The Mystery of Barack Obama

The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues

 

By Steve Baldwin, Exclusive to Western Center for Journalism

Most Americans don’t realize we have elected a president whom we know very little about.

Pictured: Barack Obama’s Autobiography, Dreams from My Father.

Researchers have discovered that Obama’s autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans.

A nation-wide network of researchers has sprung up to attempt to fill in the blanks, but at every opportunity Obama’s high-priced lawyers have built walls around various records or simply made them disappear. It is estimated that Obama’s legal team has now spent well over $1.4 million dollars blocking access to documents every American should have access to. The question is why would he spend so much money to do this?

The president who campaigned for a more “open government” and “full disclosure” will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia College records, or his Occidental College records—he will not even release his Columbia College thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois State Senate are missing and he claims his scheduling records during those State Senate years are lost as well. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school, Punahou School, he attended in Hawaii.

What is he hiding? Well, for starters, some of these records will shed light on his citizenship and birth.

Pictured: “Scott & Barry, 3rd grade 1969” Punahou School in Hawaii.

For example, Obama’s application to Punahou School – now mysteriously missing – would likely contain a birth certificate. And, according to attorney Gary Kreep, “his Occidental College records are important as they may show he attended there as a foreign exchange student.” Indeed, Obama used his Indonesian name “Barry Soetoro” while attending Occidental. Kreep has filed lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president and as part of his lawsuit he requested Obama’s records from Occidental. However, Obama’s lawyers quickly moved to stop Occidental from honoring this request.

Furthermore, now that at least three document authentication experts have declared the scanned “Certificate of Live Birth” Obama’s campaign team gave to a pro-Obama website to be an obvious phony; we know that he is hiding something here as well.

Over 49 separate law suits have been filed on the eligibility/birth certificate issue alone, with several of the suits making it all the way the United States Supreme Court, only to be denied a full hearing.

Pictured: Saudi Prince Al-Walid bin Talah

What’s more, there are questions about how he paid for his Harvard Law School education since, despite a claim by Michele Obama, no one has produced any evidence that he received student loans. The Obamas will not release any student loan details despite repeated requests from the Chicago Tribune. However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obama’s Harvard tuition. Incidentally, Prince Tala is the largest donor to CAIR, a Muslim group declared by the U.S. Government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorist financing trial. At least three of CAIR’s leaders have been indicted for terrorist activities. Al-Mansour’s admission opens up speculation as to whether Muslim interests have assisted Obama’s career in the hope he would eventually be in a position someday to promote their interests.

More recently, it was discovered that Obama’s Selective Service card may have been doctored. Federal law requires all American males to register for the Selective Service (the draft) in case a major war broke out.  Blogger Debbie Schlussel has discovered solid evidence that Obama’s Selective Service registration form was submitted not when he was younger as required, but rather in 2008 and then altered to look older. Indeed, the forgers forgot to alter the “Document Location Number” which shows that it is clearly a 2008 form. This is fraud and it’s a felony and Schlussel allegations are backed up by Stephen Coffman, a former high-ranking Federal agent. Moreover, the document shows a September 4th, 1980 date and the location of the transaction as Hawaii, but at that time Obama was thousands of miles away attending Occidental College in Los Angeles.

The real reason why Obama probably did not submit this form as a teenager is that he assumed his Kenyan or Indonesian citizenship exempted him from this requirement. But clearly, as he grew older and entered politics, he saw that any documents revealing a foreign birth – Selective Service registration, birth certificate, school applications, etc – would be problematic if he ran for the presidency. Thus, it is not a coincidence that every document which contains information about his birth or citizenship is either missing, sealed, or has been altered.

Indeed, everywhere one looks into Obama’s background, we find sealed records, scrubbed websites, altered documents, deception and unanswered questions. Can anyone imagine for a second if John McCain or George Bush had blocked access to his school, medical, and birth records?  It would have been headlines but as with everything else concerning Obama, the media has given him a pass on this.

Of all these marvels, the latest mystery and probably most perplexing is that of Obama’s social security number. It appears that Obama has multiple identities in term of possessing numerous social security numbers. Orly Taitz, an attorney who has filed numerous suits against Obama regarding his eligibility to serve as president, appears to be the first to discover this. In her suit, representing a number of military officers who are refusing to serve under an ineligible commander in chief, she hired private investigator Neil Sankey to conduct research on Obama’s prior addresses and Social Society numbers. Using Intelius, Lexis Nexis, Choice Point and other public records, Sankey found around 25 Social Security numbers connected with Obama’s name.

However, it may not be as many as 25, since Sankey also searched using closely related names such as:  “Barak Obama,” “Batock Obama,” “Barok Obama,” and “Barrack Obama.” There may very well be some Kenyans living in America with the same last name and a similar first name. In any case, I will exclude these records for the purpose of this research and focus only on names spelled exactly like his name. Moreover, we can verify many of the Social Security numbers as valid since they’re connected to addresses at which we know Obama resided. Needless to say, there are also a slew of address and social security numbers connected to addresses in states that Obama has no known connection to.

