Jimmy Gaffner
2012-09-25 06:16:12 UTC
WHERE LIES GO TO DIE Evidence discovered shows British
Protectorate of East Africa recorded Obamas birth records
before 1963 and sent returns of those events to Britains Public
Records Office and the Kew branch of British National Archives.
KEW, SURREY, GB The last place anyone would think to look for
a birth record of someone claiming to be a natural born U.S.
citizen is Great Britain. The very inclusion of the Article II
eligibility mandate in the U.S. Constitution was explicitly
intended by the founding fathers of America to prevent a then
British-born enemy usurper from attaining the office of the U.S.
presidency and thereby undermining the sovereignty of the newly
formed nation.
In the absence of honor, courage and justice on the part of
those serving in the U.S. Congress and Federal Judiciary,
Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaios Cold Case investigative group has
concluded the only law enforcement analysis of the image of
Obamas alleged Certificate of Live Birth posted to a
government website in April, 2011 and found it to be the product
of criminal fraud and document forgery.
The seeming endless evidence against Obama has now taken
investigators to the foreign archives of Great Britain wherein
it has been discovered that vital events occurring under the
jurisdiction of the British Colony in the Protectorate of East
Africa prior to 1965 were recorded and held in the main office
of the British Registrar in England until 1995 before being
archived in the BNA.
It now appears the worst fears of the U.S. Constitutions
framers were well founded as investigators working on behalf of
the ongoing investigation into the Constitutional eligibility of
Barack Obama have found yet another lead in a growing mountain
of evidence within the public records section of the British
National Archives indicating the occurrence of at least four
vital events registered to the name of Barack Obama, taking
place in the British Protectorate of East Africa (Kenya) between
1953 and 1963, including the birth of two sons before 1963.
Recall, investigative journalists working for Breitbart.com have
already discovered biographical information published by Barack
Obamas literary agent in which he claimed he was born in Kenya.
Prior to Obamas ensconcement to the White House, many
international stories also stated that Obama was Kenyan-born as
did members of Kenyas legislative assembly. Since then
information on Obamas ties has been curtailed by government
officials as the Obama administration has coincidently paid
nearly $4 billion dollars for capital projects in Kenya.
Also, the presence of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, cannot be
accounted for from February, 1961, the alleged month of her
marriage to Obama, until three weeks after the birth of Obama II
in August, 1961 when she allegedly applied for college courses
at the University of Washington. Theories about her whereabouts
have included that she participated in the Air Lift America
project as an exchange student and traveled to Nairobi as one of
many recent highschool graduates (see AASF Report 1959-1961).
The record of birth of a second son prior to Kenyan independence
is significant because biographical information about Obamas
family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to
Obama IIs birth.
Based on procedures defined in Britains Births & Deaths
Registration Act of 1953, The British Foreign & Commonwealth
Office states the following:
Registering A Birth
If your child is born outside the United Kingdom you can
register the birth with the nearest consulate (Local British
Foreign & Commonwealth Regional Registrar Office), or with our
consular department in London if youve returned to the United
Kingdom...
The standard of birth registration in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand, Republic of Ireland, Africa and Overseas Territories is
similar to the standard of birth registration of the UK.
The British Registration Service Act of 1953 (UK Revised
Statutes) states that the Queen appoints one Registrar General
for the registration of vital records. His or her name would
appear the same on all birth certificates of children born under
British common law in 1961 until the end of their service.
Article 1 of the Registration Service Act of 1953 states:
1 Registrar General Her Majesty may from time to time under the
Great Seal of the United Kingdom appoint a Registrar General and
any person so appointed shall exercise the powers and perform
the duties conferred or imposed by or under any enactment on the
Registrar General, whether described by that title alone or with
any additional description, and shall hold office during Her
Majestys pleasure.
The specific sources of information pertaining to births of
Kenyan nationals under British jurisdiction can be researched in
the following BNA files:
General Register Office
SERIES RG36
Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the
Protectorates etc of Africa and Asia
Legal status: Public Record(s)
Language: English
Creator names: General Register Office, 1836-1970
Covering Birth Registration dates: 1895-1965
Physical description: 15 volume(s)
Access conditions: Available in microform only
Held by: The National Archives, Kew
Scope and content: Notifications forwarded by officials
responsible for civil registration under administrative
ordinances in Nyasaland, Kenya, Somaliland, Uganda, Sudan,
Palestine, Sarawak, Malaya, including Johore and Selangor, and
British North Borneo, commencing at varying dates.
Publication note: Geoffrey Yeo 'The British Overseas, A Guide
to Records of Their Births, Baptisms, Marriages, Deaths and
Burials Available in the United Kingdom', London, 2nd edn, 1988.
Related material: Some earlier returns from the East African
territories in the period during which they were under Foreign
Office control are in the consular registers retained in the
custody of the registrar general.
Place: Kenya, Africa (Territory Thereof): 1920 - 1963
Subjects: Birth: registration
Courtesy: British National Archives
Recall, on August 1, 2009, Dr. Alan Keyes, Pamela Barnett and 42
other plaintiffs filed evidence in a lawsuit challenging Obama
eligibility which included a copy of an image of an alleged
Kenyan Copy of Certification of Registration of Birth (CCRB).
