogger has been on the scene for a while. I am not him. I only post as me and my comments at The Right Side of Life are under the tag “Dancin Rick” because he’s my idol – you know the guy that dance against Ben Stiller in that disco scene in the Starsky and Hutch remake.]

  16. Mr. Donofrio,

    You have shown your optimistic side, again…the WSJ is staffed by those that went to college not knowing what they would do with their lives and settled on journalism (after many years of [Ed. snipped that one] protesting the excesses of the rich, and hugging a few trees). Taranto et al are politically nearsighted, lackadaisical regarding research, and underwhelmed by the necessity of being accountable for their actions.

    Because we care doesn’t mean others see the same responsibility.


  17. Taranto writes “for profit” and he writes “for hire” so anything he presents to the commons is commercial activity; his standing and “brand” represent financial capital, which he attempts to increase each time he writes for-hire, for-profit or for commercial public recognition addressing the commons via professional or for-profit entities.

    I don’t challenge the free speach of Mr. Taranto, but question his commercial practice in promulgating lies for profit and/or personal gain.

    In the absence of any correction, we have here not an opinion but a brand building economic activity made valuable by the commission of a fraud.

    While in the commons of commerce in the State of New York, one cannot engage in economic activity made valuable by the commission of a fraud without violating consumer protection and other relevant statutes.

    I have been amazed that Journalism engaged in commercial speech has enjoyed the impunity it has; I do not begrudge it relief from simple malpractice or the respite of public correction, but to engage in willful and hardened fraud is entirely another matter, especially when doing so to protect or enhance its economic interests.

    If we must regulate and punish car and vacuum cleaner salesmen advancing their livelihood by engaging in willful and deliberate fraud, why is Taranto so special to enjoy impunity?

    Another matter for another day? Certainly.

    Something to think about nonetheless.

  18. The wsj will very soon be doing just what i said in cmment yesterday. They’ll drag out any number of liberal law school professors who will say that cit and nbc are the same thing.

    And the entire msm (lamestream media) will begin using it in their talking points to ridicule anyone that wants barry to prove anything he says is a fact.

    [Ed. I don’t doubt that. The big problem for them is the fact that both Minor and Wong Kim Ark state that the definition of Natural born citizen does not appear in the Constitution. If born on US soil meant that one was a nbc, then the definition would appear in the 14th Amendment. But both SCOTUS decisions state clearly that the definition is not in the COnstitution… so they are easily defeated on the front.]

  19. Leo,
    Here is what Taranto says about your lawsuit.

    “Ah, but the law is the law, the birthers will reply–and who can disagree? The birthers can. Whether out of ignorance or dishonesty, they misrepresent the law at every turn. Back in November, as we noted, the birthers were claiming that the Supreme Court had ordered Obama to “prove” his eligibility for the presidency. In fact, all that had happened was that a lawyer had asked the high court to hear an appeal of a lower court’s decision throwing out his frivolous lawsuit for lack of standing. The justices, of course, denied the petition, and all such lawsuits have been summarily dismissed for lack of standing. The law is the law.”

    [Ed. Justice Clarence Thomas affirmed that my case was not frivolous. When a stay application is frivolous, upon being submitted to a second justice after the first denies it, the second will also deny it. It is true that many cases are referred to the full court as a matter of procedure these days… but not the frivolous ones. There are plenty of stay applications which are not referred to the full court. The mantra you will here is that all stay applications given to a second justice are referred to the entire court… it’s not true. I have pointed out various stay application from 2008 which were denied without full court referral by the second justice.]

    Isolate, Ridicule, but present no FACTS. It’s the Alinsky way.

    [Ed. Taranto and the WSJ have lost credibility this week. Not I. It’s not like this blog is going mainstream anytime soon and I don’t make my living off this blog. But this guy has taken a serious hit to his credibility this wee. Furthemore, he’s obviously paying attention to what I have to say and so is the WSJ… when such former titans are forced to cover their ass by a little nobody like me… then you see how this country is supposed to operate. How much longer will people have their voices heard? I think we are on the verge of extinction, but for now I’m happy to at least be able to shed light on the darkness of propaganda.]

  20. It is becoming more and more obvious that the Obamamaniacs have succeeded in making the birth the only issue with the result that anyone trying to raise other questions and issues will be automatically tagged a “Birther.” As a consequence, otherwise responsible journalists and pundits shy away from even bringing up the subject of Obama’s eligibility lest they be lumped in with the “crazies” who are the real “Birthers.” Somehow we must phrase the challenge to his eligibility in such a way as to gain the support of cowardly, but otherwise good people.

  21. Larry D. Crumbleyq Says:

    If a lie is told long enough it is believed. I do not like to get lied to, and we as citizens have had it with all of this. I really do not think that he-(OBAMA)-is natural born, and I do not care what people that are suppose to be looking our for us, like certain anchors on certain news-channles say that they are. Hint-BILL O’REILLY, and others like him. This is not about race, although that is what they cry about. This is about the “TRUTH”, and I know that is an ugly word for some of you, but it is about the truh, and we as Americans need to be trully informed about this. Thanks for your time.

    Thanks again,
    Larry D. Crumbley

  22. Mitchell Staff Says:


    I agree with your statement but nothing will change their (MSM) agenda. They know that they spread lies, that’s their job. It’s what happens when you allow corporate quasi government control of the media. They put their people in, then tell them what to say.

    Your statement that we should “think outside the box” should be taken more literally. Think away from the box. I had my Dish Network shut off in August 08. Not because of some protest but because I’m cheap. Within a week or so (I hardly watched any TV even though I do have major networks avail.) I started having more energy and was getting more things done. I just had my cholesterol checked at work and it was down 80 points. And I have to admit to eating a lot of junk food. So my idea is to have a “blackout day”. Where we enact our own modern tea party. If we could get a quarter million to simultainiously shut down their cable, dish, att… whatever, the advantages would be three fold.

    A: You would save money!
    B: You would not hear their slanted opinions, lies, and selective persecutions.
    C: You won’t be supporting the propaganda and spin machines that are MSM.

    See. Win, win, win. Well anyway that’s my idea.

  23. Godwin’s Law

  24. Just ran across this. Seen it?


    [Ed. Read it. Thanks for pointing out the link. doesn’t really apply to the facts of Obama’s case.]

  25. GOOD vs. EVIL – A “Taoist” lesson….

    To understand the Taoist notion of good and evil, it is important to distinguish between the “concept” of evil versus the “reality” of evil.

    As a concept, Taoist do not hold the position of good against evil; rather, they see the interdependence of all dualities. So when one labels something as a good, one automatically creates evil.

    The “reality” of good and evil is that ALL actions contain some aspect of each. This is represented in the t’ai chi, more commonly referred to as the yin-yang symbol. Any action would have some negative (yin) and some positive (yang) aspect to it. Taoists believe that nature is a continual balance between yin and yang and that any attempt to go toward one extreme or the other will be ineffective, self-defeating and short-lived.

    Another way of understanding this is that the Sage person understands the reality of good and evil, whereas the fool concentrates on the concept of good and evil. The Sage knows that any evil will soon be replaced by good, the fool is forever fruitlessly trying to eliminate evil.

    [Ed. I’ll play the fool then. Evil must go. And it will.]

  26. Leo,

    Thanks so much for all the work you’ve done in trying to educate the American public on the constitutional qualifications to be president. Yesterday, an Indianapolis Star columnist penned a column attacking one of our local congressmen for supporting federal legislation requiring future presidential candidates to produce proof they are at least 35 years of age and a natural born citizen. The columnist attacked the congressman for becoming a part of the “ridiculous and mean-spirited debate over whether President Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen.” The columnist is so misinformed he believes the term natural born citizen is synonymous with being a U.S. citizen. It is unbelievable how uneducated and uninformed our citizens have become when it comes to understanding our constitution. This makes it easy for dishonest reporters to obfuscate and twist the facts and law at hand. Sadly, I find my fellow attorneys as uninformed on this subject matter as lay persons. The truth is that these folks think having the natural born citizen requirement is just plain silly and so they want to read it of the constitution–you know–like that pesky wording in the Second Amendment. Keep up the good work, Leo.

  27. Leo,

    If SCOTUS were to hear this case – the case of Obama’s dual-citizenry and the natural born citizen criteria set forth in the Constitution – would the Court subpoena Obama’s records such as his birth certificate or is that how SCOTUS works?

    [Ed. It aint gonna happen. The record of the case must come from the lower courts. SCOTUS does not have original jurisdiction as far as I can tell. ]

  28. I guess it’s fun to talk about this, but the truth of the matter is that the SCOTUS had the chance to consider this argument – i.e., that supposedly the President’s father’s citizenship would mean that he was only a “statutory” citizen at birth as opposed to a “natural born one” – and rejected it.

    [Ed. Nobody knows why the stay applications weren’t heard. It could have been based on lower court procedure or even that SCOTUS felt they had no jurisdiction to stop the e
    lectoral college. They just didn’t say. Regardless, they might have known we were right and looked the other way as well. Nobody knows. But I agree that nothing will be done in the courts. That doesn’t mean that nothing should be done.]

    They considered it and did not even decide that it was worth a hearing. Yes, there is the claim that by not rejecting it outright, Justice Thomas referred it to conference and so must have thought it had merit, but that could have also meant that he wanted to avoid it being resubmitted to each and every Justice before finally being dumped permanently.

    [Ed. It also means he did not believe it was frivolous because frivolous applications are dismissed by the second justice.]

    The generally accepted definition of NBC is this: born in the United States, or born overseas under conditions that grant citizenship at birth.

    [Ed. That’s the generally accepted definition for those who don’t want to see Obama removed from office, but it has no basis in law.]

  29. FYI, here is my letter to my senator today

    Senator ____, I believe that the election of Barack Obama was a fraud because he swore falsely when he signed the Arizona “Candidate’s Nominating Paper,” which declared “I am a natural born citizen of the United States.” You will soon vote on a Supreme Court nominee, but before that vote is called I ask, urge and request that you move to delay the vote until the Senate first puts to rest the serious and legitimate questions about Obama’s eligibility by: 1) Inspecting an official copy of Obama’s original birth certificate, delivered under seal directly from the State of Hawaii, and 2) Asking the Supreme Court to clarify the definition of “natural born citizen” so that the senate can support and defend the Constitution (relevant sections include Article II Section 1, and the 12th, 14th, and 20th Amendments). VP Biden’s tenure depends on Obama’s legality, so it may also be null and void. Please don’t take this matter lightly. Our founders surely intended that no one who held divided allegiance at birth should be put in command of our army.

  30. Joe the Blogger is a member at my website.

    If it is okay with you, Leo, I offer this for all to have, to share, etc

    “Natural Born Ciitizen definition, and other related quotes”

    I include the portion of the 14th amendment becaue directly next is Chief Justice Waite saying “The Constitution does not in words say…”


    And I quote the !st Congress when they called children of citizens born beyond the sea .. “considered at natural born citizens”

    They were not called natural born citizens, but were to be “considered as”

    [Ed. The words “natural born” were repealed in 1795.]

  31. Leo,
    i know i’ve been flippant and having fun with these posts recently, but today i decided to get a little more serious. seems u have stirred up a real hornet’s nest now…

    i know researching via wikipedia is like writing a doctor’s thesis with Cliff Notes, but guess what i found here:

    “Deprivation of British nationality (Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002)

    Under amendments made by the Act, British nationals can be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory. This provision applied to only dual nationals-—it is not applicable if deprivation would result in a person’s statelessness.

    Prior to this law, British nationals who acquired that status by birth or descent (as opposed to registration or naturalisation) could not be deprived of British nationality.”

    …read that last sentence again. Barry Jr. is STILL a British subject by descent. as u stated earlier, no US statute can take his British citizenship away, and neither could any UK statute.

    i’m fairly certain the framers of our Constitution did not want any British subjects to become our President. what say u?

    [Ed. It’s an issue which needs more discussion – Is Obama a UK citizen right now?”]

  32. I too saw that Glenn Beck wants Watchdogs for the Constitution. This morning I sent him an email. Leo, I used your text in blend with my own. I believe this is the way to get the point across.
    If you teach a reporter he will argue with you. If you tease him he will take the credit, when he figures it out, as his own. He too will discover the story if pointed correctly.

    The email, and please send support to Glenn. He asked for it at his “watchdog site.”

    “This watchdog can’t get a bone!

    In response to “Be a Constitutional Watchdog for America”

    I have been a watchdog. I bark at the deaf, I bare teeth to the blind, and lately I resorted to biting the apparent nerveless.

    This began one year ago with a simple question. Now the question continues to never be asked although many seem to answer. The shredding of the Constitution starts with the first cut. I pose the question, one last time. And remember this is a question of the Constitution; I need only its answer to believe that the rest of the “intent” of the greatest document remains defendable. If the answer is to discredit the person asking, don’t fear because when the constitution is tampered with enough that the cries of the masses go out, I will rise for those who failed to defend it when I asked.

    During the election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was “governed” by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell the American people how a natural born citizen of the United States can be governed – at birth – by British law?


    The 14th amendment does not address “natural born”.
    All the senators agreed in April of 2008. When extending “natural born” to John McCain Mr. Obama has stated he is aware the 14th Amendment does not cover “Natural Born”. He submitted S. RES. 511, along with Leahy, McCaskill, Coburn, Clinton and Webb.

    I quote,
    ” Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that,
    to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person
    must be a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ of the United States;

    Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears
    in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution
    of the United States;”


    I guess a lot of senators agree that “natural born Citizen” in NOT defined in the Constitution as of April 30, 2008 when they voted on S. RES. 511.


    The 1st time this made it to Talk Radio was 2 weeks ago on Medved’s show. He let me speak just long enough to answer my question by saying “his mom is German and he was offered German citizenship but he refused.” WHAT? This was followed by music and a commercial.

    If we pretend the 14th amendment defines “birthright” citizenship the next argument is a court case called Wong Kim Ark. This is the same case that has been at the forefront of Illegal aliens having children here and declaring them citizens.

    Fox news contributor John Eastman [He has appeared as an expert legal commentator on numerous television and radio programs, including C-SPAN, Fox News, OCN, NPR, KNX in Los Angeles, KFWB in Los Angeles, WABC in New York, the Michael Reagan Show, the Jane Chastain Show, the Michael Jackson show, Airtalk with Larry Mantle, L.A. Live with Duffy, the O’Reilly Factor (Fox), and the Newshour with Jim Lehrer (PBS).] has laid waste to “birthright”

    And in an amicus filed regarding an Afgan fighter, when captured, claimed US citizenship to not be tried as a combatant. He and Ed Meese (former US Attorney General) filed this.
    And in an article.

    The only people trying to define “natural born” are Hawaii Department of Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino and The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto.

    Fukino issued the following statement:

    “I … have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen…”

    In defining his location of birth, a NON issue to us (Remember the Certificate issue is NOT the legal issue. Please don’t confuse the two), she throws in legal testimony.

    “is a natural-born American citizen…”

    Don’t forget all the senators agreed “Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;”

    Where did she find this information? Is Dr. Chiyome Fukino a better Constitutional scholar and source of law than our own Supreme Court precedent? Better than John Eastman?


    And Taranto:

    “Someone born overseas and after 1986, but otherwise in identical circumstances to Obama, would be a natural-born citizen thanks to a law signed by President Reagan.”


    Oops, Reagan signed no such thing.

    Ҥ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
    The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
    (g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years…”

    The statute does not use the words “natural born citizen”.

    His magic wand didn’t add new text to the US Code overnight.

    Had Mr. Taranto made the focus of his article the issue of whether persons who obtain citizenship at birth by statute are also natural born citizens for purposes of meeting the Presidential requirements of Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5, such a discussion would have been proper.

    His only challenges come in the comments section.

    No discussions, no resolution, and no Reagan Conservatives to defend Reagan’s words being smeared.

    Please let me know if this is just a snag in the fabric or is this the unraveling of our warm sweater we call democracy.

    I hate to use the Obi-Wan line, but this federation is down to two droids and a recorded message. Who is our only “hope”?”

    That was my email. Be creative and brief. They are on the ropes and the glass jaw is showing. I took a lot of grief from Medved but the point got across. This helped revisit a live corpse.

    Call. Call. Call.
    Don’t forget to make John Eastman come from the shadows. He argued this before and he needs to know he has support for the SAME argument.

    Google “John Eastman” and “Birthright”, contact him, and make a difference.

    My children WILL grow up in the United States. I will preserve it for them.


  33. DRED SCOTT v. SANDFORD, 60 U.S. 393 (1856)
    “The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, ‘a natural-born citizen.’ ”

    “Thus Vattel, in the preliminary chapter to his Treatise on the Law of Nations, says: ‘Nations or States are bodies politic; societies of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage, by the joint efforts of their mutual strength.”

    “By this same writer it is also said: ‘The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority; they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society [60 U.S. 393, 477] cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.’ Again: ‘I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners who are permitted to settle and stay in the country.’ (Vattel, Book 1, cap. 19, p. 101.)”