In Obama’s home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042 and one starting 364.

In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999.

There are no addresses listed in New York where he attended Columbia University, but there is one listed for him in nearby Jackson, NJ, with a Social Security number beginning with 485.

Pictured: 713 Hart Senate Office Building.

In Massachusetts – where Obama attended Harvard Law School – we find three addresses, all using the 042 Social Security number. After Obama was elected to the United States Senate in 2005, he moved into an apartment at 300 Massachusetts Ave NW; the Social Security number attached to that address is the 042 one. Yet, three years later, Obama used a different Social Security number for an address listed as: 713 Hart Senate Office Building. This was the address of his United States Senate office.  This Social Security number began with 282 and was verified by the government in 2008.

This mystery grows even stranger as other addresses and Social Security numbers for Barack Obama appear in a dozen other states not known to be connected to him. Again, I am excluding those records names not spelled exactly like his name.

Tennessee, one address with a Social Security number beginning with 427

Colorado, one address, with a Social Security number beginning with 456.

Utah, two addresses, with two Social Security numbers beginning with 901 and 799.

Missouri has one address and one Social Security number beginning with 999.

Florida has two addresses listed for his him, three if you count one listed as “Barry Obama.” One is connected to a Social Security number beginning with 762.

In Georgia there are three addresses listed for him, all with different Social Security numbers:   579, 420, and 423.

In Texas there are four different addresses listed for him, one is connected to Social Security number 675.

There are two addresses listed for Barack Obama in Oregon and one address listed for him in

the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.

All told, there are 49 addresses and 16 different Social Security numbers listed for a person whose name is spelled “Barack Obama.” In some cases, the middle initial “H” is listed. If you were to expand the search to include closely related names such as: “Barac,” “Barak,” and “Barrack” Obama, you would find more than a dozen additional addresses and Social Security numbers.

Finally, the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time.

Pictured: Ann, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham

Nevertheless, all this mystery surrounding Obama appears to be a generational thing.  Researchers have discovered nearly a dozen aliases, at least two different Social Security numbers, and upwards of over 99 separate addresses for Ann Dunham, his mother. We do know she worked for the ultra liberal Ford Foundation but we also know she may have earned some income from pornographic poses, as evidenced by photos recently discovered by some researchers—how embarrassing. The only thing researchers are able to find out about Obama’s mother is the fact she made porn. I’m sure that’s a first for presidential mothers.

But we also know that Obama’s mother and grandparents associated with Communist Party  leaders such as Frank Marshall Davis, a man who, according to Obama’s book, Dreams from my Father, was his main mentor during much of his Hawaiian boyhood (although Obama tried to disguise his identity in his book). During the Cold War, Davis was named by congressional investigators as a key member of a secretive pro-Soviet networked that existed in Hawaii at that time.

Pictured: Communist Party leader, Frank Marshall Davis.

The lack of documents regarding Obama also extends to his mother and to his grandparents. Indeed, researchers have been unable to find marriage licenses for his mother’s two marriages, assuming she was ever legally married. Ditto goes for the marriage license for Ann’s parents. They cannot find birth certificates for her, her parents, or for even for her grandparents. Even more so, despite Obama’s boast of his grandfather’s military service, there’s no record of that either. For reasons no one knows, much of Obama’s life, his mother’s life and his grandparent’s life has been erased from the records as if they never existed.

But why would someone obtain so many Social Security numbers? According to investigators, those who create additional Social Society numbers are typically engaged in criminal activities such as Social Security fraud, tax fraud, real estate fraud, campaign contributions fraud, voter fraud and so on. While the private investigator who compiled this list says multiple social security numbers does not automatically prove there’s criminal activity involved, he states that “having said that, I have personally experienced many, many cases where such information has led to subsequent exposure of fraud, deception, money laundering and other crimes.“What is interesting to note is that Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court probate department and had access to the Social Security numbers of deceased people.

Pictured: Barrack Obama and his Grandmother, Madelyn Dunham. “Madeline Dunham was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court probate department and had access to the Social Security numbers of deceased people.”

It is clear that more research needs to be done on this issue.  The Western Center for Journalism

( http://www.westernjournalism.com) is inviting our readers to join the search for the truth. If you have any information about any of the addresses listed, we would love to hear from you. To find a complete list of all the addresses and Social Security numbers listed in the public record for Obama and family, please go to the Western Center for Journalism.