In the hours after the image appeared on the internet, MSNBC and
other liberal mainstream, pro-Obama networks went ballistic
attempting to debunk the idea that such a document exists.
The liberal media went out of its way to discredit the image,
protesting too much, going as far as to claim that the Kenyan
CCRB image was forged based on an Australian birth certificate
which was miraculously discovered by an unnamed blogger for a
man named Bomford.
On August 2, Keith Olbermann led the deranged effort on his now
defunct "Countdown" show to lie and propagandize the CCRB using
insults and baseless criticism of unknown "birthers" who he
claimed "attempted and failed to pass off a forgery."
Strangely, however, no one in the mainstream liberal media would
address the question now answered by the recent discovery at the
BNA. The Bomford document and the Kenyan CCRB would indeed
appear the same under British birth registration processes and
documentation formats because both municipalities in Kenya and
Australia, in 1961, operated under the Registrar General of the
British government.
It is now supported by the evidence discovered in the BNA that
the Bomford document image from Australia was accessed and used
by pro-Obama operatives as a template to alter the image of the
Kenyan CCRB image in order to make it appear that "birthers" had
created a bad counterfeit of a Kenyan birth record for Obama.
This was done by Obama's forgers to create "shell game"
confusion among the public and misdirect media attention from
the truth that an original, unaltered Kenyan CCRB, which was
never allowed to be publicly seen in its original form before
Obama's forgers were able to access and change it, was actually
an image of a legitimate document posted by unknown individuals
who were known by Obama to possess the document before hand.
Essentially, the Bomford affair was just another coverup to hide
Obama's foreign birth records.
The books containing hand written line records of vital events
attributed to Obama are contained in Series RG36 of the Family
Records section in the Kew branch of the BNA. The hand written
line records first discovered in 2009, indicate several events
were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be
handwritten and spelled Burack and Biraq) beginning in 1953
and include two births recorded in 1958 and 1960, a marriage
license registration in 1954 and a birth in 1961. Barack Obama
is said to have died in 1982 and had married at least once more
in Kenya and had at least one more child in 1968, but no record
of these were found in the BNA because, according to the
Archives desk reference, the events occurred after Kenya
achieved independence from British colonial rule in 1963.
To date, Barack Obama II is the only known alleged son of Obama
Sr. born after 1960 and before the independence of Kenya became
official in 1963.
A request for information from the BNA on the specification of
birth information contained in the series of thousands of logs
indicates that only vital events registered in Kenyas Ministry
of Health offices were recorded in the registration returns and
were placed in the National Archives care before they reached 30
years old (the law was amended to 20 years after creation in
2010).
The line records do not specify the identity or names of the
children, only gender. However, the line records are associated
with index numbers of actual microfilm copies of certificates,
licenses and registration applications filed in the archives.
According to researchers, Obamas line records were discovered
in Series RG36, reference books. Not surprisingly, when
researchers specifically requested access to the relevant
microfilm for the Obama birth registrations, they were told that
the records were currently held under an outdated privileged
access status, meaning researchers were denied access under
Chapter 52, Sections 3 and 5 of the British Public Records Act
of 1958.
However, evidence shows these records were available for public
access before August of 2009, the approximate date of arrival of
Hillary Clinton in Great Britain during her trip to Africa that
year.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-
management/access-to-public-records.pdf
Several sources show that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
made a sudden visit to the British Foreign and Commonwealth
Office, the British agency which oversees Public Records
Archives from colonial protectorates, to speak with the Chief
Executive of the Archives in early August of 2009. African news
agency expressed surprise at Clintons arrival since she did not
announce her intentions of stopping in Great Britain before
embarking on her two week trip to Africa.
OBAMAS FATHER FAILED TO INCLUDE BIRTH OF SON ON INS
APPLICATION
For someone who wanted to remain in America, its difficult to
imagine any reason why Barack Obamas alleged father, Barack the
elder, would omit the birth of an anchor baby son on an
application to extend his visa, just days after the birth
occurred, unless
The American people were told by Barack Obama, unequivocally,
that his father was a former goat herder from Kenya. However,
INS documents filed in the very same month after Obamas birth
suggest the goat herding elder Obama didnt get the memo that
he was a daddy.
On August 31st, 1961, just weeks after Obamas birth was
allegedly registered in a regional office of the Hawaiian Health
Department, Obama the elder neglected to name is newborn son on
an application for extension of his temporary visa to stay in
the U.S.
Obamas omission of the birth is astonishing and illogical given
the fact that the acknowledgement of the birth would have
fortified Obamas application for an extension. The INS has
long been more willing to extend the visa of a foreign parent of
children born in the U.S., especially when the other parent is
an American citizen.
Despite the recent release of a documentary film Dreams From My
Real Father presenting evidence that Barack Hussein Obama is
not the biological father of the younger Obama, the elder Obama
is the man named as the father on the digital image of Obamas
alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth which was posted to the
internet by the administration in April of 2011. The document
image has since been forensically examined by law enforcement
investigators and determined to be a digitally fabricated
forgery using Adobe software.
THE UGLY TRUTH
However, the sad and pathetic truth about Obamas covert natal
history and his illegitimacy lies at the bottom of a sordid pit
of lies surrounding the paternity of his birth. Doubts about
his identity, his eligibility, his intentions, his honesty and
his honorability as a man stem from what appears to be an ugly
truth about his mothers probable sexual involvement with
multiple men associated with the radical socialist movement in
1960s Hawaii.