    SCHNEIDER v. RUSK, 377 U.S. 163 (1964)
    “We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the “natural born” citizen is eligible to be President. Art. II, 1. [377 U.S. 163, 166]”


    BAUMGARTNER v. U.S., 322 U.S. 665 (1944)
    “The naturalized citizen has as much right as the natural born citizen to exercise the cherished freedoms of speech, press and religion, and without ‘clear, unequivocal, and convincing’ proof that he did not bear or swear true allegiance to the United States at the time of naturalization he cannot be denaturalized.”


    KWOCK JAN FAT v. WHITE , 253 U.S. 454 (1920)
    “He claimed that he was 18 years of age, was born at Monterey, Cal., was the son of Kwock Tuck Lee, then deceased, who was born in America of Chinese parents and had resided at Monterey for many years; that his mother at the time was living at Monterey; and that there were five children in the family-three girls and two boys.”
    (The wording is confusing, but I read it as the father Kwock Tuck Lee was also born in America or else it would be redundant)

    It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 Sup. Ct. 456. But while it is conceded that he is certainly the same person who, upon full investigation was found, in March, 1915, by the then Commissioner of Immigration, to be a natural born American citizen,….”

    “It is better that many Chinese immigrants should be improperly admitted than that one natural born citizen of the United States should be permanently excluded from his country.”


    ELK v. WILKINS, 112 U.S. 94 (1884)
    “The distinction between citizenship by birth and citizenship by naturalization is clearly marked in the provisions of the constitution, by which ‘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;’ and ‘the congress shall have power to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.’ Const. art. 2, 1; art. 1, 8. By the thirteenth amendment of the constitution slavery was prohibited. The main object of the opening sentence of the fourteenth amendment was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes, (Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393;) and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 73; Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 306.”

    “This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization……”

    [Ed. True only two sources… from “this section”, the 14th amendment. From that section only, that section is not A2S1C5 which is a different section. Regardless, I still agree that there are only two ways to be a citizen – by birth and by naturalization. But not all births are the same. A NBC is a citizen at birth and so is a citizen like Wong who is not natural born. Natural born is just a description of a type of citizenship birth.]

  34. Mitchell Staff Says:

    Well, if Kal is correct we are due some outstanding government in the future because we have had a hell of an evil streak.

  35. It was pointed out by jbjd on Atlas Shrugs that Obama’s COLB/I was born British page from fightthesmears originally stated “Paid for by Barack Obama”, even has an art logo (not just font print) that says that… and now has a disclaimer “PAID FOR BY ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA A PROJECT OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE…THIS IS NOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE’S COMMITTEE.”

    I have the original site and artwork archived which says paid for by BO, but they’re trying to make it appear now that Obama was not responsible in any way for the content of the web page in that he was not a member of the DNC and as the web page states.

    [Ed. This one from the Google cache says “paid for by Obama for America”]

  36. “A government of the people”

    Obama is of foreign people and, while partially “of the (US) people” he has natural allegiances to foreign lands due to circumstances of birth. His judgment is impaired by mixed allegiances. The subtleties of his birth circumstances are subject to arguments and the interpretations of the INS and State Department rulings and of federal law. A “natural born Citizen” needs not argue his/her case due to unquestionable and natural circumstances. All rulings and laws come down to one thing, allegiance to the US Constitution. A “natural born Citizen” has 100% natural allegiance due to place and parentage.

    Obama is a stranger here.

    The rest of his story, from birth till now, is significantly troubling. The life story of Barry Soetoro, foreign citizen and student, to Barack Obama, Illinois State Senator, US Senator and POTUS is grave.

  37. Moreover:

    To be legally a citizen, where allegiances may have varied from time to time, is one thing.

    To be naturally a citizen, where allegiance has never been split and never varied, is quite another.

  38. Leo,
    I just noticed that WSJofpropoganda left my comment, but removed the link to your last post.

    [Ed. That’s the very essence of propaganda for a main stream source to remove links to the topic under discussion.]

  39. FLASHBACK – Remember when “we” were back in school (esp. High School)?

    When the teacher left the room (for whatever reason), who did he/she leave in charge?

    Someone RELIABLE, right?

    Who did “we” wish that he/she HAD left in charge?

    The class “clown”, right?

    Do you see where I’m going with this?

    The same reason(s) that “we” wanted the class “clown” – so that “we” could do whatever “we” wanted – the same reason(s) “they” (those that continue to cover for Obama/Soetoro) perhaps want him there.

    This would include (most) in Congress, (most) Judges, (most) Law Enforcement, (most) State Attorneys, (most) Media Outlets, etc.

    I don’t buy the excuse that most (in Power) do NOT speak out because they may be afraid of being called a “racist” and/or are afraid of “race riots”.

    That’s TOTAL ignorance!

    I believe the reason(s) are rather more simplistic and perhaps as indicated.

    This is something to consider when formulating a strategy and potential tactics to win this “War”…..

  40. This may be of interest…I read this on other blogs

    His birthplace plaque is here

    it aint nowhere in Hawaii
    Coast Province Hospital Birth Certificate…

    The document posted is a 1964 copy of a 1961 original. There are three names which can be verified on this copy:
    the registrar (E.F. Lavender); the district registrar (MR() Miller); deputy registrar (Joshua Simon Couya).

    Why 1964? Perhaps it is because Obama Sr. needed proof of his son’s birth in Kenya in order to register him for citizenship that year as Kenya gained independence.
    (It may be that the ‘Prez’ hasn’t been spreading enough wealth around in the Luo tribe.)

    [Ed. This new Kenya BC thing is certainly the new big lead on this. If it’s real and they knew it was coming, might explain alot of the WSJ propaganda. I haven’t seen any explanation from Orly as to how she got it… certainly time to stay tuned as this looks to be an interesting week.]

  41. Whistleblower Says:


    Thought this might assist you.

    In “THE RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787” 436 (Max Farrand, ed., 1911)
    You will find:
    Luther Martin, of Maryland, citing Vattel’s LAW OF NATIONS during the federal convention; 4 J. Elliot, ed.,

    You will find:
    Charles Pinckney, citing Vattel’s LAW OF NATIONS during the South Carolina ratifying convention.

    In Elliot’s DEBATES 453
    You will find:
    James Wilson, citing Vattel during the Pennsylvania ratifying convention.

    see also 29 Library of Congress, Journals of the
    Continental Congress 1774-1789 887 (1933)
    You will find:
    A reprinting 1785 letter from John Jay relying on Vattel for recognizing the United States’ obligation to receive the Consul General of Great Britain.

    Vattel’s influence, though somehow deemed not worthy of mention in most law schools today (probably because the “Law of Nations” was adopted into the Common Law of England), was widespread, not only among those in the legal profession, but also among most literate men of the time. His book was sent to plantations throughout the south.

    The only reason why “natural born citizen” did not receive specific mention
    is that it was too obvious to deserve mention.

  42. You think the circus has been in town this past…wait until you see what’s going on this morning at Orly’s site. A Kenyan BC has surfaced (photo).

    [Ed. I’m all over it. According to the court filing, Orly has in her possession only an image, not the actual document. She has a photo and is asking the court to help her validate it. However, the image contains a ton of information and should be easily verified.]


    The “insiders” that work for many of the major news networks report that when a noted personality (sports, politics, business, etc.) gets to be a certain age, a pre-scripted video “obituary” is done on their life and achievements.

    Dozens of these “obituaries” are on the shelf and updated from time to time.

    Now, since it seems obvious that Obama/Soetoro will eventually get the “boot”, perhaps “we” should prepare a statement for his exit.

    I’ll go first….

    “To: Mr./Ms. Barack Obama aka Barry Soetoro,

    All of those among the ‘educated masses’ would like to thank you for playing our ‘Pretend you’re President’ game.

    Please make arrangements to return the money you falsely took from the US Treasury.

    You can keep the parting ‘gifts’ you received (except the bust of Sir Winston Churchill that you so rudely returned).

    Perhaps, the British should have sent you a bust of Hitler.

    Also, please don’t forget to take your ‘friends’ with you (we’ll fumigate after you leave and send you the bill).

    Now, remember, to remind the others of your ‘Administration’ to pack up as well.

    This would include (but not limited to): Joe ‘The clown’ Biden, Hillary ‘In the closet’ Clinton, Eric ‘The coward’ Holder, etc.

    If we find anything you may have forgotten, we’ll ship it to you – just please leave your forwarding address (since we’re not sure where exactly you’re from or going).

    Thank you again for educating us and we hope you have a nice trip.”

    Love always,



    Remember, Mr. Donofrio, it’s NOT ‘Defamation’ of it’s true!

  44. Whistleblower Says:


    Here’s a link to the Kenyan Birth Certificate.

    I would have thought that it may just be a birth record generated when a Kenyan Citizen (Barack Sr.) had a child born overseas, in order to comply with the British Naturalization Act of 1948. However, the one pictured in the link above, shows a date and place of birth. The place of birth is not noted on anything presented by the Obama Campaign.

  45. Whistleblower Says:


    At least we would no know where to place the plaque. :>)

  46. Leo,
    Longtime follower of yours. I’m curious is there is any statement of “natural born citizen” in Vattel’s writings prior to the 1797 English copy. Earlier copies seem to state “Les Naturels ou indigenes.” Is “naturels” to be construed or translated as “natural born”?

    This research is complicated by Dumas’ translation (given Franklin) seemingly being unavailable. From Publications of the Colonial Society of Mass., Pg 7:

    “Dumas’s manuscript commentary has disappeared from the copy in the Library Company of Philadelphia, for when that copy was rebound a long time since, another and more modern kind of paper than that upon which the book is printed was used for the fly leaves. Franklin’s own Vattel has vanished. So only the manuscript note written into the Harvard Vattel Apparently remains.”

    Please feel free to contact me at my email, if you have access to that.

  47. Mr Donofrio

    You ask: “[Ed. It’s an issue which needs more discussion – Is Obama a UK citizen right now?”]

    Maybe my own UK citizenship status might help.

    I was born in India in 1944, prior to Independence. My father, an Englishman, was a soldier in the British army in India. My mother was an Anglo Indian (people who were English speaking and could claim British ancestry through the male line).

    After independence the British Nationality Act (1948) was passed. Those who were born in the sub-continent and wanted to retain their British Citizenship had to register at the High Commission offices around the country with proof of blood links through their male ancestors to the UK.

    By right of marriage (please note for Obama’s mother’s situation) all my mother had to provide was her marriage certificate to claim UK citizenship. I was a UK citizen by right of birth through my father’s being an Englishman. In later years my mother and I were ‘repatriated’ by Britain to the UK which was further confirmation of our UK citizenship.

    My mother’s brothers needed to provide proof of their British ancestry to claim UK citizenship. One brother decided he would not do so, and after the required time elapsed he automatically became an Indian Citizen as he was born in India which was now independent.

    At the time of his birth Obama would have been a British subject through his father. His mother would have also been considered a British subject through marriage.

    After independence, unless he could provide proof of blood links to the UK, Obama senior would have automatically become a Kenyan Citizen, just like my uncle became an Indian Citizen.

    Obama Jr. would have become a Kenyan Citizen at the same time through his father.

    The questions therefore are:

    Did or does Kenya have a formal procedure where a citizen can formally declare they are no longer a citizen of that country and if so did Obama do that? Do their laws prohibit dual nationality?

    Consider: if Obama had to suddenly leave the USA and moved to Kenya, could he under their current laws claim his right as a Kenyan citizen through birth? If the answer is yes, you have a President with dual nationality. America or Kenya claiming him as citizen does not negate the other country’s constitution/laws concerning citizenship.

    (This does even start to consider what happened in Indonesia and the affect of Indonesian law on his citizenship for that period of his life).

    Sorry if this has not been too clear, as I have approached this not as someone with a legal mind but as one whose family has been affected by British Nationality Acts.

  48. Leo,
    Holy Crap!!! I guess that the dual Citizen thing is moot now if this is true. Like a Thunderbolt if it’s real, and it seems to be. If it is, the Media and our whole Government, both Left and right and Senate and House is gonna have some splainin to do!~ Every last one of them will be discredited.

  49. Whistleblower Says:

    If the Kenyan Birth Certificate is authentic, The State Department says Barack Obama would not be a citizen.

    “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.”

    An 18 year old woman (who is a U.S. Citizen) could not possibly have lived in the U.S. for 5 years after the age of 14. -Even in Obamaland 18 minus 14 equals 4.

    We should note that the date of certification for the above-linked Kenyan BC is the 17th of February 1964.

    [Ed. Good post but please dont use bold print… reserved for my comments.]

  50. Robert B. Davies Says:

    James Taranto, as editor of the opinions column, is abusing hi position by writing editorials in the column which is supposed to be comprised of the opinions of outside submitters.

  51. [Ed. I’m all over it. According to the court filing, Orly has in her possession only an image, not the actual document. She has a photo and is asking the court to help her validate it. However, the image contains a ton of information and should be easily verified.]
    I read her motion and it states that she has in her possession a “color copy” of the document, not a photo of the document….She seems to have supplied an electronic photo copy along with her motion…Correct me if I’m wrong, please.

    [Ed. From what’s posted it’s a color copy of a photograph – see the background.]

  52. Leo,

    I don’t know of any story that indicates our citizenship problems better than the story of two individuals named John Walker Lindh and Yaser Esam Hamdi. You might remember them, but most folks won’t. They were both treated as citizens, however Hamdi was not and represents the most extreme stretching and disregard of our constitution that it is possible to make to declare him a citizen.

    John Walker Lindh was born in Washington, D.C., on February 9, 1981 to parents Marilyn Walker and Frank Lindh, citizens of the United States at the time of John’s birth. By any standard, Lindh meets the requirements to be a natural born citizen as both parents were citizens at the time of Lindh’s birth. You can read about John Lindh in an article in Time magazine (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,187564-1,00.html) titled “The Taliban Next Door”.
    Yaser Esam Hamdi was born in Baton Rouge, LA. on September 26, 1980 to parents Esam and Nadiah Hamdi, both born in Saudi, Arabia. The parents were working in Baton Rouge temporarily and returned to Saudi Arabia with Yaser when he was an infant. So far as is known, Yaser Hamdi never returned to the United States until 2002.

    Lindh’s and Hamdi’s life’s came together when they were captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan. Hamdi and Lindh were captured by Afghan Northern Alliance forces in Konduz, Afghanistan, along with hundreds of surrendering Taliban fighters who were then sent to the Qala-e-Jangi prison complex near Mazari Sharif.

    Both survived the riot and ensuing battle at the prison, were subsequently identified as American citizens and returned to the United States, though not at the same time.

    Hamdi was named by the Bush administration as an “illegal enemy combatant”, and initially detained at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In April 2002, upon learning that Hamdi was an American citizen, authorities transferred him to a naval brig in Norfolk, Virginia, where he remained until transferred to a brig in Charleston, South Carolina.

    A fundamental question is, “who declared Hamdi an American citizen and what was their legal basis for that declaration”?

    Hamdi’s Certificate of Live Birth may be found at: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/hamdi/hamdi92680birthc.pdf

    In the lower right hand corner of the Certificate of Live Birth is this statement:
    This document shows “name and birth facts on file in the vital records registry…….”
    This is a “Certificate of Live Birth” issued by the State of Louisiana, but it is not the original birth certificate (sometimes called the long form) which is obviously filed somewhere, however it does contain enough significant factual information to determine the “at birth” citizenship of Yaser Hamdi. Download and print this document for comparison to Obama’s offering of his “Certification of Live Birth” which you may download from:


    Obama’s “Certification of Live Birth” is probably a true and factual certification of the facts shown. However, if you need to determine Obama’s citizenship status “at birth”, it is insufficient. You could declare that he was a natural born citizen based on the review of that document only, because there is no information on that document to refute that claim.

    Even Hamdi’s Certificate of Live Birth does not provide sufficient information to determine his citizenship status, because the citizenship status of his parents is not shown. Who then made the determination that Hamdi was a citizen, when did they make it and what was their legal basis?

    The DOJ obviously did and assumed that existing law allowing Hamdi to be defined as an enemy combatant, even though he was a “citizen”, would prevail in court. Hamdi’s and his father sued Rumsfeld based on the “due process” clause and the case went up to the Supreme Court. It did not prevail.

    What would the outcome have been if the Government had taken the position that Hamdi was not a citizen, and therefore had no standing to sue under the due process clause. That matter was brought up by the Center For American Unity by the submission of an Amicus brief with this question:(http://www.cfau.org/hamdi/amicusmerits.html#_ftnref2)

    “Whether a person, born in the United States of alien parents in this country on a temporary work visa, who leaves the United States as an infant, never returns, declares himself a citizen of another country, and takes up arms in a conflict against forces of the United States, and otherwise demonstrates no allegiance to the United States and demonstrates allegiance to foreign powers, was ever “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.”

    Unfortunately, the case was not about citizenship, but about due process of an assumed citizen.

    The natural born citizen, John Walker Lindh is now serving a 20 year sentence without parole. Yaser Esam Hamdi, agreed to renounce his U.S. citizenship, which he never had, accepted some other conditions and was returned to Saudi Arabia.

    Think about this. If Yaser Hamdi returns to the United States and claims he was coerced into renouncing his citizenship, has his citizenship restored, seals all his records, establishes his residency requirements and then runs for and is elected President, we will then have our first genuine Taliban President and Commander in Chief of the American Army!

    As William Ayers stated, “What a great country”.