Obama’s ineligibility: When government declares war on the people

At Lexington and Concord, the American militia was able to stand their ground against oppression because they stockpiled weapons and ammunition, created an effective local intelligence network and had the support of the populace. Those are the fundamentals of a classical insurgency. In 1964, no one framed the choice better than Ronald Reagan:

“Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

But that was another era. Sadly for our country, Reagan greatly underestimated the corruption, the inexhaustible greed and the endless lust for power of future politicians.
We have an occupant of the White House, who is ineligible to be President, who has likely forged or been complicit in the forgery of official documents and who may be using a stolen Social Security Number.
There is ever increasing evidence of widespread press self-censorship and the altering of online documents to misinform and manipulate the American people in order to protect Barack Obama.
We have a rogue and dangerous Executive Branch and members of Congress who have violated their oaths of office and abdicated their responsibility to support and defend the Constitution and uphold the rule of law.
They are now all co-conspirators attempting to achieve absolute power and corrupt the government absolutely, all of which will eventually lead to the destruction of our republic.
Michael Barone calls it “Gangster Government”, where, in the Chrysler bailout, the Obama administration forced bondholders to accept 33 cents on the dollar on secured debts while giving United Auto Worker (UAW) retirees 50 cents on the dollar on unsecured debts.
That was a clear violation of the ordinary bankruptcy rule that secured creditors are fully paid off before unsecured creditors get anything. The politically connected UAW got preference over politically unconnected bondholders.
Add to that travesty, the destruction of 789 small business, dealer franchises during the Chrysler bankruptcy hearing.
Was that yet another violation of bankruptcy law to benefit the UAW? Why does it seem that Obama and his allies always side with the fat cats over small businesses and ordinary investors?
In his superb exposé “Chrysler Bankruptcy Exposes Dirty Politics”, Declan McCullagh documents the immorality, the breakdown of the rule of law and strong-arm tactics used by some politicians.
He describes how Obama, his allies and Congressional Democrats interfered on behalf of unions (the junior creditors) and publicly upbraided the senior creditors who were asserting their contractual rights.
The UAW has donated $25.4 million to federal politicians over the last two decades, with 99 percent of that cash going to Democrats. Obama’s final 2008 campaign stop on Election Day was a UAW phone bank.
Clifford Asness, managing partner at a $20 billion hedge fund named AQR Capital Management, called it “toxic demagoguery” and says “the president’s attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him.”
The Constitution is being violated and the rule of law eroded to benefit a rich and powerful elite who care not for their country, but only for themselves.
Our elected representatives, our courts and our law enforcement agencies are ignoring our requests for the redress of grievances and investigations of likely law violations.
America no longer has a government beholden to the people.
The Declaration of Independence stated:

“In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”
It is the dishonest and ruthless people now controlling the reins of power, who are forcing the American people toward a second Lexington and Concord.
It is those politicians and their collaborators, who force us to stand our ground, not against our Constitution, but against their perversion of it and their suppression of our liberty.
In the last paragraph of his 1964 speech, Ronald Reagan also framed our current challenge:
“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”

Lawrence Sellin

Lawrence Sellin Most recent columns

© Canada Free Press 2011
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com

Rep. Tom McClintock: Another Ineligibility Denier

IS “TOM” GUILTY OF MISPRISION OF FELONY?

July 16, 2011

Rep. Tom McClintock was elected in 2008 and represents California's Fourth Congressional District

Dear Editor:

Recently I sent an article from Canada Free Press to my congressman, Tom McClintock, and received the following response:

Dear Redacted:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding President Barack Obama’s citizenship and his eligibility to serve as president.

The Constitution is the starting point for determining eligibility to serve as President. The Constitution requires that to be eligible to serve as President an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old, and have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least 14 years.

Currently, a candidate’s eligibility under these requirements is vetted by a number of sources, both inside the government and out.  First, candidates go through an intensive political vetting process in both the primary and general election – their histories are carefully examined by their political opponents who have a vested interest in uncovering the facts.  At the end of the campaigns, the voting public weighs in.  Then, when all the votes have been cast and counted, it is up to Congress to certify the results.  A final check-and-balance against eligibility irregularities lies with the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court.

President Obama has passed each of these requirements.  Further, in President Obama’s case – in addition to his Hawaii birth certificate – there were two birth announcements in major Hawaii newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin.

Thanks again for contacting me, and I look forward to hearing from you again in the future.  Should you have any further questions regarding this or any other issue, please don’t hesitate to contact me via email or my Washington D.C. office at (202) 225-2511 or my district office in Granite Bay at (916) 786-5560.

Sincerely,

Tom

Californians to McClintock: What About the Two Citizen Parents McCain Had to Have?

6Share

0digg

WHEN WAS THE “VETTING” OF OBAMA DONE, AND BY WHOM?

by Sharon Rondeau

To which vetting process is Rep. Tom McClintock referring when he says that Obama's eligbility was determined before the election?

(Jul. 16, 2011) — In response to the letter received by Congressman Tom McClintock and published here, the congressman has received the following two letters:

Hi Tom:

As my former Congressman, I hold you in high esteem and also voted for you for Governor. I am a well-regarded retired businessman.