Obama and his horde of abettors defend an improbable narrative
about his identity. The veracity of this narrative has been
damaged under the weight of a steady stream of crushing evidence
demonstrating more than 180 disparities and contradictions to
Obamas claims of natal legitimacy as president.
If Obamas cause as a usurper of power is to avenge his fathers
culture, he made the worst possible error in lying about who he
is. Vintage America is on to him. Their instincts are slowly
turning Obamas fantasy of a socialist utopia for those he
believes are humanitys offended into a laughingstock. By
building his vision for America on clay feet of lies about his
who he is, he has undermined any intention of doing something
good and right. He is not to be trusted.
Moreover, Obama is learning the painful lesson that a message of
Hope and Change means something vastly different to vintage
America, the most powerful and affluent culture in human
history, when that message has been proven to come from someone
as audaciously dishonest and deceptively calculating as this son
of otherness.
Recall, in 2011, it was reported by The Daily Pen after an
investigation of the State of Hawaiis birth statistics
collection protocols and vital records history that birth
certificates are often amended after the birth while the
original paper document is sealed under strict confidentiality
rules when the identity of the father is either determined after
birth or when the father named on the new version of the
certificate has adopted or assumed paternal responsibility for
the child.
In the latter case, the original birth record may not contain
the biological fathers name because the mother does not provide
it, or it may list paternity as unknown, but this version is
kept confidential under HRS 571. In some cases, the biological
father may not even know he is the father if the mother has had
more than one sexual partner prior to the pregnancy. There was
no DNA test in 1961, however the 1961 Vital Statistics of the
U.S. Report shows there were more than 1000 such illegitimate
births reported in the state of Hawaii during that year, about 1
in 17.
Therefore, the paternity of the child at the actual time of the
birth is not disclosed while the new amended certificate is
upheld as the original version displaying the name of the newly
identified or adoptive father as indistinguishable if different
from the biological father. This law is meant to protect the
child from stigmas resulting from illegitimacy, rape, incest or
adultery. Under these circumstances it is not possible to know
the paternal status of a child at birth unless the original
birth record is made accessible by authorized persons under
Hawaiian law.
However, notations indicating that a certificate contains
updated paternal information would be typed or printed in the
lower margin of the new certificate, below the signature
section. This lower margin of the image of Obamas certificate
has been shown by computer experts to be concealed by forgers
using a clipping mask. A clipping mask is a feature available
in Adobe software which limits the viewable area on a document
image through which only selected information can be seen. In
the case of Obamas forged certificate, the information we have
been allowed to see within the frame of the clipping mask may
merely reflect an amended birth record while concealing
notations of the amendments which exists in the lower margin
outside the frame of the clipping mask.
Regardless of any level of truth about any individual piece of
information in the image, overall, the final image is the
product of criminals and liars.
If Obama is not the biological father, or if paternal
information is listed on the original certificate as unknown,
the state of Hawaii keeps this information secret until a court
orders the documents to be released for discovery purposes in
determining Obamas eligibility. Thus far, courts have lacked
courage to uphold the Constitution thereby propagating the
greatest political fraud in American history. Judges are simply
washing their hands of the issue by refusing to even consider
actual evidence against Obama, denying citizens of justice and
their Constitutional right to a redress of grievances, because
they simply do not have the courage to face the legal crisis
such a revelation would cause.
Cowardly judges refuse to allow any exposure Obamas actual
natural born identity and, in their dereliction, have conjured a
legal fantasy filled with pressurizing wrath in which a
candidates eligibility for president is not only declared
legally uncontestable but is also automatically preeminent. In
allowing this, judges have allowed a dangerous precedent in
which any foreign invader can covertly usurp the power of the
U.S. government simply by lying about their citizenship status
and hiding documentation with the help of the American media and
a complicit legal system.
THE MARRIAGE SHAM
On his application, when asked the name and address of his
spouse, it appears Obama may have first written the name of his
actual wife in Kenya before blacking it out and writing Ann S.
Dunham.
Despite evidence indicating that Obama was simultaneously
married to a woman in Kenya, it is suspected that he claimed to
be married to Dunham in order to use the marriage as leverage to
remain in the U.S. There is no evidence or testimony that Obama
ever loved Dunham or that the two had ever been engaged.
The two did not live together before or after being married and
there were no letters, no ring, no announcement or, most
importantly, no legal marriage registration with the State of
Hawaii.
Despite a complete void of documented proof of the marriage, it
appears Dunham was granted a statutory divorce from Obama in
1964. However, images posted of the court documents from the
decree contain no original documented proof of a marriage or
legal documents showing that Obama was the father of Dunhams
child. A review of the court documents shows that at least one
document, perhaps an original birth certificate for baby Obama,
was missing from the numbering sequence.
THE INS PERSPECTIVE
Being legitimately married to a U.S. citizen would be a benefit
toward allowing a foreign spouse to remain the U.S. However,
no marriage license application or public announcement has ever
been found to indicate that Obama and Dunham were ever married
or that Obama had even divorced his Kenyan wife prior to an
alleged wedding with Dunham. This fact supports the contents of
memos from college and INS officials who expressed doubts about
the legitimacy of Obamas relationship with Dunham, even
questioning the motive of such a union between a teenage woman
and a foreign student facing visa expiration just days after the
birth of her child.
suspicions. Immigration fraud was rampant during Hawaiis
foreign birth accommodation era in the 1960s.