  53. Leo,

    Note on the copy of the BC Orly is showing has Barack Obama Sr with Honolulu, HI as his RESIDENCE. Significant?

    [Ed. He was a student at that time residing in the USA temporarily. He never applied for citizenship nor did he ever intend to permanently reside here – this was never his permanent domicile.]

  54. Curi0us0nefromthe60s Says:

    Hey Leo,

    This is off the topic of propaganda, and it is a question that I think you have answered before, but can you answer it again for me if it has already been asked?

    Instead of the Senate passing a non-binding Senate Resolution in April of 2008 regarding John McCain’s natural born citizen status, could the Congress have initiated and passed legislation defining natural born citizen? And if they do have the power to do that, could they assume that anyone who disputed their definition could fairly quickly get a case to the U.S. Supreme Court say in a matter of months?

    [Ed. I don’t believe the Constitution gives them the power to do that. Naturalization is their domain under the document so it’s their province for making laws thereto.]

  55. Like you Leo I thought Obama was born in Hawaii. If this true, Wow!!!! I called my local newspaper metro desk to inform them. I stated I never believed that Obama was born in Kenya but potential new information came up & started to mock me without hearing what I had to say. He claimed that Orly Taitz was not an attorney which I corrected him on. Finally I said aren’t you a newspaper, a journalists, which shut him up. I then gave the information & said due what you will with it. As you said this information, authenticity can be verified, pretty straightforward. If true lots of folks should go to jail for this. IMHO would be treason.

  56. And those are historic signatures/names–after all this time and millions in bribe monies, nobody has signed off on Obama’s Hawaiian crapola. And it has a seal. And it concurs with grannie’s and ambassador to kenya’s statements (as well as multiple Kenyan/African news sources).

  57. BTW now that I think about how Obama cosponsored SR511, in which was defined a NBC which he didn’t fulfill…seemingly oblivious to that because the gist of SR511 was to state that someone born out of country could be NBC… If this is his BC and it looks like it is because there’s so many factoids to it, I think it truly was what was eating at him with worry. Remember brother George in the hut living on $1/month that Odinga the marxist genocidal monster who Obama campaigned for had arrested on trumped up marijuana charges? HE could have gotten the BC. Obama clearly was not fulfilling his promises in Kenya and their pride was perhaps replaced by resentment. Well, we’ll see!

  58. That BC from Kenya also has on the bottom of the page, BOOK AND PAGE NUMBERS and a cert # up at the top, with the name of the hospital and an EMBOSSED SEAL that sure does look authentic to me, and those things that are on thta Doc are the things I look for when I am doing a search for any docs. I am a Document Researcher/Abstractor by profession. Plus the names (typed in – probably because of the Original being in Britain) and a verifiable signature and date of signing that same signautre. The ID # and the ert # seem to be real, all the other info seems to jive with what I would be looking to standout as whether phony or not, all seem to be in accordance with real…..

  59. Barrack Obama’s KENYAN BIRTH CERTIFICATE NOW appears on Orly Taitz’s web site….

    NO MATTER WHAT one think’s at this point…if a web picture was valid via snopes, fightthesmaers, and others THIS ShOULD MAKE BIG WAVES..


    See it with seal and signatures and ALL

    Here we go….

    and count me in on never buying a Wall Street Journal paper again…lying thugs….

  60. Dear Leo,

    If the Kenya “certified” copy of Obama’s birth certificate can be authenticated by the courts, I wish to thank you in advance for helping my ordinary non legal mind understand the legal issues.

    Your hard work may be beginning to pay off for the true American patriots.

    Thank you.


  61. No games, just fact Says:

    whistleblower? You say no document obama released shows place of birth? What is “Island of Oahu” on his birth certificate then? An illusion?

    [Ed. The Island of Oahu does not identify a “place” of birth, nor does the City of Honululu – they are asking for an an address, a hospital or a home – you know, a place where we can put the plaque commemorating his birth.]

  62. It will be interesting to see how the gov. propoganda machine exlains this one away. I can’t wait, and probably won’t have to. LOL

  63. Whistleblower Says:


    If I had your email address, I would have just sent a link.

    IF the Kenyan BC can be authenticated, our lady (America) will have been deceived.

    This song would be appropriate. Listen to the words.

  64. Let’s not make the same mistake Big Media makes by calling a purported birth record a “birth certificate” when it is not.

    The Kenyan document seems credible on the surface and should be subject to verification if Kenyan authorities cooperate, but it is a “Certified Copy of Registration of Birth,” complete with signature and seal. Most impressive, but not a B.C.

  65. Apocalyptic Says:

    Just a note about the “new” Kenyan certification. The date provided by the registrar is in February of 1964. There is quite a bit of discussion about how Kenya was a Republic then (it became independent in December 1963) when it did not become a true republic until December 1964—10 months later than the date on the document….

    [Ed. Either the forms say Republic back in Feb 64 or they don’t. The document is verifiable. Should be an interesting PR tug of war.]

  66. Tony Stark Says:

    According to Lame Cherry’s blog, the alleged Certified Copy of Registration of Birth in Kenya is likely the lawyer’s copy during the divorce proceedings of Stanley Ann Dunham in early 1964 where she was trying to gain custody of BO from his father.


  67. GratefulForLeo Says:

    I submitted a comment on July 28th here to Leo’s site
    questioning the wording on Obama’s FightTheSmears website which proclaimed that Obama was a NATIVE CITIZEN and that the message was “Paid for by Barack Obama 2008 . All Rights Reserved”. I provided a link to TheObamaFile SCREENSHOT of the website. I thought that this might be an ADMISSION by Obama that he was not a natural born citizen due to Leo’s revelation per the Minor case that natural born does not equal native born and vice versa.

    I then sent an e-mail to TheObamaFile telling them I had found a discrepancy between his screenshot and Obama’s FightTheSmears website in which the page appeared the same except it says “PAID FOR BY ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA,

    The next day, July 29th, I checked TheObamaFile website to see if it had posted about the discrepancy. I found, surprisingly, that TheObamaFile website was shut down with a message saying that the website owner was done and that that there would be no new postings. Disappointing, TheObamaFile was a great website.

    The next day, July 30th, I checked TheObamaFile again to see if the website owner had changed his mind. I found a new message that gave a rambling explanation that the website owner had shut down the site because almost no one had hit the tip jar, he now wouldn’t take any money, and he was going to the beach! OK, strange and odd that he wouldn’t at least leave links to the massive aggregation archive he had created.

    On August 1st, I checked to see if the link to TheObamaFile screenshot still worked because I had used it in my July 28th post on this site. I was going to explain that TheObamaFile had been shut down. I FOUND THAT TheObamaFile SCREENSHOT HAD BEEN CHANGED! Now we’re getting into conspiracy theory, because how and why does a screenshot get changed? Either the website owner changed it or someone hacked into the page to change it. It now says:
    “PAID FOR BY OBAMA FOR AMERICA 2008. All Rights Reserved.”

    Maybe I was right and the original screenshot was a legitimate ADMISSION that could be used against Obama’s claim of eligibility. Because Leo has done all the legal hard work, it appears that Obama is not a natural born citizen based on this admission. Someone sure thought it was important enough to make changes and scrub all cache from Google and the Wayback machine. I couldn’t find a copy of the original screenshot anywhere.

    I began this whole journey of discovery out of curiosity when someone reminded me that Obama had claimed he was eligible for president under the 14th Amendment. I was looking to verify that memory. Now, an actual Kenyan birth certificate is being presented that, if valid, will answer the eligibility question once and for all. Strange days.

  68. Curi0us0nefromthe60s Says:


    Thank you kindly for answering my prior question for me. Another topic you probably covered before but I missed. Could either candidate Obama or McCain taken any sort of action to have a court define natural born citizen? For example, as we know, AZ required swearing to natural born citizen status to be on their ballot. Could McCain or Obama have filed suit in AZ prior to needing to swear on this form to get their names on the ballot for a definition of natural born citizen from that court to ensure they were eligible? I would assume the answer is yes they most could have and should have.

  69. Tony Stark Says:

    If it is proven that an original Kenyan BC for Obama does exist, then the controversy over Obama’s eligibility will come down to whether 18 year old Stanley Ann Dunham could transmit her US citizenship to her son at the time of his birth. If so, then the debate over whether dual citizens are also natural born citizens will continue to rage (but with the position of those in favor of saying that dual citizens = NBC considerably weakened). If not, then game over for Obama, for he will essentially be an illegal alien and probably subject to deportation to the UK, since he says he lost his Kenyan citizenship and may never have lost his UK citizenship. These are certainly interesting times we live in.

  70. FYI………take note. It is believed that Kenya did not declare itself a “Republic” until December 1964, even though independence was gained in 1963.

    [Ed. As important as the document would be if not fake, it should have been verified further with due dilligence on every aspect that could be investigated.]

  71. To Tony Stark,
    I think that if the Kenyan Birth Document is proven to be real, then the dual citizenship issue is moot. No one born outside of the US is a Natural Born Citizen. Even the farce of Resolution 511 would not help Obama.

  72. There was an opinion from the USSC in which they upheld the deportation of a US-fathered Vietnamese under current Federal law because his father hadn’t legitimated him before he reached his 18th birthday. However what was said about US-mothered foreigners is what’s important here. The opinion stated that since the mother could have returned to the US at any time to give birth, and since the circumstances of the birth vis-a-vis the mother were easily verifiable then the law did not reach children whose mothers had failed to legitimate their children before their 18th birthday.

  73. Whistleblower Says:

    From the “Times” interview with Barack Obama.

    “He was a man of his time, from a very patriarchal society.”

    Does that sound like Barack Sr. was the kind of man to get married in February of 1961, and though he likely had the funding to support it, would not have taken his new bride to meet the family during the summer break?

    I think it makes more sense for the Obamas to have been in Kenya during the summer of 1961, than it does for them to have remained in Hawaii.

    This was 1961. Per the Times -“Black people made up less than 1% of the state’s population. And while interracial marriage was legal there, it was banned in half the other states.”

    Where do you think a black man with his white bride would have been better accepted or felt more comfortable? -Remember..this was almost 50 years ago. The U.S. wasn’t even close to being color blind in the 60’s.

  74. The one curious point I see on the document would be the date of Feb 17, 1964.

    Leo, have you checked into divorce law of 1964. Since Obama Sr was listed as the father, it would seem logical that Ann Dunham would have had to produce a document to the court verifying the legitimacy of the father listed.

    The divorce filed in Jan 1964 and finalized in March 1964

    Just another legal angle to look at for future reference

  75. Zooming in tight on the alleged Kenyan BC Copy mentioned above there in a resolution disturbance in the color around the text that in my experience is indicative of photoshopping. As you move from text element to text element over the document, the anomaly disappears over the plain paper field only to reappear with the typed and printed text. This leads me to conclude image of document, at the very least, appears to have been tampered with.

  76. Leo,
    Kenya became Independent in 12/63 and a became a Republic 1 year later. I guess that could be like the History of the US. The US became an entity with Declaration of Independence 13 years before the Constitution was ratified and 14 years before Washingtonton took office (thus the 14 year residency requirement). But I agree that Orly jumps the gun a lot, and hopefully that timeline was investigated before release of the document, or else she will do more damage to the eligibility movement if the document is proven false. The document could have been planted on purpose in order to discredit.

  77. Leo, do you have any opinion so far as to the veracity of the Kenyan Birth document?

    [Ed. No I don’t. I’m not an expert on document authentication. Furthermore, the filing makes clear she does not have the document. She has a color copy of a photo of the document. I wouldn’t know a real Kenyan Birth Certification from a fake one… and neither would anybody else who isn’t an expert or who doesn’t have some other forensic reason to believe it’s real. The whole BC circus feels like a scripted event to me. I’m not saying this is a hoax either. It may be real. But that wouldn’t make my BS detector go down at all. This is a very dodgy event in US history. I’m confused and freaked out by everything I’ve seen. From the lower courts to SCOTUS clerk’s office to the Justices handling of the cases… to this boxing match which came back for a return bout last week regarding the BC to the Wall Street Journal making up statutes which don’t exist. This is bizarre stuff. ]

  78. Whistleblower Says:

    On August 2, 2009 at 6:44 pm willem Said:

    “Zooming in tight on the alleged Kenyan BC Copy mentioned above there in a resolution disturbance in the color around the text that in my experience is indicative of photoshopping. As you move from text element to text element over the document, the anomaly disappears over the plain paper field only to reappear with the typed and printed text. This leads me to conclude image of document, at the very least, appears to have been tampered with.”


    Isn’t it possible that the disturbance is caused by the impression left as the keys were typed? Unlike today’s laser and inkjet printers, typewriters caused a letter to impact a ribbon to transfer the ink. This always left an impression on the paper.

  79. Tony Stark Says:


    Those are jpeg compression artifacts, which is the result of using the file format for images and saving it in medium or low resolution in order to decrease file size when posting on the web, otherwise it will take forever to download these files.

  80. On this new birth document, some critics are saying that it is a hoax because E.F. Lavender (a name appearing on the document) is a detergent product. However, here’s something interesting: http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/1536351/387756?zoomLevel=3

    An old Australian newspaper (The Argus) from July 13, 1915. Zoom in on “Law Clerks’ Offer.” It talks about a man named E.F. Lavender. I’m not saying it’s the same man — after all, 1915 to 1961 is a 46 year gap — though theoretically it COULD be the same man. But anyway, the point is that Australia also has ties to England as did Kenya. The British monarch is still the Australian chief of state even today. So if there was a man in Australia named E.F. Lavender, who says there couldn’t be one in Kenya?

  81. woops, delete the above comment — this is what I meant to say —


    What happens to Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation as Supreme Court Justice if the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” Presidential eligibility requirement is subsequently determined applicable to Barack Obama on the basis of Article 2’s exclusion of dual citizenship birth (doesn’t matter whether Obama born in Hawaii since his dad was British citizen at the time)? It would seem prudent, if not dereliction of Constitutional duty in not so doing, for the United States Senate to defer voting on Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation at the very least until there is determination, now imminent, on standing in Kerchner v. Congress (USDC NJ) on that precise issue (Congressional failure to take up the raised and known constitutional ineligibility question prior to declaring a Presidential winner in the vote of the electoral college). For the full Senate now to proceed to vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor (an otherwise lifetime appointment) before then, would be a knowing and very substantial exacerbation of any inherent Constitutional crisis — compounding the previous Congressional dereliction. That is, the Executive Branch, as well as conceivably all actions of a Congress under a President determined ineligible, would leave the Supreme Court as an essential unfettered remaining Branch of the Federal Government, that is unfettered so long as Mr. Obama’s appointment is not yet confirmed by the Senate.

    Will not one Senator, let alone Republican Senator, raise this issue on the Senate floor? The nation is watching.

  82. Can anybody in our government beside Congress investigate the validity of what seems to me a very credible document of birth registration? We need to write our congress-persons.

    One problem is that Kenya is still controlled to some degree by communists, who would not want to upset Obama’s applecart–they view him sympathetically.

  83. The variables are creative.

    If they can disprove a Certification from a photo of a Kenyan record, will the same process be applied to a photo of a Hawaiian record?

    Will a legal US document be the only thing to refute a Kenyan Photo?

    Or, will they say “nothing to see here”?

    Probably the last choice.
    Hammer the “natural born” or you will get screwed.
    A ball game might be won by an error on the other teams part. But if you did not show up to play by the rules you will never win the series.

  84. MissTickly Says:

    My dearest Leo,

    Although I know you are a man with few opinions: meek, timid, reluctant to speak up…shy-boy:

    I really want to know if you got the following gist from reading all that stuff I sent you (if you read it):

    The UIPA provision that mandates they release his VITAL RECORDS TO THE PUBLIC, due to ‘compelling circumstances that effects ANY persons safety and health,’ is the one I cite. People are angry and distrustful and dangerous, now. Have you read the news? I support my argument with a single AFP article that contains EXPERT OPINIONS to a ‘clear and present danger’ from racist, militant, neo-nazi, holocaust-denier ‘BIRTHERS.’ They are danger to the president and each other.

    [Ed. You make a strong point. But don’t expect logic, law or the fact that you’ve made a rational argument backed by various codes to earn you a response from Hawaii – they will ignore you. Welcome to Amerika.]

  85. MissTickly Says:

    Oh and by the way, did anyone realize that the ONLY “significantly private information” on a vital record per Hawaiian UIPA Open Records Law are these:

    Ethnicity & Date of Birth

    The rest of the information found in a birth record is NOT considered significant to privacy. I’ve asked them to leave out those two pieces of information in my formal request bundle.

  86. Joe The Blogger Says:

    When something seems to good to be true, it normally IS to good to be true.

  87. Tony-

    Respectfully, why are these particular compression artifacts asymmetrical to the document overall? They are localized to the text, both typed and printed. The blank color page is as data rich as the text. Compression algorithms are not sentient. I don’t work much with jpeg but I have extensive experience in digital audio. Given the way the localized visual distortion looks, it’s behaving like pixel blending algorithms common to alteration programs like Photoshop.

    [Ed. You’re trying to examine a color copy of a photograph. I don’t know if that matters but it is two steps removed from the actual document itself. And that makes this unverifiable on its face. They should have done more research before bringing this forward. The birther circus is now in town big time. It’s going to be a circus and it will cloud the legal issue of nbc status.]