After reading the letter appearing below this one, purportedly from you, I offer the following thoughts. I’m writing to ask you to reconsider your position on the eligibility issue– please hear me out.

1. There was no vetting process. That has been confirmed at the federal level and for various states, including our own (please research the case against Debra Bowen, Secretary of State). Nancy Pelosi omitted the Constitutional eligibility statement in her 2008 “Obama” candidate certification in 49 states and apparently perjured herself in the 50th (Hawaii). The “media” glossed over the vetting of “Obama” and seemed strangely incurious, relying mostly upon the two somewhat fictional “autobiographies.” “Obama” offered almost no background and substantiation of his past. In fact, he has actively and aggressively covered it up, in an unprecedented manner. If you can point out how and who he was vetted by, we would like to help enlighten the benighted public, who question “Obama’s” legitimacy.

2. It is fairly clear, from the papers of the founding fathers and De Vattel’s Law of Nations, a primary reference used by them in the writing of the Constitution, that they thought of a natural born citizen as someone born in this country of two citizen parents at the time of that person’s birth. SR 511 appears to harbor similar assumptions. This has been repeatedly confirmed by Congress and the Supreme Court. However, CRS wrote a very misleading memo about eligibility, distorting both facts and case law, particularly Minor vs. Happersett. This has been documented in several articles, which we will forward upon request.

3. The withholding of “Obama’s” vital papers and expenditure of possibly up to $2MM to defend him in eligibility legal actions, plus an undetermined amount from DOJ funds, is an outrage. They should have been prosecuting, not defending him.

4. There is documented, indisputable evidence, compiled by multiple independent private investigators (Sankey, Daniels and others), that:
- “Obama” is linked at least 16 stolen Social Security numbers, including 042-68-4425, via name and addresses.
- This was uncovered via commercial databases and other research.
- That led to a finding that his Selective Service registration, linked to the aforementioned Social Security number, is also fraudulent and apparently forged circa 2008.
- At least one of his purported mother’s Social Security numbers appears to be stolen.
- We are told by investigators that this normally happens either when people cannot obtain such documentation legally, or are using it to break the law, usually for financial gain or other felony fraud.

5. There is no record of him ever legally changing his name from Barry Soetoro or Soebarkah to his current AKA. There is also evidence linking him to an alias of Harrison Bounel.

6. The so-called birth certificate was, after over three years of stalling. finally released in digital form by “Obama,” via the White House staff, on 4-27-11, with limited copies made from an undetermined source document. It has been declared a fraud by dozens of document experts, some of them very well-known and respected. In short, it opens up in Adobe Illustrator as a nine-layered document, displaying numerous symptoms known to experts as evidence of alteration.

7. John McCain was submitted to an extensive investigation and humiliating Senate hearing, on his eligibility for the Presidency, in spite of having a very well-documented history and two American citizen parents. His family has served with distinction as military officers for multiple generations. Even though he was born in Panama (NOT the at the time Canal Zone, a U.S. Possession, as many thought), he was declared eligible, because his father was serving his country as a military officer, a special case. No such hearing was ever held for his Democrat opponent, who had far more mysterious circumstances in his past and had already been served for eligibility suits. Some say this was some sort of quid pro quo. Whatever.

8. You didn’t raise the issue in your letter, but the so-called “birth announcements”:
- Are unvetted
- Are not legal documents
- Could have been triggered via relatives in a request, or Certification (NOT Certificate) of Live Birth, obtained with only an affidavit, under Hawaiian law.
- Do not state the name of the child
- Do not state the place of birth
- List a false address, where the parents never lived

Congress and courts have both failed to act on the issues, to date. The Courts claim it’s Congress’ responsibility and Congress vice- versa. You say it’s a non-issue. About half of the public at large surveyed think otherwise.

We do NOT intend to roll over and let this go away. The stakes are way too high. The founders established a high bar for eligibility, precisely to help avoid situations like we have now, with a chief executive whose priorities, loyalties, ideology and revered traditions clearly do not stand with We The People. This and his many impeachable offenses, are far worse than Watergate and Monicagate to the nth power.

We hope and pray that you will have the courage to act, to motivate the House of Reps to investigate this and act accordingly. I also ask you to help motivate the FBI to move on the multiple complaints submitted.

We do not think it is sufficient to wait until January 2013 to solve the problem, particularly because he has been so very dangerous and destructive in office and seems willing to commit massive fraud to get his way, with powerful forces enabling him to do so.