Since Obama was a foreigner wanting to extend his temporary
visa, the INS certainly understood that by claiming a marriage
to Dunham, it would promote INS approval of an extension, but in
Dunhams case there was an added risk to the relationship for
Obama she was pregnant.
It appears, from the contents of documents in Obamas INS file,
when pressed by INS agents and school officials on the actual
validity of his relationship to Dunham and baby Obama, having
certainly been advised of legal ramifications for lying, he
refused to name Obama as his child but maintained that he was
married to Dunham. This indicates that Obama was either not
certain if he was the biological father, or that he knew he
wasnt.
Under child protection laws in many states, including Hawaii,
when the biological father is deceased or unidentified by the
mother, the man who is married to the mother at the time she
gives birth automatically becomes the father named on the
official birth certificate until it is proven in court that he
is not the biological father. Mandatory Legitimacy applies
even if the birth is the result of adultery, when the mother is
married at the time of birth, until paternity is successfully
contested. Today, DNA testing allows for conclusive
determinations about paternity, but in 1961, it was more
difficult to determine paternity. Hawaiis child welfare
statutes indicate the statutory fathers name on the
certificate may be removed by court order, if paternity is
successfully contested, after a judge has decided the case in
the interest of the childs welfare. This law is intended to
protect the child if the mother dies.
DELUSIONS OF LEGITIMACY
Government officials in Hawaii, including Governor Neil
Abercrombie, Lt. Governor Brian Schatz and former Hawaiian
elections official, Tim Adams have all indicated that they could
find no original record of Obamas alleged birth in any hospital
in Hawaii in the course of their duties to verify his
eligibility. The absence of verifiable birth documentation was
so apparent that Schatz, serving as the chairman of the Democrat
Party of Hawaii in 2008, refused to certify that Obama was
indeed constitutionally eligible to hold the office of president
when he submitted the Official Certification of Nomination of
Obama. Schatz deferred the responsibility to Nancy Pelosi and
DNC, and then Chair of the Hawaiian Elections Commission, Kevin
Cronin. Cronin resigned suddenly after controversy surrounding
his decision began to strain his relationship with the
commission.
Ignorance, lies and lack of understanding about the difference
between a medically verified birth and a legal registration of
birth has confused the public about Obamas natal history and
eligibility.
Liars and abettors in media and government, drudging on behalf
of the Obama administration, have anchored their Alinsky-style
ridicule of those questioning Obamas eligibility in a delusion
that he must be legitimate because his birth was announced in
two Hawaiian newspapers.
The elder Obamas name appears as the father of a newborn son in
images of two birth announcements appearing in two Honolulu
newspapers on August 13th and 14th, 1961. Birth announcements
in Hawaii in 1961 were published automatically from a birth
registration list provided directly to the papers by the
Hawaiian Department of Health. The notifications of births
provided to the Health Department, however, were not only the
product of information provided by hospitals and doctors, alone.
The distinction between the information used by the hospital to
create a Certificate of Live Birth and the information used by
the Department of Health to create a birth registration is that
information used to create birth registrations were allowed to
be submitted from anyone possessing credible information about
the birth, including family members, witnesses or attendants,
regardless of the actual location of the birth. Contrarily, the
information on a Live Birth record must be verified and
attested by a licensed medical doctor qualified to determine the
characteristics of a live birth event. This is important in
cases when a distinction was needed between a still birth and
a baby that may have been born alive but then died upon
delivery. In the latter case, both a birth certificate and a
death certificate are required while a still birth requires only
a death certificate because of the definition of a live birth
under HRS 338-1.
Hawaii has a long history of allocating foreign births to the
mothers claimed Hawaiian residence regardless of the actual
location of the birth, which was in compliance with guidelines
established by the National Center for Health Statistics in
order to accurately attribute data from births with decadal
Census figures. Unfortunately, these vital statistics reporting
guidelines are not conducive with determining the natural born
status of the child.
For example, the Bureau of Census in 1961 counted all residents
by county regardless of their temporary absence at the time of
the Census when the Census worker was able to identify residents
of a county through the information provided by others. This
applies even today.
Therefore, beginning in as early as 1933, it was determined that
births must be accounted the same way for all usual residents
regardless of the mothers location at the time of the event
when that resident mother intended to return to that county. In
Hawaii, if a child did not have an official certificate prior to
the mothers return, the local Health Department was obligated
to provide one under the Model State Vital Statistics Act of
1942, Section 8 of Hawaiis Public Health Regulations and HRS
338.
The impact of population figures on the Hawaiis economy and
agency resources was very significant in 1961. The accuracy of
the Census takes precedence over the accuracy and veracity of
vital statistics in the U.S. Vital statistics are reported
annually, but the Census only occurs every ten years which means
there is large volume of population which goes untracked between
Census years. If births and deaths were not allocated to the
residents of each county, regardless of the location of the
vital event, the results would cause large disparities when
compared with the Census data.
http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/07/obamas-kenyan-birth-
records-discovered.html
.#e4
Protectorate of East Africa recorded Obamas birth records
before 1963 and sent returns of those events to Britains Public
Records Office and the Kew branch of British National Archives.