    What I found most damning were the rules (lines) printed on the page. How would a jpeg compression algorithm “know” to only distort the typed and printed text and leave the printed rules and color body of the document visually undisturbed?

    I’m not trying to be argumentative. I’ve got a couple of experts looking at this on Monday. I’m agnostic as of now.

    If you can point me to viewable reference examples I’d be happy to look at it.

    That said, I’ve become extremely suspicious of any data or revelations which draw attention away from the the core issue of failing NBC qualification due to being a foreign citizen at birth.

    Hold on to the center.

    The shit storm of disinformation and obfuscation is just beginning, and it will sweep the lemmings right over the cliff.

    It works this way. All they need do is distort, inflame and discredit and people will tune out; the more complicated the story the more shorthand will be used to condense and dismiss it. The more confusion and disarray that can be sewn, the more the Truth becomes collectively lost.

    Hysteria and hyperbole are the object of the exercise. Getting you to lose patience; lose composure; crave theatrics and titillation — to get you hooked on your own adrenalin, sucked into your own private mania by the millions, one person at a time..

    If I were Obama I would be paying Orly Taitz to do what she is doing.

  88. Voco Indubium Says:


    Can you help me with this? How do you see this?

    Most of my friends are shocked when I tell them that they, as ordinary citizens, would not have Standing in a Constitutional issue. Even politicians or prominent citizens as Ambassador Alen Keyes have no standing.

    As you said in one of your notes, this has been happening before we even heard the name of BHO. I recall a case a few years ago when Ron Paul brought a constitutional issue to SCOTUS and he had no standing either.

    It seems to me that the Constitution is not enforceable because the judges are interpreting and applying the flexible Standing Doctrine as if they were kings and not judges. If the Constitution is not enforceable, for all practical purposes we have no Constitution.

    How is it possible that while US citizens have no standing, non-citizen, GITMO terrorists do? It is now debated by Congress whether the GITMO prisoners should be tried by US courts as opposed to military courts and I believe they were cases during the Bush administration in US courts as well.

    This is an upside-down world. There is no more common sense, or is there? It seems to me that the judges are the critical elements here. Alen Keyes in his internet video calls them derelict of duty. Perhaps most of them are Progressives and as such they think the Constitution is irrelevant? What is going on in our society?

  89. MissTickly Says:

    Oh, yes. One more thing:

    In case the term ‘VITAL RECORDS’ isn’t inclusive per my FIRST REQUEST FOR RECORDS, I also requested that all MATERIAL OF SUPPORT AND EVIDENCE as to the information put forth in his vital records be disclosed, too, per both these provisions:

    • Rule (§92F-12) (3) (Agencies must also disclose) Records where compelling circumstances show an effect on the health or safety of any individual;
    • Rule (§92F-12) (15) Information collected for the purpose of making information available to the public.

    The support/evidence for the provisions to disclose this material is found within my formal UIPA request. Particularly the public statement of information about him being a “natural born citizen” and “born in Hawaii.”

    And one would think that would include a letter from a hospital in Hawaii that was offered as proof he was “born in Hawaii” and resulted in an amended birth record. I will ask for clarification, though, when they send me acknowledgment of my request.

  90. When the story of the Obama letter o Kopiolani (sp?) letter broke at WND, it got me to thinking.

    So on my program I asked three questions for the Obama followers that listen.

    1. How does British law govern the birth status of an American natural born citizen?

    2. Which hospital in Honolulu was he born in: the one he said in 2004, or the one in his letter of January 2009?

    3. When did Obama renounce his British citizenship?

    Obama has a sister one year older than he. She had until she was 21, like all kids in Kenya in 1963, to decide to be Kenyan, or whatver other cittizenships they might have. So, as his sister has Kenyan onlyu citizenship, she renounded being British at 21 or earlier.

    Per Obama’s website and factCheck.. Obama lost his Kenyan citizenship for not renoncing his American citizenship. So I was wondering on air, did he ever renounce his British citizenship? Likely his mother renounced it for him, when they moved in with his step-dad Lolo Soetoro.. but then we can only surmise as Obama won’t produce any official documents.

    And he isn’t telling, either.

    [Ed. He may very well still be a British citizen. I thought his sister Maya was born of the father Lolo Soetoro in Indonesia not Obama Sr., right? If the new Kenyan BC is accurate then forget about nbc, Obama would not even be a US citizen.]

  91. Leo,

    I’m immensely gratified that you’re still fighting the good fight despite all the setbacks and Bickeling erm bickering that’s attended your efforts. Keep on keeping on!

  92. MissTickly Says:

    [Ed. You make a strong point. But don’t expect logic, law or the fact that you’ve made a rational argument backed by various codes to earn you a response from Hawaii – they will ignore you. Welcome to Amerika.]

    Well, if they do—I have recourse. I will re-file with the Office of Information Practices which if I understand correctly, is under the Lt. Governor’s oversight.

    Also, they have to cite specific ‘exceptions’ to the rejection of any of my request. I really don’t see any unless I requested a record ‘under seal,’ as in an adoption. So you see, those exceptions alone could be very telling.

    I think it would be difficult to justify how a vital record need be so private that we have to ignore the safety of the President and all Americans. Consider this additional support I submitted for this provision to disclose his records–UIPA (§92F-12) (3) “[And] Records where compelling circumstances show an effect on the health or safety of any individual;” :

    Comments pulled from Politico.com Forum per this ‘birther’ article


    Gambler: Jul. 27, 2009 – 1:25 PM EST
    Don’t worry, GoCowboys,
    We libs have plenty of guns and amo and will fight to preserve the union and our democratically elected President. It may be bloody as Les-WA predicts, but it may not be quick. It may take some time to round up the tratiors.

    gocowboys: Jul. 27, 2009 – 1:57 PM EST
    Indeed. I was raised around guns. My dad always had guns. I have three brothers, all have guns, two are cops. So I know how to handle a gun. My daughter is learing now, she wants to get a gun.
    I fully support the second amendment. I have a problem with people threatening to start a war simply because they don’t like who the President is.
    So much for the myth that Dems don’t support the second amendment.


    Gambler: Jul. 27, 2009 – 1:43 PM EST
    Then talk to the guy who posted the threats of bloodshed and insurrection. I didn’t start this; I was just warning him that taking over the country wouldn’t be as easy as he seemed to think.

    colonelcobwebs: Jul. 27, 2009 – 1:54 PM EST
    And these people fail to understand that any imagined “second civil war” wouldn’t break down into red states versus blue states, but rather rural areas versus urban areas. A well-armed “Marlboro Man” isn’t going to ride into the city and start picking off limp wristed liberals one by one.
    You see…urban areas possess (among other things):
    1. Seaports
    2. Airports
    3. Manufacturing
    4. Telecommunications
    Need I go on?
    Careful what you wish for, my secessionist friends.
    Does the year “1865” ring a bell?



    [Ed. I’ll play devil’s advocate. I have no opinion at this time whether the BC is real or fake. But the arguments being bandied against it all have possible answers as well.]

    First, this is the same “type” of document that the Obama camp is pushing on the public – a Certification and NOT a Certificate (with signatures of mom, dad, Doctor, witnesses, etc.)

    [Ed. Then what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.]

    Second, Kenya did NOT become a Republic until December of 1964.

    [Ed. Kenya became independent in 1963… we do not know when Coast Province and Mombassa started using the term “Republic of Kenya”. We can see from various newspaper sources that Kenya was being called a Republic as far back as 1961. See this also, a comment from LEXINOM at the Freeper site which explains the image was “Published on April 11th, 1961 on Page 4 near top center of the page. Missouri Chillicothe Constitution Tribune in pdf format. The usage of ‘Republic of Kenya’ seems common place way before December of 1964.”]

    Third, E.F. Lavender (Registrar) is a common detergent in Kenya.

    [Ed. Lavender is also a name regularly used by Kenyans. Search “Lavender kenya” and then do one in facebook.]

    Fourth, the Certification# 44 0 47 is an insult: 44 = 44th President, O = Obama, 47 = his current age.

    [Ed. A conspiracy theory or a coincidence? ]


    I hope my “Farewell” letter does NOT sit on the “shelf” too long.

    Again, folks, PLEASE realize that the law is NOT on “our” side and “we’ll” have to think and work “outside of the box”.

    Even IF this were real, it would get stonewalled in the Courts.

    [Ed. Like I said a few times already, I’m not impressed by the tactics of those who brought this forward this week. It needed to be verified better. This is just going to create havoc for the nbc issue but that’s not going away anytime soon either. Farewell, sir. Now that you’ve said farewell, we will have to hold you to it.]

  94. billvanallen Says:


    WSJ blog calling for constitutional amendment on NBC issue

    [Ed. Good luck with that amendment. It aint gonna happen though.]

  95. naturalborncitizen Says:

    Regarding the controversy as to whether Kenya was referred to as “Republic of Kenya” back in Feb. 1964, I thought it would be interesting to see when Kenya was admitted to the UN and under what name – Kenya or Republic of Kenya.

    I’ve found two interesting references which indicate Kenya having been first admitted into the United Nations in 1963 under the title “Republic of Kenya”.

    Wiki lists Constitutional formation date for the “Republic of Kenya” as December 12, 1963 and the date of admission as December 16, 1963.


    The Encyclopedia of the United Nations states: “Republic of Kenya. Member of the UN since 16 December 1963.’

    [Ed. UPDATED 9:33 AM – UN Library checked the actual Resolution admitting Kenya to the UN – resolution # 1796 dated December 16, 1963 does not say “Republic of Kenya”, it just says Kenya. Additionally neither the Kenya Mission for the UN nor the Kenyan Embassy in DC were able to shed any further light on the issue. Although they were both very helpful and they did try to come up with an accurate answer when asked if documents purporting to be from “Republic of Kenya” dated Feb 1964 were legit. Neither source felt that they could answer the question in any definitive way. So please don’t go around saying they’ve been told to keep quiet. They haven’t. The people there were very professional and courteous and we spent some time on the phone. They didn’t take a position either way and nobody could confirm or deny the use of “republic of Kenya” circa Feb 1964.]

    Also see this for links to newspaper reference mentioning Republic of Kenya form 1961.

  96. Leo said: “This [Kenyan BC] is just going to create havoc for the nbc issue…”

    DING! The NBC issue is THE ISSUE and now, quite conveniently, Taitz and WND whip a pic of a Kenyan doc out of their hats. I’ve never trusted WND.

    As willem stated on this thread, if I were Obama I would be paying Orly Taitz to do what she is doing.

  97. Kal Says: August 3, 2009 at 6:20 am
    First, this is the same “type” of document that the Obama camp is pushing on the public – a Certification and NOT a Certificate (with signatures of mom, dad, Doctor, witnesses, etc.)

    [Ed. Then what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.]


    I’m thinking that both sides of a crucial Constitutional debate have offered up nothing more than low res photographs of documents that appear to be some sort of birth certificate.

    Meanwhile the President of the United States of America admits he was born under British rule.

    Circus of the bizarre, played out on the WWW.

    [Ed. Agreed. This feels like a psyop of epic proportions.]

  98. Leo

    I have erred in re the Pryor YLR Note. I concluded Pryor did not speak to the 1795 repeal. She did, albeit somewhat cryptically. Here is the passage from page 891:

    “b. Naturalization Act of 1790

    Congress’ first act concerning citizenship, the Naturalization Act of 1790, was consistent with Madison’s and Hamilton’s understanding. In that act Congress provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, … shall be considered as natural born citizens . . . .” ~3 Although the phrase was deleted in a later act for unknown reasons, the Act was never challenged as being beyond the scope of Congress’ naturalization power.”

    The distortion and bias evident here inverts the question. Is not this the unchallenged question: “Can Congress retroactive grant citizens “citizen at birth” status when they are not natural born citizens?” The answer is obviously “no” and so compellingly so it was repealed and the original meaning restored in its entirety without so much as a grumble.

    The YLR note is from 1988. Dare I wonder if there was an invisible hand even back then pushing the meme of “unknown reasons” to disparage and neutralize the phrase ‘natural born citizen.’ Rereading the Note, I sense a deliberate agenda to discredit the legitimacy of the NBC concept as used in Article II.

    Having erred doesn’t diminish my suspicions about the possible impact of this YLR Note on Taranto and those upon whom he relies. I can certainly accept a possiblility that they might be sailing under a black flag. In matters like these, anyone could. Look at Joseph Farah and WND; at the least the flag is black and green. But my years of reading Taranto lead me to think they too have erred.

    There’s an old saw I’ve learned to trust: “Never attribute to malice what can also be attributed to stupidity.” Malice may be present but stupidity gives it scale; i.e., malice can be ignored but never turn your back on stupidity or error.

    [Ed. Any chance it was just stupidity and not malice was erased with Taranto’s second article. He knows exactly what he is saying.]

    There is also prefacing statement from Pryor which jumped out during the last reading:

    “Congress has the power to define which classes of people will be citizens upon birth, but it may not declare any person a “citizen at birth” retroactively.”

    A duplicitous statement given the ‘unknown reasons’ mantra in re the 1795 repeal.

    Here’s the full cite with footnotes:

    Page 884 to 885

    “Section I follows the traditional method of approaching the natural born citizen clause, and illustrates the fundamental indeterminacy and in completeness of this approach.” Section II demonstrates that Congress’ naturalization powers under the Constitution enable it to naturalize citizens from birth. Section III marshals textual and structural support for the alternative “naturalized born” approach, which reads the clause to require that the presidential candidate be a citizen at the time of birth. Under that approach, Congress has the power to define which classes of people will be citizens upon birth, but it may not declare any person a “citizen at birth” retroactively.(15)”

    I5. For example, Congress could not declare in 1987 that John Smythe, born an alien in 1952, “shall henceforth be a citizen at birth.” Nor could Congress declare an entire class of living John Smythes (e.g., “all persons descended from Henry VIII”) to be citizens at birth. For a discussion of what might happen if Congress said in 1987, “all persons born after this day who are descended from Henry VIII shall be citizens at birth,” see infra text accompanying notes 92-,-94.

    So we return to the above prefacing statement:

    “Congress has the power to define which classes of people will be citizens upon birth, but it may not declare any person a “citizen at birth” retroactively.”

    What has been planted and is stuck in the minds of those like Taranto has been painted red in the Note’s conclusion.

    “Under the naturalized born approach, any person with a right to American citizenship under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States at the time of his or her birth is a natural-born citizen for purposes of presidential eligibility.”

    Full cite:


    If the eligibility of a presidential candidate born outside the territorial United States were challenged under the natural-born citizen clause to day, the outcome, based on traditional methods of approaching the clause, would be unpredictable and unsatisfactory. This Note’s approach removes the confusion caused by Supreme Court dicta asserting that there are only two classes of citizens, native-born and naturalized. As historical and textual analysis has shown, a citizen may be both “naturalized” and “natural born.” Under the naturalized born approach, any person with a right to American citizenship under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States at the time of his or her birth is a natural-born citizen for purposes of presidential eligibility.

  99. billvanallen Says:

    reposted from Gabe:

    A response to the “WE HAVE IT NOW!!!!!” e-mail I sent is bellow, My response is yes, it probably is a hoax, but, the withholding of Bummers collage records, is not a hoax, the withholding of Bummer’s travel documents is NOT a hoax, the courts not letting “Discovery” on the matter is a NOT a hoax and the withholding of “STANLEY ANN DUN HAM” travel records, for the reason of “unwarranted invasion of privacy” is not a hoax, But that should be the hoax, because, “STANLEY ANN Durham’s” Constitutional guarantees to “unwarranted invasion of privacy” expired with her life. The worst part of this there is any debate at all, reason being; Bummer admits that his father was a British subject, and became a Kenya citizen, that admission makes Obummer ineligible to be the president. That should be the end of the story, only as a nation we chose to listen to the media (propaganda) to form our mind sets, that is one of the problems. The other problem is we live in a world were EVIL PEOPLE have a printing press that gives themselves more Currency (money substitute) than God put Precious Metals on earth to be used as money. That with our propaganda (media) mind set, we imagine the a piece of paper has value, and if there is a bigger number on that paper it has a multiple of that value, WOW what a great imagination we have as a nation, don’t we. I should copyright this; “IMAGINATION NATION” ‘a great place to think you live’ (any copyright lawyers out there?) So maybe some are right if we just use our imagination and everything will be fine, then click your heals my pretty. Thanks for reading, Gabriel

  100. Tony Stark Says:


    Don’t take my word for it. Get your pocket digital camera, take a picture of a page from a book under similar lighting, make a copy of the image and save the duplicate image a few times as a jpeg file under low to medium quality setting. Compare the original and the one that’s been saved multiple times under that quality setting. The jpeg file format is known as a “lossy” format. The algorithm basically looks at the surrounding pixels and then makes judgements about what can be discarded and what can be kept to maintain a reasonable image. Each time you save the image, more data gets thrown out and the image quality suffers even more. Non-lossy file formats include PNG and the TIFF format in case you want to maintain the best quality, just FYI when you’re dealing with digital photos.

  101. Tony Stark Says:

    “Third, E.F. Lavender (Registrar) is a common detergent in Kenya.

    [Ed. Lavender is also a name regularly used by Kenyans. Search “Lavender kenya” and then do one in facebook.]”