Regards,

G. Miller

———————————

Dear Rep. McLintock,

I read your letter to “redacted” on the Post and Email website and would like to share the following. You said that President Obama was thoroughly vetted and found clean. I don’t think so. You may have forgotten Senate Resolution 511 which vetted Sen. McCain on being a natural born citizen. He was cleared and his nomination accepted by Democrats. But here’s what you and so many others are missing. During one of the hearings on Res. 511 Sen. Patrick Leahy said, “Because he (McCain) was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen.” Obviously, “born to American citizens” means that both parents are U.S. citizens, which McCain’s parents were. But by this statement, Sen. Leahy admitted that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Art. 2, Sect. 1, Clause 5 of the constitution. This appeared to be a thoughtless “oops” that went unnoticed. But according to the historical record and Surpeme Court rulings, Leahy is dead on. Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States because his father was Kenyan and never was a U.S. citizen. McCain must have known this, but why didn’t he bring it up? And why didn’t he and Republicans demand that Sen. Obama be vetted for natural born citizenship also? Those questions need to be answered, but try and get one. The real substance of natural born citizenship is citizen parents and Leahy nailed it. So you are wrong, sir, when you say that Barack Obama was thoroughly vetted. He has committed election fraud and is guilty of usurping the presidency, among other things. Check with Senator Leahy and see if he still believes a natural born citizen is born of parents who are BOTH “American citizens.”

Regards, J. Black

Microfilms and stories connected to the newspaper birth announcements of Obama birth

I promise you that this piece has information not posted anywhere before. This work is exclusive to this blog.  Material published elsewhere after the date of this article, should probably  cite this work.

This blog post is about the research I have done into the history, microfilms and stories connected to the newspaper birth announcements of Obama birth.

I realized quite some time ago that no one had done comparisons on copies from multiple libraries -personally collected- on a large scale.  I set off to do so.
My main goal originally was to look for any obvious anomalies.
Second, the frequency of the two papers posting the birth announcements in exact order within a day or two of publication.
Third, anything that jumped out as being out of place, or dissimilar between the copies from each location.

I will begin with a very abbreviated history on the discovery of the infamous Obama newspaper birth announcements, followed by my own experiences and the materials that I’ve collected which are relevant to the research in this post.  So, basically this is written somewhat like a a journal.  There are a total of four different posts, and a “supporting” page of PDF’s titled “The Wheat and the Chaff”. (over in the right hand column).

The links to the other three posts are below:

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/ya-cant-always-get-what-ya-want/

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/06/06/graphs-and-stats/ 

                                                                   http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/wheres-sherlock-holmes-when-you-need-him/

The History:

Shortly after obama’s “COLB” appeared on his campaign website, many people claimed that it was fraudulent, and demanded that he produce his original long form BC.  That never happened.  Instead, an intrepid PUMA doing research made the discovery of the now famous obama birth announcement that apparently appeared in the Aug. 13,1961 Honolulu Advertiser.  This was “discovered” by Lori Starfelt, who made the claim that she was sent the copy by the Hawaii State Library.

This is what I was able to find on our friend Starfelt, written by a columnist  :

BREAKING UPDATE: “LORI STARFELT” IS SAID TO HAVE PASSED AWAY.   MARCH 16th 2011, FROM UTERINE CANCER.  THERE WERE CONDOLENCES WRITTEN ON “HER” BLOG, AND A MEMORIAL DATE SET FOR ONE MONTH AFTER SHE PASSED AWAY.  NO OBITUARIES, ETC. WERE FOUND.  THIS FILMMAKER DIED THE DAY BEFORE DONALD TRUMP BEGAN HIS SUPPORT OF THOSE WHO QUESTION OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY.

“This announcement was not found by, as might be expected, the usual suspects (the “Obamania media” as they’re known by some), but by one researcher trying to prove that Obama wasn’t born in the U.S: Lori Starfelt, who’s part of a team creating an anti-Obama documentary for the pro-Clinton PUMAs.  It was posted by “TexasDarlin,” another person researching this issue.

I’ve got to hand it to these people.  Even if their effort is only to going to lead to the conclusion that he is a citizen (which, with this announcement, would seem to be closer and closer to the case), they’re pretty good researchers.  I think rooting out possible corruption and deception is not a bad thing.

So, the announcement was published.  To those who will question its authenticity, Lori (Starfelt), the researcher, explains:

“In 1961, the hospitals would take their new birth certificates to Vital Records. At the end of the week, Vital Records would post a sheet that for the news paper to pick up that contained births, deaths, marriages and divorces. The Advertiser routinely printed this information in their Sunday edition. This is not a paid announcement that his grandmother could arrange. This is information that comes from Vital Records – we know this because this particular section reflects those records. They didn’t have a provision for paid, one sentence announcement that would be included in the Vital Records. At the time, if a child was born outside a hospital, the family would have 30 days to apply for a birth certificate and Vital Records would expect to see prenatal care records, or pediatrician records of the first check up, etc. They’d also want the notarized statement from the mid-wife. Of course, they can apply later but that would noted as a different kind of birth certificate. I think TD has already addressed that. This information was received by Vital Records the first week of his birth = that suggests the hospital.”