KEW, SURREY, GB The last place anyone would think to look for
a birth record of someone claiming to be a natural born U.S.
citizen is Great Britain. The very inclusion of the Article II
eligibility mandate in the U.S. Constitution was explicitly
intended by the founding fathers of America to prevent a then
British-born enemy usurper from attaining the office of the U.S.
presidency and thereby undermining the sovereignty of the newly
formed nation.
In the absence of honor, courage and justice on the part of
those serving in the U.S. Congress and Federal Judiciary,
Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaios Cold Case investigative group has
concluded the only law enforcement analysis of the image of
Obamas alleged Certificate of Live Birth posted to a
government website in April, 2011 and found it to be the product
of criminal fraud and document forgery.
The seeming endless evidence against Obama has now taken
investigators to the foreign archives of Great Britain wherein
it has been discovered that vital events occurring under the
jurisdiction of the British Colony in the Protectorate of East
Africa prior to 1965 were recorded and held in the main office
of the British Registrar in England until 1995 before being
archived in the BNA.
It now appears the worst fears of the U.S. Constitutions
framers were well founded as investigators working on behalf of
the ongoing investigation into the Constitutional eligibility of
Barack Obama have found yet another lead in a growing mountain
of evidence within the public records section of the British
National Archives indicating the occurrence of at least four
vital events registered to the name of Barack Obama, taking
place in the British Protectorate of East Africa (Kenya) between
1953 and 1963, including the birth of two sons before 1963.
Recall, investigative journalists working for Breitbart.com have
already discovered biographical information published by Barack
Obamas literary agent in which he claimed he was born in Kenya.
Prior to Obamas ensconcement to the White House, many
international stories also stated that Obama was Kenyan-born as
did members of Kenyas legislative assembly. Since then
information on Obamas ties has been curtailed by government
officials as the Obama administration has coincidently paid
nearly $4 billion dollars for capital projects in Kenya.
Also, the presence of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, cannot be
accounted for from February, 1961, the alleged month of her
marriage to Obama, until three weeks after the birth of Obama II
in August, 1961 when she allegedly applied for college courses
at the University of Washington. Theories about her whereabouts
have included that she participated in the Air Lift America
project as an exchange student and traveled to Nairobi as one of
many recent highschool graduates (see AASF Report 1959-1961).
The record of birth of a second son prior to Kenyan independence
is significant because biographical information about Obamas
family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to
Obama IIs birth.
Based on procedures defined in Britains Births & Deaths
Registration Act of 1953, The British Foreign & Commonwealth
Office states the following:
Registering A Birth
If your child is born outside the United Kingdom you can
register the birth with the nearest consulate (Local British
Foreign & Commonwealth Regional Registrar Office), or with our
consular department in London if youve returned to the United
Kingdom...
The standard of birth registration in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand, Republic of Ireland, Africa and Overseas Territories is
similar to the standard of birth registration of the UK.
The British Registration Service Act of 1953 (UK Revised
Statutes) states that the Queen appoints one Registrar General
for the registration of vital records. His or her name would
appear the same on all birth certificates of children born under
British common law in 1961 until the end of their service.
Article 1 of the Registration Service Act of 1953 states:
1 Registrar General Her Majesty may from time to time under the
Great Seal of the United Kingdom appoint a Registrar General and
any person so appointed shall exercise the powers and perform
the duties conferred or imposed by or under any enactment on the
Registrar General, whether described by that title alone or with
any additional description, and shall hold office during Her
Majestys pleasure.
The specific sources of information pertaining to births of
Kenyan nationals under British jurisdiction can be researched in
the following BNA files:
General Register Office
SERIES RG36
Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the
Protectorates etc of Africa and Asia
Legal status: Public Record(s)
Language: English
Creator names: General Register Office, 1836-1970
Covering Birth Registration dates: 1895-1965
Physical description: 15 volume(s)
Access conditions: Available in microform only
Held by: The National Archives, Kew
Scope and content: Notifications forwarded by officials
responsible for civil registration under administrative
ordinances in Nyasaland, Kenya, Somaliland, Uganda, Sudan,
Palestine, Sarawak, Malaya, including Johore and Selangor, and
British North Borneo, commencing at varying dates.
Publication note: Geoffrey Yeo 'The British Overseas, A Guide
to Records of Their Births, Baptisms, Marriages, Deaths and
Burials Available in the United Kingdom', London, 2nd edn, 1988.
Related material: Some earlier returns from the East African
territories in the period during which they were under Foreign
Office control are in the consular registers retained in the
custody of the registrar general.
Place: Kenya, Africa (Territory Thereof): 1920 - 1963
Subjects: Birth: registration
Courtesy: British National Archives
Recall, on August 1, 2009, Dr. Alan Keyes, Pamela Barnett and 42
other plaintiffs filed evidence in a lawsuit challenging Obama
eligibility which included a copy of an image of an alleged
Kenyan Copy of Certification of Registration of Birth (CCRB).
In the hours after the image appeared on the internet, MSNBC and
other liberal mainstream, pro-Obama networks went ballistic
attempting to debunk the idea that such a document exists.