    If you do just a basic Google search with E Lavender such as Eric or Elmer, you will see a ton of names with that combination. What’s up with these people’s parents taking up the name of a soap anyway? 😉

  102. Unbamboozleus Says:

    I don’t think this article, “Media Viciousness and Obfuscating the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” from Canada Free Press has been posted here yet.


    [Ed. Yes, and it’s a good article and I thank him for the link and nod to this blog. I don’t agree with him that McCain would have been eligible though. Regardless whether he was eligible or not, McCain should not have run. It was just too close a call and he’s prvided eligibility cover and support for Obama all along and I dont think he ever meant to win.]

  103. In violation of
    # United States Code

  104. Kenya’s own Constitution (adopted in 1963) refers to it as a “republic.” See http://www.constitutionnet.org/en/vl/constitution-republic-kenya-1963-amended-2008

    If nothing else, that should at least put a stay on the ‘there was no republic’ argument and provide a valid reason to check the document for authenticity.

  105. All DUers with Photoshop Experience
    Your Country Needs You
    “20. We need to create THOUSANDS of them and ship them all over the f*cking place.
    bury the f*ckers in precise fakes, all just a little different from each other.
    I wanna see heads explode. I wanna see people drooling from the breakdowns.”

  106. Leo,

    Your writing has consistently been: clear, concise, readable and firmly grounded in Constitutional Law. Yours has been the best source on this emotional topic and the most quoted. I share your outrage over the WSJ’s abandonment of their “Free Press” responsibilities. It is beyond despicable!

    Your reference to the Nazi Goebbels, however, much less having his photo prominently displayed, will cause the vast majority of your website visitors to TURN-AWAY without even reading your crucial work. It is simple human nature, sadly.

    In any conflict only the cooler heads prevail. Therefore, please, please remove all references to Goebbels. Retaining such vitriol will only result in far, far fewer people from reading the Only Source for The Truth, as grounded in Constitutional Law. Once they have done so they will readily recognize the scam being perpetrated upon our Nation.

    Deeply & Most Respectfully yours,

    [Ed. To state that Reagan signed a law making people born overseas natural born citizens is a propaganda lie. Let’s cite the inspiration – Goebbels. That’s the inspiration for the Wall Street Journal and Taranto writing these lies. ]

  107. Leo,
    getting back on point to the NBC issue, and the WSJ purposely throwing gas on the flames… i had to go back and look at some of your archives last year. correct me if wrong, but didn’t your (and Cort’s) petition(s) get locked down behind doors (twice) before they, as you say, “punted” the issue?

    my thoughts now are that they didn’t punt the NBC issue. since you have pointed out that there are in fact two separate and distinct classes of citizens, not including those that are statutory citizens (ie: naturalized, etc.), and that of these two non-statutory citizen classes, one class (the mere “citizen” class) is in fact a lesser animal than the “natural born citizen” class, and that further distinction between those classes was made by the original Constitution, to wit, that only the preferred NBC class of citizen could be President, and that distinction was again verified in later rulings and interpretations (Ark, Minor, Elk etc.) even if obliquely…

    do u think SCOTUS may indeed be waiting for somebody to bring up that inherent complicity and conundrum that there are in fact two distinct (and unequal) non-statutory citizenship statuses? since NBC is solely used as a hiring requirement for a Article 2 job (POTUS), then is it even possible for them to rule that a NBC requirement is un-constitutional? can they claim NBC is not a right, but a status? like in a Dred Scott-type ruling? and therefore falls under an equal-opportunity affirmative action job? (if so, then Sotomayor’s nomination makes a lot more sense!)

    IMO that mentality, “citizen = natural born citizen”, is the number one reason there is so much pushback and propaganda against this issue. people refuse to believe that a NBC has special significance and preference over mere citizens, simply because of their birth. of course it does, but trying to make people understand that is like talking to mind-numbed robots.

    like u say, the BC issue was always a red-herring and sideshow. IF… untrue.

    [Ed. Scotus wants this issue like they want a bad case of the clap. ]

  108. kittycat Says:


    I copied this from Free Republic and a person named BP2 wrote it. It’s a bit of interesting information about Kenya.

    “There’s more than meets the eye here … it seems the “Republic of Kenya” might have existed before Dec. 12, 1964.

    Please read the following about the “ten mile strip” of what is now “Coastal Province”:

    The Constitution of Kenya Review Commission – [Cached Version]
    Published on: 9/1/2002

    Views were divided as to whether the coastal strip should be treated as a single entity with Kenya Colony, or whether it should be handed back to the Sultan of Zanzibar or it be treated as an independent entity and declared Independent.

    In a report submitted to the British Government and the Sultan of Zanzibar entitled ‘The Kenya Coastal Strip Ð Report by the Commissioner’ Mr. Robertson recommended that the coastal strip be incorporated into Kenya before self government and independence subject to certain safeguards being given to the coastal people which should be entrenched in the constitution.

    Robertson further recommended that the British Government abrogate the 1895 Agreement with the Sultan of Zanzibar and that another Agreement be made between the Government of Kenya and the Sultan of Zanzibar whereby the Sultan of Zanzibar will surrender his Sovereignty claims over the Coastal strip in consideration of the Kenya Government undertaking to respect and safeguarding inter alia the maintenance of the Sharia Law for Muslims and the retention of the Kadhi’s Courts.

    On the 5th October 1963, the said Agreement was actually executed in the form of an exchange of letters between the Prime Ministers of Kenya and Zanzibar Messrs Jomo Kenyatta and M. Shamte respectively.

    That Kadhis’ work should be restricted to judicial work and Muslims to elect their own Islamic/spiritual leader (mufti) who will be their official spokesman and an advisor to the government on issues affecting Muslims in Kenya.

    Muslim personal law on marriage, divorce, inheritance and succession is not codified into legislation in Kenya. It is left to the Kadhi’s in their different courts to interpret the law as they understand it.There are no reports of the Kadhi’s Court’s decisions – hence this has hampered the growth of Islamic Law jurisprudence in Kenya.

    Muslims are mainly of two sects in Kenya – the Sunni and Shia.Majority of the Muslims in Kenya are Sunni Muslims but there is a significant population of Shia Muslims too and consideration ought to be given to the appointment of Kadhis of the Shia Sect to cater the interest of the Shia Muslims.

    Under Section 66 of the constitution as read with the provisions of the legislations passed pursuant to that Section, Islamic Law is clearly recognised as a source of the Laws of Kenya in as far as matters pertaining to marriage, divorce and inheritance for the Muslims is concerned.The Kadhi’s Court’s and the High Court must apply the Muslim Personal Law in dealing with Muslim personal matters. However, Section 3 of the Judicature Act, Chapter 8, Laws of Kenya which lists the sources of the Laws of Kenya and provides for the Jurisdiction of the various Courts in Kenya, does not include Muslim personal law as one of the sources of the Laws of Kenya subject to limitation as to the scope of application.The result has been that Institutions of higher learning in Kenya that teach law to students do not include Islamic Law in their curriculum or courses.Consequently, when lawyers get admitted to the bar in Kenya as advocates with the right of audience before all Courts, they find it difficult to effectively represent clients in the Kadhi’s Court’s especially if they are not Muslims and have not studied Islamic Law. It is therefore necessary to recognize Islamic Law as one of the sources of the law in Kenya and for the same to be taught at universities and in the Kenya School of Law.

    I’ll reiterate the key quotations from this official Kenyan report:
    … “Views were divided as to whether the coastal strip should be treated as a single entity with Kenya Colony” …
    … “Islamic law” …
    … “Muslim personal law on marriage, divorce, inheritance and succession is not codified into legislation in Kenya.” …

    and MY personal favorites:
    … “recommended that the coastal strip be incorporated into Kenya before self government and independence subject to certain safeguards being given to the coastal people which should be entrenched in the constitution” …
    … “Agreement was actually executed in the form of an exchange of letters” …

    It appears the “Ten-Mile Strip” (where Obama’s possible place of birth is located) was separate and seemingly sovereign from the county that WOULD eventually BECOME the “Republic of Kenya” — at least for a short while in 1963 and 1964.

    * I wonder what they might have called themselves in the interim, to ensure they wouldn’t be annexed by Zanzibar, you know, BEFORE the whole of Kenya became a Republic on Dec. 12, 1964? *

    My money is on the “Republic of Kenya”. And this Kenyan birth certificate from the “Republic of Kenya” in February 1964 is looking MORE and MORE plausible…”

  109. Even big government neocon madman Karl Rove has taken notice of this new birth document: http://twitter.com/KarlRove/status/3103454921

  110. …McCain should not have run. It was just too close a call and he’s prvided eligibility cover and support for Obama all along and I dont think he ever meant to win.

    I agree completely, Leo!

    The 2008 election was so rigged. Two candidates, neither a Natural born Citizen, both supported by Soros.

    I believe McCain was the “designated loser”, but Soros would win either way.

  111. Let’s talk about the law that Reagan signed, and how that law applies to every new employee in the United States … no exceptions for Obama as a new Senator (taking office in Jan 2005) or as a new President (taking office in Jan 2009). Let’s see those I-9 forms, Barry…

    POTUS & The I-9 Form

  112. naturalborncitizen Says:

    Kal said,

    “Fourth, the Certification# 44 0 47 is an insult: 44 = 44th President, O = Obama, 47 = his current age.”

    This is just silly now – the document says “No. 47,044.” It’s not the letter o but the number 0 as in forty seven thousand and forty four… If I tried to say that number 0 stood for Obama, I would be soundly and rightly ridiculed to the high heavens. If it were the letter there would be no need for the comma.

    I’m not taking a position on the veracity of the document but this seems rather desperate.

  113. If the new Kenyan BC is accurate then forget about nbc, Obama would not even be a US citizen.

    Yes, and given that he authored the book “Assault Hope: From Jakarta to the White House“, I think he could very seriously be considered an enemy combatant, who should be locked up in Gitmo.

    I’m serious.

  114. People who believe as you do, ( I am one), that the preponderance of the evidence that you have brought forth upon this website indicates that we have an unconstitutional president need to go from simply commenting and wringing our hands to a more active role. My suggestion would be that all of us who believe that this man in the White House is a Fraud put up a large sign on our front lawns,porches, windows and other very noticeable privately held property that simply says in large letters. FRAUD! If these signs start springing up all over America then people will notice and begin to investigate and ask questions and then we can direct them to your website where one more will get educated. The time for talk is over, time for some peaceful resistance and action. Stay away from public property, simply use your own 1st Amend. rights on your own property and say FRAUD! What do you think of this idea?

  115. Yes we know as fact that Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen & this raises the Constitutional question is Obama a Natural Born Citizen. However, the vast majority of Americans believe that if you are born in the USA or on a US military you can run for President. Yes we who come here understand that they are wrong, but that is reality. Think about, Obama bragged about the fact his father was foreign born & not a citizen & he was born in Hawaii which makes him eligible to run for President. Sadly that was fine with American voter since he won the Presidential vote handily. IMHO the Natural Born Citizen question will never see the light of day in the courts or in Congress. The only thing that will get the American people mad enough & demand his removal from office now is if Obama was born in Kenya. Axelrod Inc. understands this & so now I am thinking all this disinformation from the Wall Street Journal, the pressure to fire Lou Dobbs, smearing the “Birthers” is that just maybe he was born in Kenya after all. Obama has only released a Certificate of Live Birth which all that is required at the time for issuance is someone like Obama’s Grandparents under oath saying Obama was born in Hawaii. This new document could be part of his Mother divorce records (follows the correct timeline, very important) since she needed this higher standard, a certified copy of registration of Birth & not the Hawaiian very low standard COLB to get sole custody of Obama from Obama Sr. Most likely this document if genuine was stored away in an attorney‘s record box that worked for Obama’s mother in her divorce proceedings & Axelrod Inc. missed it. So, if and a big if the information in the document is accurate & will lead if not stopped by those protecting Obama, to the British version of a long form Birth Certificate proving Obama was born in Kenya that will end the Obama Presidency. If true, I would be in panic mode if I was Axelrod Inc. & now does make sense to me what is going on in the MSM.

    [Ed. Or it could be the final smoke which draws out a long form Hawaii BC. Perhaps this is designed to draw out the real Hawaii long form. I’m not saying the Kenya thing is fake, and Im not saying it’s real… Im just seeing the table being set for dinner though. We shall see.]

  116. Leo,
    the previous post by Max brings up yet another question about how/why his mom was able to keep the Barry Jr. in a divorce. only in the US and some other Western nations does the mother normally keep the kids. almost every other country in the world considers children to be the “property” of the father. with almost legal certainty a Muslim father gets to keep his male offspring in just about every Islamic or near-Islamic country worldwide.

    stories of child abductions by Islamic fathers and other non-Western fathers are unfortunately all too common. for whatever reason, Obama Sr. didn’t keep custody of his son. the new Kenyan BC may have been part of that intense legal battle. …or not. but at the very least, for a Muslim father – even a “non-practicing” Muslim father – to give up or lose his right to his firstborn male son is absolutely extraordinary.

    i didn’t read “Dreams Of My Father” so if Teh One addressed this monumental legal custody shift in it, plz somebody inform us what happened?

  117. DEFENSE!!


    I was merely pointing out ALL of the inconsistencies and weird coincidences.

    If you remember, I have said ALL along that I believe that Obama/Soetoro was born in Kenya.

    However, I will not support a forgery.


    Those four [4] items of criticism that I listed were from various bloggers that noticed them on the form.

    Originally, I thought (and hoped) it was real but checking around (various sites), I found those notations and merely mentioned them on your site.


    Second, Kenya did NOT become a Republic until December of 1964.

    Dominion of Kenya (December 12, 1963 – December 12, 1964)

    Republic of Kenya (December 12, 1964 – present)


    [Ed. The numerology thing was ridiculous. The Republic of Kenya thing is settled yet. Great Britain considered Kenya a dominion but Kenya considered itself a Republic form independence in 1963. The document is easily verifiable. People just need to be patient and orly should have been patient.]

  118. Obot is a Constitutional lawyer, right?
    Yes he is, well then how many cases has he been in that relates to Constitutional issues? I have not heard of one. It’s quit convenient isn’t it now? If you question him about BC and what is to be natural born citizen and Constitution. Well most would think that he would know pretty much everything about the Constitution and would make sure that there is no question in doubt that he is natural born citizen and therefore eligibly to be the prez. Hmmm, I think he forgot to cover few things and now the information have leaked out into the mainstream and the mainstream media is trying very hard to debunk the rumors and call everyone who question him bunch of kooks.

    We know him through his false book and no nothing more than beyond the books. Who is this guy? we still question this, something very wrong here. Why has he spent over 1million dollars to hide from the true? Hired three law firms to make sure to silence his past. If he were to produce the BC, the long form it’s to late, we will know that it is a fake version just like the short version that was released on his website. The version that was on his website was Photoshop modified version which was poorly done.

  119. IMHO, I don’t think this is a setup & Obama shows the “real deal” to get rid of the Natural Born citizen issue. I am now convinced he does not have a Hawaiian long form Birth certificate. If he did his mother would have used it when she divorced Obama Sr. He never had one. Hawaii has at the time 5 or 6 different types of Birth certificates du e to the influx of foreign workers to work in the fields & Federal money in relation to citizens a state has, another words a welfare bonanza for the State, if you had a heartbeat you could get citizenship. So it was easy for Obama’s Grandparents to fake his Hawaiian birth. All they have to do for COLB is swear under oath that he was born in Hawaiian. See that is why his mother could not use it. Not worth a grain of salt. Also, take note in the anger that I see in the MSM, Chris Matthews when he talks about the “Birthers” tells me Obama is hiding something about Kenya. Finally those in power are not going to risk a power struggle with Obama about his father because that was known by the voting public before the election & he won. Again not right but that is Realpolitik. So Axelrod Inc. knows that & is not worried about that. However, if Obama was born in Kenya, then he flat out lied & his Presidency will end in days. This would make Axelrod Inc. react the way he is now through his surrogates.

  120. Browsing over at Citizen Wells. I wasn’t even aware of this back in Nov. 2008:


    From Bishop McRae:

    “The officials in Kenya throughout the registrar’s office in both Mombassa and Nairobi have told us that he was born in Kenya, and they will tell you verbally that the records have always existed, both for Obama’s birth, and the birthing records of his mother. But the government, under orders from Barack’s cousin Raila Odinga have sealed and confiscated the files to keep them top secret. The government employees know the truth, but fear for their lives in a most serious way. Our preacher, Kweli Shububia (Swahili for “True Witness”, his name has been changed to protect his identity and safety) has already received a mulititude of death threats and has fled the country for his safety.”

    Anyone here, can call Bishop McRae a liar. However, the good Bishop has signed an affidavit attesting to his statement. It would appear that he is prepared to swear in a court of law to this in testimony. Also, this also must raise an eyebrow:


    Concerning Sec. Clinton’s itinerary: (Daily Appointments Schedule,Monday, August 3, 2009)

    “PM depart Andrews Air Force Base en route to Nairobi, Kenya.”

    IDK…………….. Coincidence?

  121. Wiki reports Mombassa was part of Zanzibar until it changed allegiance and joined Kenya upon its independence. Do we now have (rhymes with rastafarian) Zanzibarian citizenship adding to the mayhem? Still, through his father he would have been a British Citizen at birth.