Or does it?  One very notable thing going on in her “statement” is that she seems to have been able to effortlessly get answers that no one has been able to get since.  If you try to get this info from the newspapers, the hospitals or from the Department of Health in HI, you will not get a straight answer.  But Lori Starfelt got one.  And, she actually got an almost PRISTINE copy of the announcement.  Now,  we don’t REALLY know where she obtained it from, she claimed that it was given to her by the Librarian at the State Library in Honolulu.

Just a day or so after Lori’s discovery was published, along came the second birth announcement, this one was supposedly discovered by someone with the online nic- name Koa,  IN PERSON and also at the HI State Library.  Below was from a poster at the FreeRepublic blog who copied and pasted Koa’s account of the discovery:

“Source of announcement: In posting that announcement, the user stated as follows:”

“Here’s a copy I made today of the August 14th (could have been the 15th or 16th), 1961 Star Bulletin newspaper showing Obama’s birth announcement stored on microfilm at the Hawaii State Library in Honolulu. I had to enlarge it to the point of losing the top of the page with the date and day in order to make it readable. The microfilm is stored in the basement of the library and was in the box marked Star Bulletin Aug 1, 1961-Aug 16, 1961. …”

This was the Aug. 14,1961 Honolulu Star Bulletin announcement-the one on the right above.  Just click to enlarge.

Honolulu Advertiser, closeup of original announcement thats posted above left (I note the bottom of the letters in “Obama” are cut off):

Now, you will notice that in this example (from a pro-obama google webcache) is the “same” ad as above, only it looks a bit different: No dotted lines, letters have been restored and do not appear “chopped off”, heavy line under Asing announcement missing, periods added to the “A M  Hatchle” announcement”. Nice and shiny.

In a Jan. 7, 2010 article in WorldNetDaily I found the following:

“The Advertiser and Star-Bulletin began collaborating on reporting birth announcements in 1961. On June 1, 1962, they signed a Formal Letter of Agreement to create the Hawaiian News Agency to jointly publish both papers, an agreement that remains in place even today.

A comparison of the Obama birth announcement in the two newspapers shows they are identical in every detail, including the order of other announcements preceding and following the Obama listing.“

Birth announcements from the Star-Bulletin (left) and Honolulu Advertiser (right), with Barack Obama’s announcement marked

WHY DID I HIGHLIGHT THE STATEMENT IN THE WND ARTICLE?

It has been advanced many, times that there is more weight to this “proof” because the announcements appeared in both papers one day apart, presumably because both papers are thought to have always published the same birth announcements.  So, if it is in one paper it is in the other.

That erroneous presumption was corrected early on by other researchers who found that identical listing of these announcements was not typically the case.

Now for some more news,

I own a set of paper copies of both of these newspapers (copied from microfilm) that were personally collected for me by a close friend.  The copies that I own are from both the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin, and were collected from BOTH Hawaii libraries that have the micro films, the State Library and the University Library.  These were collected early March 2010. I also own a set of these paper copies from the Library of Congress in Washington DC, that I personally collected in 2010.  The dates for each set are from July 23,1961  through September 8, 1961.  I wish to make it clear that I am not claiming to have the microfilm rolls-I have the paper copies made while viewing the microfilms.  The viewer has a printer that allows you to print the image on the screen.

LET ME MAKE A STATEMENT HERE.  THE IMAGES OF THE ANNOUNCEMENTS FIRST POSTED (SHOWN ABOVE) DO NOT MATCH THE CONDITION OF THE COPIES THAT I OWN.   IN FACT, THE COPIES THAT I HAVE FROM HAWAII ARE CLEARER AND HAVE LESS SIGNS OF WEAR IN THE STAR BULLETIN OF THE SAME DATE, SUPPOSEDLY FROM THE EXACT SAME LOCATION.

But the Advertiser is definitely in much worse shape.  It has damage marks that run both diagonally and horizontally.  The diagonal marks are odd, the film only slides between two glass plates and is otherwise stationary.  I looked into the history of microfilms and found out that these are very tough films, meant to last “99 years”. Where you see the dotted line above obama’s announ. in the first ever online posted image, on my copy of the Advertiser from the same location there are significant lines obscuring that area. Additionally, the bottom of the letters in”obama” are not cut off as they appear to be in the original image.  The “a” at the end of obama appears slightly tilted and lower than the rest of that letters in that line.

Clearly, one would NOT expect these microfilms to morph in precisely this way.  I mean one gets better, one gets worse – by scratches appearing that cover an area that has repeatedly been pointedout as having a strange “dotted line” above the obama announ.  The copies from the University Honolulu Advertiser are in excellent condition.  Almost as clear as the Starfelt image.