The liberal media went out of its way to discredit the image,
protesting too much, going as far as to claim that the Kenyan
CCRB image was forged based on an Australian birth certificate
which was miraculously discovered by an unnamed blogger for a
man named Bomford.
On August 2, Keith Olbermann led the deranged effort on his now
defunct "Countdown" show to lie and propagandize the CCRB using
insults and baseless criticism of unknown "birthers" who he
claimed "attempted and failed to pass off a forgery."
Strangely, however, no one in the mainstream liberal media would
address the question now answered by the recent discovery at the
BNA. The Bomford document and the Kenyan CCRB would indeed
appear the same under British birth registration processes and
documentation formats because both municipalities in Kenya and
Australia, in 1961, operated under the Registrar General of the
British government.
It is now supported by the evidence discovered in the BNA that
the Bomford document image from Australia was accessed and used
by pro-Obama operatives as a template to alter the image of the
Kenyan CCRB image in order to make it appear that "birthers" had
created a bad counterfeit of a Kenyan birth record for Obama.
This was done by Obama's forgers to create "shell game"
confusion among the public and misdirect media attention from
the truth that an original, unaltered Kenyan CCRB, which was
never allowed to be publicly seen in its original form before
Obama's forgers were able to access and change it, was actually
an image of a legitimate document posted by unknown individuals
who were known by Obama to possess the document before hand.
Essentially, the Bomford affair was just another coverup to hide
Obama's foreign birth records.
The books containing hand written line records of vital events
attributed to Obama are contained in Series RG36 of the Family
Records section in the Kew branch of the BNA. The hand written
line records first discovered in 2009, indicate several events
were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be
handwritten and spelled Burack and Biraq) beginning in 1953
and include two births recorded in 1958 and 1960, a marriage
license registration in 1954 and a birth in 1961. Barack Obama
is said to have died in 1982 and had married at least once more
in Kenya and had at least one more child in 1968, but no record
of these were found in the BNA because, according to the
Archives desk reference, the events occurred after Kenya
achieved independence from British colonial rule in 1963.
To date, Barack Obama II is the only known alleged son of Obama
Sr. born after 1960 and before the independence of Kenya became
official in 1963.
A request for information from the BNA on the specification of
birth information contained in the series of thousands of logs
indicates that only vital events registered in Kenyas Ministry
of Health offices were recorded in the registration returns and
were placed in the National Archives care before they reached 30
years old (the law was amended to 20 years after creation in
2010).
The line records do not specify the identity or names of the
children, only gender. However, the line records are associated
with index numbers of actual microfilm copies of certificates,
licenses and registration applications filed in the archives.
According to researchers, Obamas line records were discovered
in Series RG36, reference books. Not surprisingly, when
researchers specifically requested access to the relevant
microfilm for the Obama birth registrations, they were told that
the records were currently held under an outdated privileged
access status, meaning researchers were denied access under
Chapter 52, Sections 3 and 5 of the British Public Records Act
of 1958.
However, evidence shows these records were available for public
access before August of 2009, the approximate date of arrival of
Hillary Clinton in Great Britain during her trip to Africa that
year.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-
management/access-to-public-records.pdf
Several sources show that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
made a sudden visit to the British Foreign and Commonwealth
Office, the British agency which oversees Public Records
Archives from colonial protectorates, to speak with the Chief
Executive of the Archives in early August of 2009. African news
agency expressed surprise at Clintons arrival since she did not
announce her intentions of stopping in Great Britain before
embarking on her two week trip to Africa.
OBAMAS FATHER FAILED TO INCLUDE BIRTH OF SON ON INS
APPLICATION
For someone who wanted to remain in America, its difficult to
imagine any reason why Barack Obamas alleged father, Barack the
elder, would omit the birth of an anchor baby son on an
application to extend his visa, just days after the birth
occurred, unless
The American people were told by Barack Obama, unequivocally,
that his father was a former goat herder from Kenya. However,
INS documents filed in the very same month after Obamas birth
suggest the goat herding elder Obama didnt get the memo that
he was a daddy.
On August 31st, 1961, just weeks after Obamas birth was
allegedly registered in a regional office of the Hawaiian Health
Department, Obama the elder neglected to name is newborn son on
an application for extension of his temporary visa to stay in
the U.S.
Obamas omission of the birth is astonishing and illogical given
the fact that the acknowledgement of the birth would have
fortified Obamas application for an extension. The INS has
long been more willing to extend the visa of a foreign parent of
children born in the U.S., especially when the other parent is
an American citizen.
Despite the recent release of a documentary film Dreams From My
Real Father presenting evidence that Barack Hussein Obama is
not the biological father of the younger Obama, the elder Obama
is the man named as the father on the digital image of Obamas
alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth which was posted to the
internet by the administration in April of 2011. The document
image has since been forensically examined by law enforcement
investigators and determined to be a digitally fabricated
forgery using Adobe software.
THE UGLY TRUTH
However, the sad and pathetic truth about Obamas covert natal
history and his illegitimacy lies at the bottom of a sordid pit
of lies surrounding the paternity of his birth. Doubts about
his identity, his eligibility, his intentions, his honesty and
his honorability as a man stem from what appears to be an ugly
truth about his mothers probable sexual involvement with
multiple men associated with the radical socialist movement in
1960s Hawaii.