  122. kittycat Says:

    Orly’s site was hacked when this came out, or shortly afterwards. The idiots changed the number at the top from 47,644 to 47,044 and the name K.F. Lavender to E.F. Lavender. I just downloaded an earlier copy from Free Republic of someone had downloaded it about 2 a.m. Here’s the link and it’s Post #72, I think:


  123. Attn.: billvanallen

    RE: WSJ blog calling for constitutional amendment on NBC issue – http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/07/30/natural-born-killer-mulling-a-constitutional-amendment/

    About a week ago the LA Times – blog came up with the same idea. WSJ could be more original, or are they controlled by the same interests? This was my remark to the LAT blog:

    I fully support your idea. That would be a straightforward, honest way to make him eligible and everyone would have to respect it.

    What we have now is similar to the old Soviet judiciary system. The judges are hell-bent to protect the secret, applying the very flexible Standing Doctrine. So far none of the lawsuits were heard on merit. Consequently, due to the politically correct judges, the Constitution is unenforceable.

    So let’s do the Constitutional Amendment – congratulation for the idea initiated by the Editor’s Board. Of course the states would have to ratify it. Good luck.

  124. Found by user literatim at RonPaulForums.com / http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2244513&postcount=30 is this April 11, 1961 page from the Chillicothe Constitution-Tribune.

    See http://chillicothe.newspaperarchive.com/PdfViewer.aspx?img=114412159&src=browse

    Look under the caption “HAROLD W. YOUNG IS A COLLEGE CLUB OFFICER.” It says, “The last two men, Mr. Okatcha and Mr. Olindo, are natives of the East African Republic of Kenya.”

    Though it’s a U.S. paper, it shows Kenya being referred to as a ‘republic’ all the way back in 1961, even before Obama’s August birth.

  125. Leo take a look at tjhis MSNBC clip of Orly

    Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

    Oh, I do believe now Obama was born in Kenya. At the end befroe they cut her off she mentioned that Obama is not a natural born citizen. Love Orly, she called them Brown shirts

  126. That link did not work her…

    Leo take a look at tjhis MSNBC clip of Orly


    Oh, I do believe now Obama was born in Kenya. At the end befroe they cut her off she mentioned that Obama is not a natural born citizen. Love Orly, she called them Brown shirts

  127. Leo I found the Youtube video …

    Leo take a look at this MSNBC clip of Orly

    Oh, I do believe now Obama was born in Kenya. At the end befroe they cut her off she mentioned that Obama is not a natural born citizen. Love Orly, she called them Brown shirts

    [Ed. she got too out of control, but they issued a really low blow with that thing about their driver…]

  128. Leo

    Michael Savage radio show
    08/03/09 H1 Monday, August 03, 2009
    hour 1, starts at time 18:00
    Savage interviews Dr. Orly Taitz about the issue of Obama’s eligibility


    May be carried over to the second hour, but haven’t listened that far yet.

  129. The Kenyan document posted by Orly Taitz is a fake.

    Look at the top left-hand corner. It says “7s 6d”. That’s seven shillings and six pence. There being six pence to an (then contemporaneous currency) English shilling, that’s seven and a half shillings.

    Only one problem: Kenya in 1964 (the document date) was using the East African shilling, whereby each shilling was composed of 100 cents, not of six pence. The usual way to write this would be “Sh. 7/50”. The use of the letter “d” unambiguously identifies the currency as Denarius or pence, just as it did in England up to 1970. I know this because I’m English.

    The jig was up when a Brit who was raised in Kenya during a time spanning 1964 chimed in at freerepublic and pointed this out. His post is here: …
    Oops it’s been removed. It WAS #968, which is now missing. Isn’t that curious? Puts freerepublic in a fascist light.

    The final nail in the coffin came when what is most likely the candidate template for the forgery was found here:

    Even the registrar’s name (Miller) is the same. Case closed.

    [Ed. That’s an interesting document right there. Look at this readers. What do you all think? Don’t know if the form was standard but this certainly is interesting. I couldn’t find the link to this document at the bomford.net page – where is the page the document links from?]

    Shortly after trying to share this information with these “freepers”, my posting privileges were summarily revoked. I can only conclude that freerepublic is a terminally tainted and corrupt site, and I will not be bothering them again.

    [Ed. Updated 9:49 PM – looks like you’re wrong about the Shilling thing: this from Freep:

    971 posted on Monday, August 03, 2009 5:06:16 PM by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 958 | View Replies]
    To: Thon Brocket

    Bzzt, wrong. It was shillings and pence until 1966, when it became shillings and pennies (wierd, yup). Linky – had a better one but lost it – http://www.centralbank.go.ke/Currency/CurrencyHistory.aspx]

  130. BuckeyeTexan Says:

    Bill O’Reilly summed it up tonight for all of the brown-shirt media. Regarding the NBC controversy he said, “I don’t care!”

    And that’s the essence of investigative journalism today – they don’t care.

  131. No Leo, you’re a victim of the travesty of censorship at Freep. The link you posts clearly shows cents anyway, and there’s no mention of pence!

    When this comment was made, both myself (as AndrewPPP) and Thon Brocket responded by pointing out the error. I assume that these responses have also been removed. I have no idea as to motive, but that’s a fact. Here’s the skinny on the currency:
    from which you can see that it’s cents and not pence.

    Also note that 7s 6d is perfectly legal currency for Australia in the sizties.

    No Leo, you’re a victim of the travesty of censorship at Freep. The link you posts clearly shows cents anyway, and there’s no mention of pence!

    When this comment was made, both myself (as AndrewPPP) and Thon Brocket responded by pointing out the error. I assume that these responses have also been removed. I have no idea as to motive, but that’s a fact. Here’s the skinny on the currency:
    from which you can see that it’s cents and not pence.

    [Ed. When I plug bomford.net into the the Wayback Machine web site search engine, I get hits going back to 2006. I can follow them to this link… for example this is the link to the bomford.net page as it appeared on Dec 16, 2006. I then click through “The Worcestershire Bomfords” then click “Annotated Family Tree” and that leads me to a big page where I can search the page for “David Jeffrey Bomford” and there is a small link there under the letter “b” and if I click it (go ahead and click it) it leads to a page which says:

    Not in Archive.

    No archived versions of the page you requested are available. If the page is still available on the Internet, we will begin archiving it during our next crawl.

    You may want to:

    * Search for all pages on the site bomford.net/
    * Try a different page address, at top

    See the FAQs for more info and help, or contact us.

    OK, if I right click the link and isolate the part which you have provided


    it then leads to the South Australia birth certification… but the Way Back Machine doesn’t have this certification you are relying on archived which tells me that everything at this Bomford site is real and archived… but the certifcate – which may be real – is not archived – which means it’s possible that it’s just been added to the site… and that could mean foul play. I really don’t know what to make of it. If I just plug the URL for the image into the Way Back Machine it gives the same response – that the page is not archived – and this does not seem right to me if the rest of the site is. Not saying it’s bogus, but it is an issue. Just trying to be fair and balanced.]

  132. Leo,
    Here is the link ypu’re looking for….Just follow these instructions.
    Also, David Bomford, if you search on that site, is collecting photos of Bomfords. He provides his email address on this page. If you go there and search for David you’ll find the line that has his email.


    It seems that it may be his birth certificate (cert. copy) he’s contributed to the Bomford site…

    If you scroll or search down to his appearance in the tree, next David if you are searching, there is a “b” standing for “born” that is a link. It links to the certified copy of reg. of birth.

    Bones Says:

    August 4, 2009 at 1:06 am
    This goes directly to the line with the link:


  133. kittycat Says:


    What’s the deal with the Lavender family? One of Orly’s documents says E.F. Lavender, another says K.F. Lavender and on that one it’s G.F. Lavender.

    And to be honest, I’m not sure which Orly document is correct now. Guess we’ll all find out.

  134. The “burden of proof” is on Obama and no one else.

    We don’t have to prove that the Kenyan birth certificate is real.

    [Ed. I do NOT agree with you. We do have the duty to make sure it’s not a fraud. Don’t let your desperation to win this thing cloud your judgment. Lose site of what’s real and you start to lower standards and make everything dodgy. Unless we are going to lower our standards of truth then we better make sure something is real before we begin telling people it has probative value. I’m not with you on this at all.]

    He has to provide a certified copy of his original birth certificate proving his:
    1) Birth location
    2) Father
    3) Mother

    [Ed. That would be nice, but it’s also not required under the Constitution. Please keep that in mind.]

    “native born” Citizen = Citizen = 1.
    Birth on U.S. soil (1) is sufficient to make you a Citizen (C).
    The 14th Amendment defines citizenship based on U.S. birth. The 14th Amendment does not define Natural Born Citizenship, and the Supreme Court, more than six years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, made it clear that the 14th amendment does not define Natural Born Citizenship. Some people refer to 14th Amendment citizenship (upon U.S. birth) as “Native born citizen”, but that is not the type of citizenship required by the U.S. Constitution to be eligible to hold the office of President and Commander in Chief.

    NBC = 1, 2, 3.
    Birth on U.S. soil (1), to a U.S. Citizen father (2), and a U.S. Citizen mother (3), is necessary to make you a Natural Born Citizen (NBC).

    Again, the burden of proof is on Obama, no one else, to prove that he is a Natural born Citizen.

    [Ed. No, it’s on us now that he is President defacto. Unless forced by a court of law, there is nothing which makes him have to prove anything. That’s the real situation we face.]

    And since he has already admitted that his father was a British citizen who passed British citizenship on to his son, Obama himself has already admitted that he is not a Natural born citizen. But then, he swore under oath to the State of Arizona that he was a Natural born Citizen. So, either has lied about who is father is, or he has lied about being a Natural born Citizen.

    Which lie is it?

  135. Tony Stark Says:

    WND has taken up your suggestion about the plaque and posted a story requesting the same thing, where should we put the plaque commemorating Obama’s birth:


    [Ed. Where do we put the plaque? ]

  136. Whistleblower Says:

    Even if the Kenyan BC is fraudulent, we must remember that Barack Obama II would have had dual citizenship at birth.

    Dual citizenship at birth! -Now that’s loyalty you can believe in. Well sorta.

  137. Leo, here’s a message I’m sending out (with slight modifications) to different places as a call to activism (for Obama’s birthday tomorrow) on the natural born citizen issue.


    August 4th is Barack Obama’s birthday, and I have an idea for giving an activism ‘present’ to Congress.

    According to Glenn Thrush, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid denounced the birther issue Monday on the Senate floor, saying that it “ignores the undeniable and proven fact that President Obama was born in the United States.”
    REFERENCE: Glenn Thrush. “Reid Hits ‘Artificial Controversy’ of Birthers.” Politico. Capitol News Company LLC. August 3, 2009. Accessed August 3, 2009. http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0809/Reid_hits_artificial_controversy_of_birthers.html

    However, there’s something that Senator Reid is ignoring, and that’s the historical/legal matter that even if Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims, he still may be ineligible to be president because he held Kenyan/British citizenship at birth thru his father under the British Nationality Act of 1948, and possessed foreign citizenship until he was 21 years old.
    REFERENCE: FactCheck.org. Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. August 29, 2008. http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html Referenced at: Fight the Smears. Obama for America. 2008. Accessed June 27, 2009. http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
    (Note that this website used to be listed under the ownership of Obama for America. When it was accessed on August 3, 2009 it was listed as belonging to Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee. Peculiar.)

    Leo Donofrio Esq. asks the pertinent question: “Can you please tell the American people how a natural born citizen of the United States can be governed – at birth – by British law?”
    REFERENCE: Leo Donofrio, Esq. “World Net Daily Drops The POTUS Ineligiblity (sic) Ball…” Natural Born Citizen. June 23, 2009. Accessed August 1, 2009. https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/world-net-daily-drops-the-potus-ineligiblity-ball/

    It’s a simple question, and an objective one at that. It’s not conspiracy; it’s simply a matter of fact. Why won’t Congress address this issue? As Mr. Donofrio also said, “It’s hardly a fringe concept to expect and demand that the Commander in Chief was never a citizen of another nation.”
    REFERENCE: Leo Donofrio, Esq. “The Relevant Obama Admission.” Natural Born Citizen. July 29, 2009. Updated twice that same day. Accessed August 3, 2009. https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/07/29/the-relevant-obama-admission-2/

    In his treatise, Vattel stated that “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” And he went on to state, “I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen ; for, if be (sic) is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
    REFERENCE: Monsieur de Vattel. The Law of Nations. New edition by Joseph Chitty with notes and additions by Edward D. Ingraham. Philadelphia: T. & J. W. Johnson & Co., Law Booksellers, 1867. 101. Accessed June 26 and/or 27, 2009. http://books.google.com/books?id=0B0MAAAAYAAJ&pg=PP7
    ALSO SEE REFERENCE (on the significance of Vattel): “Emmerich de Vattel.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Accessed July 6, 2009. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/624086/Emmerich-de-Vattel

    The U.S. Supreme Court quoted Vattel as saying, “The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.”
    REFERENCE: The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 289 (1814). Cited at the U.S. Supreme Court Center. Justia & Oyez & Forms WorkFlow. Accessed July 26, 2009. http://supreme.justia.com/us/12/253/case.html

    The Supreme Court also stated, “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
    REFERENCE: Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 21 Wall. 167-168 (1874). Cited at the U.S. Supreme Court Center. Justia & Oyez & Forms WorkFlow. Accessed July 26, 2009. http://supreme.justia.com/us/88/162/case.html
    (Note that this case was decided after the ratification of the 14th amendment, meaning the court held that said amendment did not define a “natural born citizen;” it merely defined a citizen, and here the court points us to external historical sources (of which Vattel would be one such an authority) to discover the definition of a “natural born citizen.” See the post on this matter by Leo Donofrio, Esq. at https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/07/27/obama-is-guilty-on-at-least-two-counts-of-false-swearing/ initially dated July 27, 2009, updated July 28, 2009.)

    In the Virginia ratifying convention of the Constitution, Madison said, “It is to be presumed that, in transactions with foreign countries, those who regulate them will feel the whole force of national attachment to their country. The contrast being between their own nation and a foreign nation, is it not presumable they will, as far as possible, advance the interest of their own country?”
    REFERENCE: Madison. “Thursday, June 19, 1788″ (misprinted by Jonathan Elliot as “Wednesday, June 18, 1788″). Jonathan Elliot. “The Debates in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Virginia, on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.” The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. 1836. Book compiled by Jon Roland of The Constitution Society, September 5, 1995 at http://www.constitution.org/elliot.htm Updated October 21, 2001. Specific section which was cited accessed July 29, 2009. http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va_16.htm

    Madison’s point reflects the mindset that a government official involved in foreign affairs will obviously seek the interests of his own country more than that of another country, and that in fact, they will seek their own country’s interests to the fullest possible extent. This gives us good reason to believe that the founders intended to exclude dual citizens (like Obama, assuming he was born in Hawaii) from the ‘natural born’ category, seeing as a dual citizen may well have conflicting national interests, rendering such a person incapable of fully and properly representing the foreign interests of the United States. In Obama’s own case, he had foreign citizenship until he was an adult, by which time he would certainty have had the chance to intellectually-develop at least something of a national attachment.

    So let’s make sure Congress hears from us this August 4th so that we can get an answer to that pertinent aforementioned question posed by Mr. Donofrio: “Can you please tell the American people how a natural born citizen of the United States can be governed – at birth – by British law?”

    I propose that on the evening of August 4th, wait until the offices of your two U.S. senators and representative are closed. Then call their closest district office and leave them a brief voice mail. It can go something like this (this is just a sample. Please use your own words; it will be more effective):

    “Today is August 4th: Barack Obama’s birthday. Recently there has been a lot of additional controversy surrounding Obama’s birth certificate. However, Congress and the media are essentially ignoring an even more important matter: the fact that Obama was born a foreign citizen governed under the British Nationality Act of 1948, and held foreign citizenship until he was 21 years old. Obama even admitted as much on his official Fight the Smears website. The founders intended to keep foreign influence out of the office of president, so is it so much to expect that the chief executive was never the citizen of a foreign nation? And can you explain to the American people how a natural born United States citizen could be governed at birth by foreign citizenship law? Do you have an answer for your constituents as to this vital question? What do you plan to do in order to resolve it?”

    You can also call their D.C. office, of course, or any of their district offices, but if you do nothing else I suggest simply calling the closest district office because it’s more convenient and that way, in many cases, you won’t have to make a long-distance call. Ideally, when their staff comes in to work on Wednesday morning their voice mail boxes will be filled with messages from many constituents asking that essential question, and demanding that they do something about it. And if you’re so inclined, you may also consider calling and leaving a similar message for your state’s governor.

  138. Let’s send the plaque to DC’s wax museum as it’s resting place!

    –WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 (UPI) — Madame Tussauds Washington says it is setting up a star-studded party scene to celebrate U.S. President Barack Obama’s 48th birthday. The museum’s Oval Office exhibit will feature wax figures of Obama. “Guests in the attraction can join the party in the attraction’s replica Oval Office and have their photograph taken with the president and his party guests,” the museum said in a news release.

    Notice how quite the press has been regarding Bo’s birthday?
    –Washington Times–“White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was noncommittal about Mr. Obama’s plans for his birthday.”