I will say straight out that the stories from both “Lori Starfelt” and “Koa” are misleading and in the case of “Koa” a complete lie.  So, the stories of the first “discoveries” are actually complete fabrications.  I do not know if Starfelt intentionally lied, but that copy she emailed to TexasDarlin could absolutely not have come from the source she claimed to have been told it had.  And Koa outright made that story of his/her discovery up.  The images from the copies we collected prove this beyond doubt.  Additionally, Koa seemed to know nothing of the process of viewing the film on the reader-in fact had no idea about the dates on the film he/she supposedly handled in person.

Some other observations that I personally am in the unique position of being able to make:

The films are on reels dated from the first of the month to the 15th., then from the 16th. to the last day of the month.

The Honolulu Advertiser published both an am and pm edition each day.

The boxes in the Library of Congress were in very good condition.  The boxes of the Honolulu Adver. in both HI locations were quite worn, while the boxes for the Star Bulletin in both HI locations were in very good condition.

The box containing the Aug. 1-15, 1961 Honolulu Star Bulletin in the Library of Congress in Washington DC. has the original reference numbers scribbled out and rewritten in black ink. (Taken with my cell phone)  The Star Bulletin films were in boxes marked: Micro Photo Inc. 1700 Shaw Ave. Cleveland12, Ohio.  The Honolulu Advertiser films were in a box marked: Recordak Corp. 444 Madison Ave. New York, NY.

The Aug. 1 -15 1961 Star Bulletin microfilm at the Library of Congress has a slice down the center of the film, it begins at the identifying “LC” punch outs on the end of the film.  Sorry, my photo of this is not very clear.  The slice down the center is actually very straight and deep.  I ran my fingernail across lightly and it caught up in the slice.  UPDATE: I neglected to mention before that when I examined this film on site I did unroll it over a yard to determine how long the slice was.  It was on the entire portion that I unrolled, and did appear to continue-I didn’t want to be too obvious, so I didn’t unroll it further than that off of the spool.

At the University Library in Honolulu the staff delivers the film and also replaces it.  You are not under any observation while handling the film. No library card needed.

At the State Library in Honolulu you collect the film and return the film yourself.  Other than some rude staff members making snide comments about my friend, and presumably to him, as he was able to hear said comments (having the leisure time to do so may be one reason that HI has the Library staff on furlough days) he was unsupervised while making copies.  Copies at that library require inserting COINS into the viewer copy machine.  No Library card needed.

At the Library of Congress you must pass through security upon entering the Library.  You must obtain a Library card.  You must fill out a request form and the films are delivered to a table which you indicate on the form.  You return the films to a special area yourself.  You are unsupervised while making copies.  You must have any purse or bag/backpack glanced into upon leaving at he main entrance, otherwise you do not go through “security” again.

My friend felt it would be a very simple matter to make a switch of films in either HI Library.  I can confirm the same would be the case even with the Library of Congress in spite of the “security” checks.

OK, so now that we have all of that out of the way I will put up the PDFs containing  images of the copies for Aug. 13, 1961 Honolulu Advertiser, and the Aug. 14, 1961 Star Bulletin that I have from the Library of Congress, both of the Hawaii Libraries.  You can do the math yourself.  These are kind of huge, so just adjust the size.  Some are copied in sections so that the top of the page including date, page number, ect. are included.

 ADDITIONAL APOLOGIZES:  I DON’T HAVE THESE IN THE FORMAT I WANT,  I AM STILL WORKING THE BUGS OUT.  SORRY THAT YOU HAVE TO CLICK ON PDFs!

Library of Congress, DC, Honolulu Advertiser0001

Library Of Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001

Library Of Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0003

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Advertiser0001

State Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001

State Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002

Honolulu State Library, Honolulu Advertiser -1 of 20001

Honolulu State Library, Honolulu Advertiser-2 of 20001

OBSERVATION:  The PDFs for the Library of Congress-Honolulu Advertiser shows no “periods” after the A M Hatchie announcement (two below obama’s).  At 400% blown-up there are no “periods”.  In the copy from the HI University Library they are crystal clear at the size the PDF opens in. In the HI State Library Honolulu Advertiser, the periods appears to be there as well, though harder to make out. Since that is the most “degraded” of the microfilms, if those are visible there, they should be on the Library of Congress copy also.  AND: in the first ever posting of the obama announcement-the last name is spelled Hatchle, NOW in every copy I’ve seen it appears as Hatchie.  So, again-clear differences between the copies at different locations.  All aspects of the text should be the same in all papers/microfilms.

Here’s where I throw a monkey wrench into the wheels turning in your mind.  I will post PDFs of these next images.  See how quickly you pick up what you are looking at.  This is page 23 from the Star Bulletin on Aug. 14, 1961.  Tip: obama’s birth announcement appears on page 24,  Aug. 14, 1961 in the Star Bulletin.

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin 230001

Library Of Congress, DC Honolulu Star Bulletin-23-10001

Library OF Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin, 23-20001

YEP, you got it in one.  The film shows that page 23 was imaged twice.  What is most notable about this is that the same exact page was not imaged twice, but page 23 was laid out twice as you can clearly tell from the images in the copies.  It is this way on the Library of Congress copy and the University Library in HI, I do not know if the film in the other HI library has the same occurrence because my friend did flub that copy….not sure he was looking at the instruction page that day.  Sigh.  Now, remember that this is the page that appears immediately before the page obama’s birth announcement is published on.

Remember back when I highlighted this statement in the article from WND: A comparison of the Obama birth announcement in the two newspapers shows they are identical in every detail,including the order of other announcements preceding and following the Obama listing.“ ???

I will explain why I highlighted that snippet.

It has been advanced that both papers printed identical lists as the general rule.  As I mentioned before, this was pointed out to add more “weight” to the “proof ” these newspaper birth announcements lend to obama’s birth story.  As it turns out it was done more or less sporadically.  I pulled a sample size of ten days from each paper.  I began the splendidly tedious process of comparing the incidence of the same birth announcements being listed in both papers.  Mainly with an eye towards how often they matched in exact order.The only time this occurred in that particular way within the ten days that I researched, was on the dates that had obama’s birth announcements.

And I even took the extra steps of comparing editions to a three day range (edition before, same date, edition after) of the sister publication.  So, I tried to cover all the bases in a fair comparison.

So.  The ONE and ONLY time that the two papers published the birth list, beginning at the first announcement, in exact descending order, was the editions that obama’s birth announcement appeared in.  This was indeed the only time that these announcements were printed this way, as the closest the papers came to doing this again never had all the same names listed in the exact same order.  I figured the ten day sample would give conclusive data as to if this was uncommon.

This also shows that the story Starfelt gave about how these announcements got to the newspapers was false.

I eventually finished comparing the two month range of birth announcements that I have – nowhere did ALL of the announcements match the next days announcements in the sister paper as they did on the days where obama’s announcements are listed.    I also checked the copies for Jan. 15 1961 – all of Feb. ’61, and the phenomenon did not occur during that time frame either.

7/7/10  I added a new post with the images of the copies that were used in this comparison process, there is also a “Page” in the column on the right with these same PDFs which will open to a much larger, easier to read size:

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/07/07/the-wheat-and-the-chaff/

And I must mention, I didn’t forget the Nordyke twins birth announcement.  Remember that it was given to this blog by a Citizen Investigator, and this is the first blog that published that image for public view. http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/01/07 While I was looking at my newest Library of Congress copy of the Aug. 16 1961 (the date the Nordyke twins announcement appears) I happened to notice that off to the side a few columns over was what looks to be a fingerprint.  It’s in scale with the newspaper, not the viewer.  It’s NOT in the copies from each location.  The theory is that these came from a master reel-all of the microfilms.  When a “fingerprint” is in one, it should be in all.  Yes?

Aug. 16 19610001

Ponder this over:  No one can access the Certification Of Live Birth (COLB) presented as proof of obama’s birth in HI.  But they cannot restrict the public’s access to these microfilms.

It is truly remarkable how these are morphing since first being discovered, allegedly, at the State Library in Honolulu HI, is it not?

11/22/2010 Quick Note: A short summary of this post, combinbed with info from the most recent trip into HI at this link: http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/round-pegs-in-square-holes/

I put up a You Tube vid showing a woman ordering her long form birth certificate in July 2010 ~ in Honolulu HI.  The Video Is At The Bottom Of That Post: http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/some-tropical-truth/

Special thanks to some  wonderful and dedicated  associates that have worked on this data as well.  Big thanks to Redpill for spreading the word.  The Network Of Knowledge.  Dig it.

Extra giant thank you to TsunamiGeno for his hard work on behalf of his old friend…me.  I know how difficult this had to have been, boy do I ever!

I WISH TO STATE THAT I AM NOT MAKING A CLAIM THAT I HAVE FACTUAL PROOF THESE MICROFILMS CONTAINING BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR obama ARE TAMPERED WITH.   I HAVE DISPLAYED ON THIS BLOG, OVER FOUR SEPARATE POSTS, A PORTION – THAT MOST DIRECTLY RELATING TO obama’s BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS – OF THE MATERIAL THAT I HAVE COLLECTED.  I HAVE DIRECTLY SHARED COPIES AND PDF’S OF MY RESEARCH WITH OTHERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN DOING THEIR OWN RESEARCH, THEIR CONCLUSIONS AND OR CLAIMS ARE HOWEVER, THEIR OWN.

I DO NOT ENDORSE ANY CLAIMS MADE BY ANY OTHER PERSON/PERSONS IF THOSE “CLAIMS” ARE NOT INCLUDED IN MY OWN RESEARCH WORK PRESENTED IN THIS BLOG.

Here is a link to a fairly recent article about the archives housed by the newspapers.

http://thinktech.honadvblogs.com/2010/03/09/where-will-all-the-archives-go/