Obama and his horde of abettors defend an improbable narrative
about his identity. The veracity of this narrative has been
damaged under the weight of a steady stream of crushing evidence
demonstrating more than 180 disparities and contradictions to
Obamas claims of natal legitimacy as president.
If Obamas cause as a usurper of power is to avenge his fathers
culture, he made the worst possible error in lying about who he
is. Vintage America is on to him. Their instincts are slowly
turning Obamas fantasy of a socialist utopia for those he
believes are humanitys offended into a laughingstock. By
building his vision for America on clay feet of lies about his
who he is, he has undermined any intention of doing something
good and right. He is not to be trusted.
Moreover, Obama is learning the painful lesson that a message of
Hope and Change means something vastly different to vintage
America, the most powerful and affluent culture in human
history, when that message has been proven to come from someone
as audaciously dishonest and deceptively calculating as this son
of otherness.
Recall, in 2011, it was reported by The Daily Pen after an
investigation of the State of Hawaiis birth statistics
collection protocols and vital records history that birth
certificates are often amended after the birth while the
original paper document is sealed under strict confidentiality
rules when the identity of the father is either determined after
birth or when the father named on the new version of the
certificate has adopted or assumed paternal responsibility for
the child.
In the latter case, the original birth record may not contain
the biological fathers name because the mother does not provide
it, or it may list paternity as unknown, but this version is
kept confidential under HRS 571. In some cases, the biological
father may not even know he is the father if the mother has had
more than one sexual partner prior to the pregnancy. There was
no DNA test in 1961, however the 1961 Vital Statistics of the
U.S. Report shows there were more than 1000 such illegitimate
births reported in the state of Hawaii during that year, about 1
in 17.
Therefore, the paternity of the child at the actual time of the
birth is not disclosed while the new amended certificate is
upheld as the original version displaying the name of the newly
identified or adoptive father as indistinguishable if different
from the biological father. This law is meant to protect the
child from stigmas resulting from illegitimacy, rape, incest or
adultery. Under these circumstances it is not possible to know
the paternal status of a child at birth unless the original
birth record is made accessible by authorized persons under
Hawaiian law.
However, notations indicating that a certificate contains
updated paternal information would be typed or printed in the
lower margin of the new certificate, below the signature
section. This lower margin of the image of Obamas certificate
has been shown by computer experts to be concealed by forgers
using a clipping mask. A clipping mask is a feature available
in Adobe software which limits the viewable area on a document
image through which only selected information can be seen. In
the case of Obamas forged certificate, the information we have
been allowed to see within the frame of the clipping mask may
merely reflect an amended birth record while concealing
notations of the amendments which exists in the lower margin
outside the frame of the clipping mask.
Regardless of any level of truth about any individual piece of
information in the image, overall, the final image is the
product of criminals and liars.
If Obama is not the biological father, or if paternal
information is listed on the original certificate as unknown,
the state of Hawaii keeps this information secret until a court
orders the documents to be released for discovery purposes in
determining Obamas eligibility. Thus far, courts have lacked
courage to uphold the Constitution thereby propagating the
greatest political fraud in American history. Judges are simply
washing their hands of the issue by refusing to even consider
actual evidence against Obama, denying citizens of justice and
their Constitutional right to a redress of grievances, because
they simply do not have the courage to face the legal crisis
such a revelation would cause.
Cowardly judges refuse to allow any exposure Obamas actual
natural born identity and, in their dereliction, have conjured a
legal fantasy filled with pressurizing wrath in which a
candidates eligibility for president is not only declared
legally uncontestable but is also automatically preeminent. In
allowing this, judges have allowed a dangerous precedent in
which any foreign invader can covertly usurp the power of the
U.S. government simply by lying about their citizenship status
and hiding documentation with the help of the American media and
a complicit legal system.
THE MARRIAGE SHAM
On his application, when asked the name and address of his
spouse, it appears Obama may have first written the name of his
actual wife in Kenya before blacking it out and writing Ann S.
Dunham.
Despite evidence indicating that Obama was simultaneously
married to a woman in Kenya, it is suspected that he claimed to
be married to Dunham in order to use the marriage as leverage to
remain in the U.S. There is no evidence or testimony that Obama
ever loved Dunham or that the two had ever been engaged.
The two did not live together before or after being married and
there were no letters, no ring, no announcement or, most
importantly, no legal marriage registration with the State of
Hawaii.
Despite a complete void of documented proof of the marriage, it
appears Dunham was granted a statutory divorce from Obama in
1964. However, images posted of the court documents from the
decree contain no original documented proof of a marriage or
legal documents showing that Obama was the father of Dunhams
child. A review of the court documents shows that at least one
document, perhaps an original birth certificate for baby Obama,
was missing from the numbering sequence.
THE INS PERSPECTIVE
Being legitimately married to a U.S. citizen would be a benefit
toward allowing a foreign spouse to remain the U.S. However,
no marriage license application or public announcement has ever
been found to indicate that Obama and Dunham were ever married
or that Obama had even divorced his Kenyan wife prior to an
alleged wedding with Dunham. This fact supports the contents of
memos from college and INS officials who expressed doubts about
the legitimacy of Obamas relationship with Dunham, even
questioning the motive of such a union between a teenage woman
and a foreign student facing visa expiration just days after the
birth of her child.