  139. In reference to Reeko’s questions above about how Stanley Ann Dunham Obama was able to get custody of Barack…she alleged mental “cruelty” in the divorce papers (according to the blogger Lame Cherry) against Obama Sr. Because of this, she would have needed to prove definitively that she was his mother and would have to have provided documentation in the form of the certification of live birth document we are seeing now (assuming it is authentic).
    The timing does seem to fit….Stanley Ann filed for divorce in January 1964, BC document is dated Feb 17, 1964 and divorce was final in March 1964.
    Thank you again Leo, for your calm and reasoned analysis. You are an oasis in the desert.

  140. Leo, your Wayback analysis was good, but if you check the other images from that page, they don’t show up either (at least the handful that I checked). And my experience with Wayback is that images often do not show up…

    Additionally, David Bomford can be contacted by email. His email address is right on the site. I’m afraid the proverbial towel is asking to be “thrown in.” Reality is waiting to be reclaimed. I’m convinced now this was a disinformation campaign, possibly to discredit Orly.


    [Ed. I’m not a document authenticator or web site tech. I got no horse in this race either way, said that from the start. I said it would cause havoc for the true nbc legal issue: Whether the Constitution allows the President to be born of an alien father and to have been a citizen of another nation. That’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s just a question of law. Somebody’s got some ‘splainin to do – even more than one somebody. But it’s not me.]

  141. jcd,

    “Concerning Sec. Clinton’s itinerary: (Daily Appointments Schedule,Monday, August 3, 2009)

    “PM depart Andrews Air Force Base en route to Nairobi, Kenya.”

    IDK…………….. Coincidence?”


    1) *PM stands for Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, Department
    of State

    2)The current PM is Andrew J. Shapiro.

    3)Andrew J. Shapiro was an associate at the Washington, DC law firm Covington &

    4)Eric Holder was a partner at Covington & Burling.

    I wonder if there are more dots to connect?

    That search took 30 seconds.

  142. We don’t have to prove that the Kenyan birth certificate is real.

    [Ed. I do NOT agree with you. We do have the duty to make sure it’s not a fraud. Don’t let your desperation to win this thing cloud your judgment. Lose site of what’s real and you start to lower standards and make everything dodgy. Unless we are going to lower our standards of truth then we better make sure something is real before we begin telling people it has probative value. I’m not with you on this at all.]

    I’m sorry if I hit a hot button with you here, Leo.

    I’m not advocating that we lower our standards of truth. I’m not advocating “fake, but accurate”. I have not told anyone that this document has probative value. If it is proven accurate, great! Then it would have probative value and proves he is ineligible. But even if it is proven to be fraudulent, that doesn’t end the question of Barack’s eligibility because it doesn’t prove that he is eligible.

    In my mind, this isn’t innocent until proven guilty, it’s ineligible until proven eligible.

    I understand that you believe that as soon as he was sworn in, it became “innocent until proven guilty”. All because our members of Congress did not adequately ensure he was proven eligible.

    As soon as one Senator or one Representative decides to actually uphold their sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution, and they ask the State of Hawaii to send them, under seal, and official copy of the original birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama, it will have to be released.

    Would Dr. Fukino have the gall to tell members of Congress, who are sworn to support and defend the Constitution (including the natural born citizen requirement and the language of ensuring Obama hasn’t “failed to qualify”), that they don’t have a “tangible interest” in that document? The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and trumps any Hawaiian state law. If Dr. Fukino does turn them down, perhaps they would proceed with a Quo Warranto case in the D.C. court.

    My main point in all of this is that the burden of proof should be on Obama, and no one else. If it takes a member of Congress to request the original birth certificate and/or initiate the Quo Warranto case, so be it.

    I believe we are reaching critical mass, and it’s only a matter of time…

  143. There’s been talk about fired I.G. Walpin being able to bring a suit on Obama’s eligibility.

    Well, he has apparently filed suit to get his job back: see http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/18/fired-inspector-general-files-lawsuit/

    It’s not an eligibility case, but it does help show that one could theoretically be raised.

    Does anyone know how to contact Walpin, anyway?

  144. Phil at TRSOL has an interesting post regarding the bomford.net document. http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6938

    This just keeps getting stranger and stranger.

  145. The MSNBC brown shirts were using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for radicals on her.

  146. McCain was on Greta’s show. She was asking him about future Republican Pres candidates. He mentioned Bobby Jindal. Both Jindal’s parents were not U.S. citizens when he was born. McCain knows this.

  147. Tony Stark Says:

    The Bomford/Australian certificate image seems to have disappeared from all the “debunking” articles. Check out post 1,139 about 2/3rds down the page, re the Kenyan coat of arms emblem:
    Looks like the Aussie cert was copied from Taitz’s, and not vise-versa.

    “Koyann (Steve Ellis), who fabricated the fake “Australian” certificate, didn’t take the time to replacte the crest, instead he cropped the upper part of the template, as you can see: the words “South Australia” are cut in half. It’s clear that he used the Kenya image as template and not the other way around. The typed letters are not distorted by the paper creases as they should.”

  148. […] This post was Twitted by larrymwalkerjr […]

  149. Oops, major brainfarts up there from me. I kept saying “six pence to a shilling”, when I should have said twelve. In any case, I would not be surprised if this whole business with the “Kenyan” forgery was simply a discrediting tactic. Doesn’t change the nbc issue one whit of course.

  150. I agree with you Mr. Donofrio, but I do have a dog in this fight, the oath that I took.

    If the UK not will not release the information they may hold on President Obama’s past, they can use that information to guide their own agendas and possibly compromise our National Security. That is the real issue here as President Obama continues to obscure his past.

    President Obama needs to reassure the public by being forthcoming with his records to put all these matters to rest. The issues you raise are valid points but the larger question is, how secure is our Nation?

    [Ed. The safety of our nations is the foremost reason all of us should care. THAT horse will all have in this race. What I mean was that I have not taken a position on whether the kenyan cert is real or not… I haven’t entered that race. I have no idea if it’s real or fake. Same for the Bomford one. The race I am in is the nbc legal question issue as that is an identifable legal question and not a conspiracy theory. ]

  151. Attn.: Jim L

    RE: Michael Savage radio show 08/03/09 Monday

    Jim, thanks for informing us about the show. Let me give you my impression.

    The interview with Orly was too short. She tried her best to explain the issues, and significantly she is not relying solely on the vault-BC any more. She tried to explain the nbc issue: the father foreign citizen etc.

    Unfortunately, Savage, while meant well, does not understand the issues and kept mixing up the term citizen with natural born citizen. Also, Michael emphasized the ruining the economy, nationalizing industries, trying to institute socialized medicine. All valid topics but it took too much time away from Orly to explain the subject matter.
    He asked Orly if she new Berg. (Because he interviewed Berg a few months ago.) To her credit she replied with a short yes.

    Savage is not afraid to say what he thinks. Consequently he has a loyal audience, sometimes he shoots from the hip, or exaggerates, but overall he is strait-shooter and entertaining guy. I am going to thank him for interviewing Orly and some of you may consider doing the same. If he could interview Leo, that would be great – I am going to suggest that in my note to Michael – if Leo does not mind?

    [Ed. I don’t mind. I would love to go on a major radio program and discuss the Wall Street Journal’s propaganda. I don’t believe Savage will be allowed to have me on though.] strong>

  152. Leo, your “buddy” at Plains Radio, Ed Hale, has confessed to being the person behind this Kenyan nonsense. Here’s a snippet from the link below

    What I’m hearing from someone who was present: Ed Hale of Plains Radio Network, in his chat room yesterday, claimed he was the one to pass the now infamous Kenyan BC to Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. Taitz submitted it as Exhibit A, attached to a filing over the weekend in Keyes v. Obama. Hale said he had paid $1,000 for it last year to a woman named “Shirley” who did business in Kenya. Apparently, at one point, he had previously said he had submitted the document to the FBI and that it was in Swahili. He now says those statements were untrue. And he says he used the eBay guy to somehow cover his butt.


  153. I copied and posted a slightly modified version of Nick’s message above, and sent it to family, friends and others, far and wide …

    It might help a great amount if several hundred other folks did too!

    Let’s as many as possible of us stay behind the ‘natural born citizen’ issue …

  154. Civis Naturaliter Natus Says:


    If you do a web search the owner of Bomford.net is identified in 2 International Conferences as Richard Bamford, who was just involved in a high level fraud scheme in Australia. For those who are going to use the Bamford.net image to discredit the image given to Attorney Taitz, they better watch out, because Bamford could be a document forger. GIM International lists him as an export in GIS systems, which are digital mapping and imaging programs. These could easily be used to forge documents as simple as Certificates of Registration.

    [Ed. Very interesting, civ. Please see me research on the bomford.net site via the way back machine – I could not find the document in the way back machine but I did find the link. This is why the BC is always going to be a conspiracy theory. And the juicy BC is so much sexier than the boring legal question. Somebody is doing a great job the whole way through of obfuscating the real issue.]

  155. Leo, The Chicago Tribune’s Eric Zorn is spreading more lies on the NBC issue. Check it out. http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2009/08/natural-.html

    [Ed. Wow. So this is the new argument. The writer feels that he has more wisdom than the framers and that the framers intent should now be ignored because of some poll he quotes…It’s nice to see they are finally coming to discuss the real issue. If Kim Jong Il or Osama Bin Laden impregnates an American woman and and then she comes here and has the child, are we supposed to allow that child to be President? No way. And the only way to insure that never happens is by obeying the Costitution.]

  156. naturalborncitizen Says:

    It’s amazing that this link works

    but this does not


    it says:

    “This account has been suspended.
    Either the domain has been overused, or the reseller ran out of resources.”

    why doesn’t this work?

    who can you trust?

  157. Leo:

    I cannot get first link!

  158. JosephII Says:

    Leo, just wanted to say hello, that I’ve been praying God will continue to give you great Wisdom, Fortitude, Courage and Discernment in your fight for our beloved America the Beautiful and the divinely ordained Constitution of our Founding Fathers. I thank God that He has given you the legal expertise to be a very calm, logical and accurate analyst of the Constitution and teach We The People its principles in clear, simple, and easy to understand terms. You Leo, for this long time, have been a steady rock, a light, a strength, a mighty warrior to those of us who are engaged in an apocalyptic battle with those corrupt forces which would destroy our great nation and the freedoms we enjoy. Thank you Leo, God bless you, a true and noble Patriot of our beloved America, and keep you in the Palm of His Hand always. I am very proud of you Leo and, if it were possible, I would award you the Medal of Freedom and the highest accolades America could bestow on its heros.

  159. Free cake & Candy for everyone…Today Aug 4 ….is Obama’s Birthday
    Betting it’s the lowest -to zero- key story of the day

    Hopefully Later, we can all play pin the tail on the donkey

  160. Hugh Says:
    August 4, 2009 at 6:48 am
    I cannot get first link!
    this may be a copy of that same image

  161. Distribute widely —

    What happens to Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation as Supreme Court Justice if the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” Presidential eligibility requirement is subsequently determined applicable to Barack Obama on the basis of Article 2’s exclusion of dual citizenship birth (doesn’t matter whether Obama born in Hawaii since his dad was British citizen at the time)? It would seem prudent, if not dereliction of Constitutional duty in not so doing, for the United States Senate to defer voting on Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation at the very least until there is determination, now imminent, on standing in Kerchner v. Congress (USDC NJ) on that precise issue (Congressional failure to take up the raised and known constitutional ineligibility question prior to declaring a Presidential winner in the vote of the electoral college). For the full Senate now to proceed to vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor (an otherwise lifetime appointment) before then, would be a knowing and very substantial exacerbation of any inherent Constitutional crisis — compounding the previous Congressional dereliction. That is, the Executive Branch, as well as conceivably all actions of a Congress under a President determined ineligible, would leave the Supreme Court as an essential unfettered remaining Branch of the Federal Government, that is unfettered so long as Mr. Obama’s nominee is not yet confirmed by the Senate.

    Will not one Senator, let alone Republican Senator, raise this issue on the Senate floor? The nation is watching.

  162. Whistleblower Says:

    “The people, are ever entitled to demand of their elected representatives an ‘exact and constant observance’ of the principles of the Constitution, above all, to exercise no powers not granted. We may not, therefore, shut our eyes to the issue of legitimacy.” -paraphrasing Raoul Berger quoting John Adams

    It is claimed by President Obama that the charges of usurpation most certainly cannot be proved; it is without merit. They claim that the legitimacy of the (acting) President’s qualification as a “natural born citizen” in terms of the original intent cannot be proved. This attempt at even-handed analysis overlooks the fact that under a Constitution which delegates and limits power, the burden is on a claimant to point to the source of his qualification—failing which, it is a usurpation. -paraphrasing Leonard Levy

    Our problem isn’t proof. -We have that. Our problem is access to the courts. -Which has been continuously denied.

    On the East Pediment of OUR Supreme Court building, the words “JUSTICE the GUARDIAN of LIBERTY” are inscribed. One would think that Chief Justice Hughes, who proposed those words, would have found the any citizen would/should have the ability to challenge the qualifications of the elected President.

    Think about this:

    If Leo had not been denied certiorari the questions of legitimacy could have been answered before the election even took place.

  163. All this clown did was open new doors.


    Take info from the article, research, and pow! Noboby gives a crap about the constitution.


    “On October 5, 2004, the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate held hearings on proposals to eliminate the natural-born citizen requirement in the U.S. Constitution.”


    I will start looking up names of senators and representatives who were against these ideas. Mabey they still have a backbone.



    [This is in reference to comments about Kim’s and/or Osama’s kids NOT being eligible (legally correct)].

    I’m a bit surprised at your comments (on more than one occasion) that the “natural born” law saves the US from someone who would not have the US’s best interest at heart (paraphrasing).

    How many “natural born” citizens (in power) are just standing on the sidelines or worse, supporting Obama/Soetoro?

    Also, I’m sure you would be the first to come to the defense if someone tried to say anything negative about Obama’s kids.

    Kids (legal issues aside) should NOT be held accountable for their father’s (or mother’s) sins.

    Let’s take each issue and occurrence individually – for NOW it’s “natural born”.

    And, let’s stop pretending it’s anything more than just a Constitutional requirement (it does NOT enforce morality).

    [Ed. It’s a requirement – the requirement has a purpose. That purpose was framed by John Jay – to keep the Commander and Chief pure of foreign blood]

    If it did, Obama would NOT be there right now!

  165. Gary G, Hilary did not go, it was the “PM”*

    Concerning Sec. Clinton’s itinerary: (Daily Appointments Schedule,Monday, August 3, 2009)

    “PM depart Andrews Air Force Base en route to Nairobi, Kenya.”


    1) *PM stands for Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, Department
    of State

    2)The current PM is Andrew J. Shapiro.

    3)Andrew J. Shapiro was an associate at the Washington, DC law firm Covington & Burling.

    4)Eric Holder was a partner at Covington & Burling.

    Big suprise.

  166. Unbamboozleus Says:

    I thought that a decision (on standing?) was expected in the Kerchner v Congress et al case yesterday but I cannot find anything about it anywhere. Does anyone have any information about it?

  167. Whistleblower Says:

    A few quotes that seem to be on point.

    “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell

    “Many are destined to reason wrongly; others, not to reason at all; and others to persecute those who do reason.” —Voltaire

    “The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.” —William F. Buckley

    “Ignorance is king. Many would not profit by his abdication. Many enrich themselves by means of his dark monarchy. They are his Court, and in his name they defraud and govern, enrich themselves and perpetuate their power.” ; A Canticle for Leibowitz; Walter M. Miller, Jr.

    “Secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy… censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything — you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him” -John Lyle in Revolt in 2100 by Robert A. Heinlein

  168. What the hell is Orly doing? Is she deliberately trying to sabatage this issue?

    Leo, you stated: “I said it would cause havoc for the true nbc legal issue: Whether the Constitution allows the President to be born of an alien father and to have been a citizen of another nation. That’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s just a question of law. Somebody’s got some ‘splainin to do – even more than one somebody. But it’s not me”

    We all know Orly is a dual US-Israeli citizen. Is she trying to distract the public from the NBC issue, knowing that the raised awareness in the public would cause many people to start looking at citizens with dual loyalties like her? Is this another example of someone putting the interests of a foreign power ahead of the interest of the United States?

    [Ed. In fairness to her, she always mentions the nbc issue and tries to explain it. It’s just that, as intelligent as she is, English is not her native tongue and the concepts are difficult in general to express without being verbose. ]

  169. Whistleblower Says:

    Perhaps Dr. Taitz would do well to express herself in her native tongue, and then have it translated.

    Or perhaps Dr. Taitz could use a good spokesperson.

  170. This is precisely the point I discussed with my husband last night after viewing that video. She probably has good command of the issues, but she presents them VERY poorly since English is not her native tongue.

    She definitely needs a spokesperson and that spokesperson needs talking points so as not to be taken off message when the interviewer starts interrupting, being rude and slinging obsurdities at him/her. That was a terrible interview – from both sides!

  171. i'mnaturalborntoo Says:

    Whistleblower–I agree. I wish she could get an interviewer who has the time to give to her without rushing her. I think she would do well in a low-key, slower-paced interview. Charlie Rose, perhaps–I’m not holding my breath!

