Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MJ who wrote (129559)	4/10/2012 9:46:25 AM
From: lorne	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224759

Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB December 29th, 2008 therightsideoflife.com Another case that had been flying under the radar was Keyes v. Lingle, where the Constitution Party and Dr. Amb. Alan Keyes were petitioning against Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, Chief Elections Officer Kevin B. Cronin, and various other Defendants as a means of holding an official accountable for determining Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility. Documentation: •Dismissed on December 5 (HTML/PDF) •Motion to Reconsider dismissed on December 12 (HTML/PDF) You will notice that the case was dismissed on a technicality (according to the judge, the Plaintiffs referred to the wrong Hawaiian statute(s)), not on content. However, the bigger story to this lawsuit is the fact that forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines (pictured) has documented in an associated affidavit (PDF) the following: 2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document. 3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it. 4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all. [emphasis mine] The above clearly illustrates that it is impossible to determine eligibility based on the widely-circulated certification of live birth and that the only way to determine Barack Hussein Obama’s natural born citizenship status is to retrieve the currently-sealed certificate of live birth. It appears that we’re dealing with an individual who has so much to hide on so little a document. Update: A couple of other articles related to this posting:

To: MJ who wrote (129559)	4/10/2012 2:13:38 PM
From: lorne	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224759

Could FactCheck.org be Plainly Stating Obama’s Biggest Citizenship Problem? November 20th, 2008 therightsideoflife.com theobamafile.com reported today a fact that is the premise of Donofrio v. Wells: Barack Obama’s citizenship status at birth, Leo Donofrio claims, is what ultimately matters when considering his eligibility as President. Could FactCheck.org be providing the most damning evidence in plain sight to support Leo’s conclusion?… Article: When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children: British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth. In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC. Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that: 1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963… 2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963. As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963. … But the paper failed to note that the Kenyan Constitution prohibits dual citizenship for adults. Kenya recognizes dual citizenship for children, but Kenya’s Constitution specifies that at age 21, Kenyan citizens who possesses citizenship in more than one country automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship unless they formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya. Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982. Again, Leo Donofrio’s case is premised on Barack Obama’s citizenship at birth, regardless of what a COLB (certificate of live birth, which isn’t the full, “vault” copy) has to say. And, in theory, it doesn’t matter whether or not Barack Obama’s citizenship changed a day, month, year or years after he was born; it’s at birth, according to Leo, that counts. If you will recall from one of Leo Donofrio’s interviews, he mentioned that even the Founding Fathers had to “grandfather” themselves into the potentiality of being President, thusly (from Article 2, Section1): …or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution… Remember: the Founding Fathers were originally born (at birth) in another country, namely (in some cases), England. They were therefore born as His Majesty’s subjects. And, like Barack Obama, they would have had dual citizenship (for a time) as well! That’s why, according to Leo, they had to put in this clause, else they would have never qualified. Why did this matter so much? The first Americans literally fought with blood, sweat, tears and treasure to found a new nation. The Founders didn’t want, say, an English monarch to therefore be able to take on the office of President; too much undue foreign influence. The same holds true today. So, unless Barack Obama was born before or on September 17, 1787, he would not qualify for this clause