From the perspective of an INS agent, the circumstances
surrounding Obamas relationship with Dunham would have raisedsuspicions. Immigration fraud was rampant during Hawaiis
foreign birth accommodation era in the 1960s.
Since Obama was a foreigner wanting to extend his temporary
visa, the INS certainly understood that by claiming a marriage
to Dunham, it would promote INS approval of an extension, but in
Dunhams case there was an added risk to the relationship for
Obama she was pregnant.
It appears, from the contents of documents in Obamas INS file,
when pressed by INS agents and school officials on the actual
validity of his relationship to Dunham and baby Obama, having
certainly been advised of legal ramifications for lying, he
refused to name Obama as his child but maintained that he was
married to Dunham. This indicates that Obama was either not
certain if he was the biological father, or that he knew he
wasnt.
Under child protection laws in many states, including Hawaii,
when the biological father is deceased or unidentified by the
mother, the man who is married to the mother at the time she
gives birth automatically becomes the father named on the
official birth certificate until it is proven in court that he
is not the biological father. Mandatory Legitimacy applies
even if the birth is the result of adultery, when the mother is
married at the time of birth, until paternity is successfully
contested. Today, DNA testing allows for conclusive
determinations about paternity, but in 1961, it was more
difficult to determine paternity. Hawaiis child welfare
statutes indicate the statutory fathers name on the
certificate may be removed by court order, if paternity is
successfully contested, after a judge has decided the case in
the interest of the childs welfare. This law is intended to
protect the child if the mother dies.
DELUSIONS OF LEGITIMACY
Government officials in Hawaii, including Governor Neil
Abercrombie, Lt. Governor Brian Schatz and former Hawaiian
elections official, Tim Adams have all indicated that they could
find no original record of Obamas alleged birth in any hospital
in Hawaii in the course of their duties to verify his
eligibility. The absence of verifiable birth documentation was
so apparent that Schatz, serving as the chairman of the Democrat
Party of Hawaii in 2008, refused to certify that Obama was
indeed constitutionally eligible to hold the office of president
when he submitted the Official Certification of Nomination of
Obama. Schatz deferred the responsibility to Nancy Pelosi and
DNC, and then Chair of the Hawaiian Elections Commission, Kevin
Cronin. Cronin resigned suddenly after controversy surrounding
his decision began to strain his relationship with the
commission.
Ignorance, lies and lack of understanding about the difference
between a medically verified birth and a legal registration of
birth has confused the public about Obamas natal history and
eligibility.
Liars and abettors in media and government, drudging on behalf
of the Obama administration, have anchored their Alinsky-style
ridicule of those questioning Obamas eligibility in a delusion
that he must be legitimate because his birth was announced in
two Hawaiian newspapers.
The elder Obamas name appears as the father of a newborn son in
images of two birth announcements appearing in two Honolulu
newspapers on August 13th and 14th, 1961. Birth announcements
in Hawaii in 1961 were published automatically from a birth
registration list provided directly to the papers by the
Hawaiian Department of Health. The notifications of births
provided to the Health Department, however, were not only the
product of information provided by hospitals and doctors, alone.
The distinction between the information used by the hospital to
create a Certificate of Live Birth and the information used by
the Department of Health to create a birth registration is that
information used to create birth registrations were allowed to
be submitted from anyone possessing credible information about
the birth, including family members, witnesses or attendants,
regardless of the actual location of the birth. Contrarily, the
information on a Live Birth record must be verified and
attested by a licensed medical doctor qualified to determine the
characteristics of a live birth event. This is important in
cases when a distinction was needed between a still birth and
a baby that may have been born alive but then died upon
delivery. In the latter case, both a birth certificate and a
death certificate are required while a still birth requires only
a death certificate because of the definition of a live birth
under HRS 338-1.
Hawaii has a long history of allocating foreign births to the
mothers claimed Hawaiian residence regardless of the actual
location of the birth, which was in compliance with guidelines
established by the National Center for Health Statistics in
order to accurately attribute data from births with decadal
Census figures. Unfortunately, these vital statistics reporting
guidelines are not conducive with determining the natural born
status of the child.
For example, the Bureau of Census in 1961 counted all residents
by county regardless of their temporary absence at the time of
the Census when the Census worker was able to identify residents
of a county through the information provided by others. This
applies even today.
Therefore, beginning in as early as 1933, it was determined that
births must be accounted the same way for all usual residents
regardless of the mothers location at the time of the event
when that resident mother intended to return to that county. In
Hawaii, if a child did not have an official certificate prior to
the mothers return, the local Health Department was obligated
to provide one under the Model State Vital Statistics Act of
1942, Section 8 of Hawaiis Public Health Regulations and HRS
338.
The impact of population figures on the Hawaiis economy and
agency resources was very significant in 1961. The accuracy of
the Census takes precedence over the accuracy and veracity of
vital statistics in the U.S. Vital statistics are reported
annually, but the Census only occurs every ten years which means
there is large volume of population which goes untracked between
Census years. If births and deaths were not allocated to the
residents of each county, regardless of the location of the
vital event, the results would cause large disparities when
compared with the Census data.
http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/07/obamas-kenyan-birth-
records-discovered.html
.#e4