  172. When these birth certificate forgeries are pushed as the real mccoy, they need to be traced and prosecuted.
    Forged birth certificates are a real threat to national security.

    “A stack of blank birth certificates has been stolen from the city Health Department’s offices, leading investigators to worry that they may have fallen into the hands of terrorists, The Post has learned.
    The NYPD and the city’s Department of Investigation are investigating.
    “It’s like hitting the Lotto for a terrorist,” one investigator said.
    “Forged documents are one of the primary concerns of Homeland Security. After you get that birth certificate, you can get any document you want. This is extremely serious.”
    Those at Democratic Underground behind many of the forgeries, have openly stated their mission:
    “bury the f***ers (those durn birfers) in precise fakes, all just a little different from each other.
    I wanna see heads explode. I wanna see people drooling from the breakdowns.”
    ” Help! I have no idea what you want us to do. One person should build a fake Obama
    birth certificate and then we all should mail copies everywhere. Is that what you want?”
    “We want EVERYONE to make a fake birth certificate!”
    “Ok, but at least someone should have a form to start with. Or are you suggesting we all build a
    a birth certificate, including the form from scratch? I think it is a good idea but the form linked was conducive to making a birth certificate out of. There must be better examples around.”
    “EarlG posted one Sunday
    After observing the hilarity over on Free Republic today I thought it was unfair for Oily Taters to have all the fun, so I put together a blank “Kenyan birth certificate” for everyone to play with.
    Either download the blank form here,
    print it, and then fill out the form with a typewriter (if you can find one), or open this image http://upload.democraticunderground.com/img/09/bc_template.jpg?CLICK in an image editing application and fill it out with a typewriter font, then print.
    Take a picture and show us your birth certificates! I’m afraid this photo is bad because the light in here isn’t good enough for a pic on my phone (I’ll take a better one in the morning), but you may be able to make out that this document proves Prince Charles was born in Kenya. The form has been signed by Deputy Registrar William H. Macy.”
    “With due respect sir, and i mean it.

    The form EarlG posted isn’t the right kind for what I believe is your intention. In any case his is extremely hard to photoshop. There are good forms on DU and i don’t have the links handy that are actual forms that one can photoshop and then print and send as an actual form.
    So, one mite print a fake birth cert from Kenya (bad enough to tell) and send it to the local newspaper with return addy from the local republican party as if they were exposing the President’s birth in Kenya.
    Or use the actual legitimate birth cert and re-do it with photoshop to make it look as if it was trying to be passed off as legit, and send it to the local repuke party as if you were exposing the pres as faking his own birth cert.”
    “Based on today’s certificate, someone already got started.
    And a capital job he/she did on it, too. Just enough flaws to make it obvious, while fooling the dimwits.”
    “Okay, I will try to make one. I am going to say he was born in some refugee camp under UN control and write it mostly in French, but I’m only fluent in Google translator French, so if anyone can help with “translation” that would be awesome.”
    “Say no more, here’s mine:
    http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6619/bhocert.jpg After all, if this was a fake cert, they could be prosecuted!”
    “I could always tweak it but I am no birth certificate expert. Here’s some to get the juices flowing.
    Here are a couple blanks for inspiration:
    First the English one I used:
    http://fake utilitys.com/db5/00437/fakeutilitys.com/_uimages/Birth-Certificate.jpg
    Teddy bear one for shizz n giggles:
    http://www.parkdale novelty.com/photos/Birth.jpg
    A similar English one – it has a name filled in so just use the clone stamp tool to get rid of it:
    http://www.richard byrom.com/images/uploads/daniel_2Djames_2Dbyrom_2Dbirth_2Dregistration.jpg
    Long form English BC to same guy – clone stamp as usual:
    http://www.richard byrom.com/images/uploads/daniel_2Djames_2Dbyrom_2Dbirth_2Dregistration2.jpg
    Generic, completely non-governmental BC:
    http://www.free printablecertificates.net/samples-free/birth.png
    Maryland Dept of Health BC – clone stamp needed:
    http://m rotha.com/arlena_ann_dilley/Arlena%20Birth%20Certificate.jpg
    Lebron James’ Ohio BC:
    http://www.bball city.com/images/2006/lebrons-bc-1-med.jpg
    A Volkswagen “birth certificate”, I bet if you cloned out the VW logo and the English translations of the stuff in German you could get away with passing it off as German:
    http://vw kombi.com/_images/vw-birth-cert.jpg”
    ” My husband has a suggestion about that – make Kenyan AND Hawaiian fake certificates
    For ALL the birthers and those that push their crap. Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Lou Dobbs, the Faux Noise twerps, the head of Freeperville, whoever we can get enough info on to fake them. Make dozens for each of them, spread them around. It could be fun!”
    “No, not thousands (of fake birth certificates).
    Just a half dozen very good ones discovered a few months apart. Might as well make some $$$ off Orly and her band of dipshit donors.”
    ” call it “Operation Chaos”, since that is what is going on within FR’s Birther movement anyways
    I’ll let out a little secret that maybe some free Republic lurkers might see and make em quake a bit; 3 of the more vocal Birther proponents at the FR are really shills. The idea is to be as outlandish as possible without going overboard, thereby bringing ridicule to the entire movement…well, even more ridicule than it gets anyways.”
    “Is it legal and where do we send them?”
    ” I think whether it is legal or not depends on what you’re going to do with it.
    If all you’re going to do is use it to show off your Photoshop skills, I don’t think it’s a problem.
    However, if you’re going to use it to fraudulently receive government assistance or to slander someone, then yeah, that would be illegal.
    I think it would be like making fake money for a game: as long as you’re not going to use it to swindle someone out of money or property, you should be fine.”

  173. Attn: Whistleblower

    RE: “Perhaps Dr. Taitz would do well to express herself in her native tongue, and then have it translated. Or perhaps Dr. Taitz could use a good spokesperson. “

    Orly can express herself quite well when the interviewer is civil. I listened to her interview by Michael Savage yesterday. (Refer to my note of yesterday.) She was articulate and in control. In spite of her accent, every word she utters is understandable. What MSNBC did to her is the lowest of the low of American journalism. She was near loosing control – and I don’t blame her. I would have walked off if an interviewer treated me that way. She should not have agreed to be interviewed by them. She is not trained for type of verbal karate. Very few people are – and those who are, are silent or ignorant of the issues, or just don’t care.

    It is a shame that a naturalized citizen as Orly has to take up the fight for our Constitution, as there are only a handful of talented natural born citizens, including Leo, who care to do anything. There should be hundreds, if not thousands, born American lawyers fighting for the Constitution, the most successful constitution on this planet.

    To suggest that she should have an interpreter is ridiculous. She would loose all credibility – (what does a foreign person care?) One reason she fights is because she sees very real parallels with the present US situation of the unenforceable Constitution due to the dereliction of duty of the politically-correct US judges and the justice system of the old Soviet Union where she was born. This gives her credibility.

    Does she make mistakes? Of course she does, like all of us. But lately as Leo observed she is not basing her claim alone on the vault-BC. She always mentions the nbc issue as well. She did that in both interviews.

    She is a courageous and very intelligent person – we should support her not hinder her.

    [Ed. I do not appreciate at all that she brought the Kenya thing forward without verifying its veracity. She doesn’t deserve blind allegiance.]

  174. RE: “[Ed. I do not appreciate at all that she brought the Kenya thing forward without verifying its veracity. She doesn’t deserve blind allegiance.]”

    Yes of course, that was one of her mistakes and another is endangering some of the military plaintiffs as you pointed out earlier. Maybe she is too emotional or impatient – I do not know her personally. I am not giving her blind-alliance but pointing out that the criticism about expressing herself maybe misdirected.

    RE: “The Kenya thing”.

    I have no doubt that it will not be authenticated regardless if it is false or genuine. A phone call similar that was earlier made (documented by the official government minutes of Kenya) to one of the officials in Kenya, will take care of that. In fact I am not sure that Orly or WND could have done more than what they did to verify its veracity. The Kenya government put a gag-order on all related matters long ago.

    I think it is naïve of Orly or WND to expect honest, straightforward answers from a third word country like Kenya; even more corrupt than the US.

    [Ed. At the very least, a forensic analysis of whether documents bearing “Republic of Kenya” could have been done without any reference to this document. But she didn’t do that. She’s subjected the document to proper attacks.]

  175. Silence Do Good Says:

    Hello Leo:

    First of all…thank you for your work.

    Second: You stated that you beleived that Obama may have a British passport.

    Third: A common link between you and Michael Savage is that Savage has been named by the British government as a “dangerous person.” And therefore, was banned from entry. Savage is attempting to get his good name restored and find out who in the US and Britain allowed him to get on the banned list.

    Fourth: I just find the irony too great to pass up. Obama, jr. was born a British subject. Savage was banned entry to Britain and our founding fathers were most particularly fearful of a citizen with dual national loyalties. (especially Britiish)

    Once again, thank you.

  176. RE: ” [Ed. At the very least, a forensic analysis of whether documents bearing “Republic of Kenya” could have been done without any reference to this document. But she didn’t do that. She’s subjected the document to proper attacks.] ”

    Yes, I agree. They could have done that. WND said that it looked like similar BC’s at that time issued for other people. But that is all the research they had done. They could have been more specific. I am not sure if they published an example of the similar documents. Maybe they should now, if they have not.

  177. Did you see the August 4th article in the Canada Free Press? Not naming, but quoting a cable news personality on the top-down extreme pressure to never mention Obama’s eligibility on the news. Going back to last November. No surprise there.


  178. Did Dr. Taitz submit this to the court? Was she obligated in some way to disclose all she knew and possessed, whether she knew it to be valid or wondered out loud asking the court to help her validate it? Is that part of the discovery process? Would it not be considered important to the case even as a counterfeit, if it is such?


    Hi Leo,

    What is your opinion of Andy Martin asking Holder and Mueller for investigating the KBC?


    It seems to me, he has no legal base for his request. Orly submitted it to court asking for authentication. In spite of the mistake of not doing enough research on it, that we discussed in detail, she never stated that it was genuine. So what is Andy doing?

    Is he attacking Orly indirectly?

    If yes, for what gain?

    Obviously he is promoting himself, as he is now running for office. Agree?

    Is he indirectly raising the controversy, hoping to get answers to his stalled lawsuits?

    His claim of “obstructing justice” is incorrect, is not it?

    Requesting an Independent Counsel or Special Prosecutor for the KBC seems to be out of line – is it not?

    “….preferably someone who is a Republican but an attorney who has a criminal justice, and not an actively political, background…” Is he dreaming?

  180. Leo, your comparison of obama’s MSM, WSJ and Taranto to the Nazi propaganda minister Goebbels, was right on the mark! Thank God for that “crazy” Glenn Beck, Fox News, 5-6 pm, yesterday, he had a piece on obama’s newly appointed minister of propaganda “czar” (can’t remember her name) who will point out the “dis-information” that is being spread by the “teabag-waving mobs”, “birthers” and the “GOP which is “busloading hecklers to disrupt the town hall meetings” where hundreds, if not thousands are trashing the Democrat reps and senators. And, not only that, but the socialist-fascist, obummer is outrageously encouraging the same 1984 Orwellian scare tactics on the internet, of reporting to the White House, SNITCHING ON ANYONE who sends them an email criticizing him and his health-scare un-reform bill! I suspect that obummer’s hackers are surfing the net, and particularly you, Leo, to note and report to the usurper what is going on with the NBC issue and to dis-inform the American public which is becomming more and more disenchanted with him.

    History is repeating itself, the usurper in chief is implementing Soviet Union-Hitlerian scare tactics to silence the opposition. And the GOP repubs are a bunch of sniveling, weak-kneeded cowards for not blasting obummer and calling him out on the steps of Congress for the neo-Hitler-Stalinist that he is. Sound the alarm, Hitler’s Crystal Night, the night the Nazis broke the glass of the Jewish stores and dwellings, is about to repeat itself in America. obummer’s MSM propaganda machine is going into overdrive implementing Alinsky’s tactics of taking control of the government. This real, this is big!

    Leo, you and Orly Taitz’ KBC have got obummer and henchmen sweating real hard, ramping up the attacks on the tea baggers, birthers and you and your great work on the constitutional “Natural Born Citizen” requirement to be POTUS. I have the ominous sense that something big is going to blow the roof off of America. Let pray, pray, pray, that God will have mercy on us and will prevent the the forces of evil from destroying us and our America the Beautiful.

  181. *PM stands for Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, Department
    of State

    What Official Business would the Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs have in Kenya? Why would the US be concerned with the Political-Military situation of Kenya?

  182. Propaganda Alert: In their evening news program on August 6, National Public Radio–as in your and my publically-sponsored radio, being broadcast in my area from the facilities of a public state university–gave about five minutes to a foreign-born commentator with a heavy foreign accent who ridiculed “birthers” as “Dobbies” (Lou Dobbs) and so on.

    The speaker defended the Hawaiian “birth certificate” (his Big Lie usage) as genuine and said there was no evidence that Obama was born anywhere else. At that point he veered off into outer space and UFO’s, suggesting that eligibility advocates were also paranoid about invasion from space. You get the drift.

    Wherever Obama was born, and that has yet to be established as a fact, there is definitely a broad conspiracy in the mainstream media to keep the general public happy in its ignorance.

    And your tax dollars are helping to finance the propaganda machine.

  183. […] Don’t Let Them Get Away With Hijacking The U.S. Constitution! […]

  184. JosephII Says:


    Got the idea from “kittycat” on another thread, to email Senator Chuck Schumer of NY. “Chucky” called for transparency from a presidential candidate!!!! when it was in reference to John McCain’s transparency. Let’s not all laugh out loud too long and too much! The hypocrisy is reaching critical mass.

    Dear Senator:

    You are aware of the great controversy on the internet about Obama’s lack of transparency with regard to all his personal records of birth, education, travel, etc. Never in the history of the USA, has there been a president who has sealed all his personal records. What in the world is Obama being so secretive about? All records, papers dealing with the life of a president MUST BE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN! There was quote by a NY Senator sometime ago, calling for transparency, on Leo Donofrio, Esq. blog, http://WWW.naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com You will easily recognize the senator by what he said so clearly and convincingly:

    kittycat Says:

    August 7, 2009 at 10:43 am
    Leo, this really should go viral. I posted this at CW’s.

    And here we have the hypocrite, article from WND:

    ” Question: What do you think the relevance of John McCain’s cancer is on this election?

    Schumer: I don’t know the relevance but I will say this. When you’re running for President everything should be public including your full medical records. I believe in the right to privacy but when you’re running for President which is such an important job the need of the public to know supercedes it.”


    [Ed. Nice one. Let’s see if Chucky does that thing where he talks out of both sides of his mouth.]

    Senator “Chucky”:

    Don’t you think the presumed POTUS, Obama, needs to “supercede” his privacy and make his life records publicized for the public’s right to know? John McCain did, what is Obama hiding from the public’s need to know that his birth status of “natural born citizen” meets the US Constitution’s requirements, that the POTUS be a citizen of the USA, born on USA soil, of TWO PARENTS WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE USA! George Washington and patriots demanded it and put in the Constitution. Why doesn’t Obama want to be transparent and prove his NBC status? Isn’t that what you called for with regard to John McCain? By the way, no statute by House Reps or Senators can make an NBC which McCain wasn’t, since he was born in a hospital, Colon, Panama!

  185. thank for information

  186. thank you! I really liked this post!

  187. The Wall Street Journal is owned by the parent company of the FOX News channel.

  188. […] propaganda issued by Taranto came in the form of two articles – both dissected at length by yours truly – wherein he lied to his readers by stating that a US statute was signed by Ronald Reagan which […]

  189. Mr. Donofrio states that: (a) On December 31, 1982, Barrack Obama was a Kenya citizen and a British Subject. (b) On January 1, 1983, Obama became a Commonwealth Citizen under Section 37 of the British Nationality Act of 1981. (c) Commonwealth Citizens are “not aliens” to the UK under Section 50 of the BNA 1981. (d) Commonwealth Citizens have the right to vote and hold office in the UK. (e) Obama be now be a “full citizen of Kenya as well as the United Kingdom.”

    If one consults the British Home Office web page, http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/aboutcitizenship/ one finds that there are recognized only six forms of “British Nationality,” none of which is Commonwealth Citizen. The six are British Citizen, British Overseas Citizen, British Overseas Territories Citizen, British National (Overseas), British Protected Person and British Subject. Only British Citizens have the automatic right to live, work and vote in the UK. Citizens of countries listed in Schedule 3 of the BNA of 1981, including Kenya citizens, have no automatic right to live in the UK, unless they have a parent who was born in the UK, and then they may apply for UK residence. Obama’s father was not born in the UK.

    Being a Commonwealth Citizen gives one the right to emigrate to the UK as a “non-alien” but otherwise no automatic right to entry into or residence in the UK.

    While “British subjects” in general in 1983 became “commonwealth citizens,” the latter is by no means a nationality category on passports recognized by immigration authorities. The passport of, for example, a person born in the UK, in the category “Nationality,” is designated a “British Citizen.”

  190. You’re the star Leo!


    [Ed. Finally, a news source gets it right. Thanks for the link.]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: