White House Releases Obama's Long-Form Birth Certificate

Originally posted by 2ndFUTURE
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer

 

So....I'm retarded because I care about our constitution being violated at every turn. I'm retarded because caring about the Natural born Citizen claus knowing what this precedent will mean for future candidates.

I say YOU are retarded for not knowing or understanding the importance of the Constitution and why it keeps you safe. You take for granted the rights you have though they are being whittled away by both parties in Washington.day by day.

I am not a "birther". I am a constitutionalist. And you should be too. Obama claimed to be but he is anything but

You're just an idiot. You're wrapping yourself in a constitution that you can't understand in the least. You should be ashamed of yourself. You must be one of the most ignorant and pig-headed people on ATS.

How can you claim to be defending a constitution that you can't understand. Go get a GED or something.

Originally posted by wakeupcall1111
Oh brother. His parent's race are listed as Caucasion and African? What a bunch of crap. No one used those terms in that day. I was born 12 days after Obama, same year, and my birth certificate says father and mother listed as White - not Caucasion. FOUL - FAKE once again!

Here’s the certification of live birth of the son of a birther (Miki Booth).

Can you tell what’s listed as race of parents? Is this person’s birth certificate a fraud too?

I'm not a "birther", but my only question is..

Why is there no mailing address for the mother on this form? Is it because it would be too easy for Hawaiians to either dispute a legitimate address (eg.."The person that lives in that address has been there longer than that!" or "That address never existed"..etc..)

Just a thought.

Originally posted by glad_to_be_His
You have to admit if he had done this years ago there wouldn't be as many crying foul now.

Public figures always have to weigh the results of responding to rumors. Feeding a rumor by denying it and trying to prove it wrong can be very dangerous. So can ignoring it. They have to play it by ear. My guess is that Obama decided not to feed it. But now, it has become such an issue with Trump jumping on the birther bandwagon, he has decided to quash it.

The reason this issue is so emotional with me is that I have spent many, many hours in deep research and most of my findings are posted on this board with credible SOURCES. Yet I still see rumors that have been debunked YEARS ago being stated as fact. This habit of repeating lies (all the while claiming to be searching for the TRUTH) and making up new rumors, is frustrating to me. The remaining birthers don't want the truth. Period.
.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


BH...we should really just give up. Some people will never listen to reason or facts. Some can't admit to themselves that they have been wrong and spreading lies for over 3 years.

They will hold onto this...and if Obama is re-elected, then they can still tell themselves that Obama is a CIA plant.

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
• If the original document was in a bound volume (as reflected by the curvature of the left hand side of the certificate), how can the green patterned background of the document's safety paper be so seamless?

• Why, if Obama was born on August 4, 1961, was the “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” four days later on August 8, 1961?

• What is the significance of the smudges in the box containing the name of the reported attendant?

• David A. Sinclair, the M.D. who purportedly signed the document, died nearly eight years ago at age 81. So he is conveniently unavailable to answer questions about Obama’s reported birth.

• In the “This Birth” box there are two mysterious Xs above “Twin” and “Triplet.” Is there a sibling or two unaccounted for?

• What is the significance of the mysterious numbers, seen vertically, on the document’s right side?

• Finally, the “Signature of Local Registrar” in box 21 may be a desperate attempt at establishing the document’s Hawaiian authenticity. Note to forgers: It is spelled “Ukulele.”

I think these are distractions - the little marks are used to authenticate the paper. The question not posed is why is his ID higher than the people born the next day.

Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961: Obama's certificate number: 61 10641

The Nordyke twins were born in Hawaii on August 5, 1961: Susan Nordyke's certificate number: 61 10637 and Gretchen Nordyke's certificate number: 61 10638

Why was his name not listed in the report of all COLB issued from 1911 to 1972.

Finally why on his previously released birth certificate is his father listed as "Negro - African" and on this one the more modern "African"? It seems odd if the two were created simultaneously that they would have differences.

It seems clear that this release photo is not of the original but a copy and the copy has been edited so why, why, why? That seems crazy.

Originally posted by 2ndFUTURE
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
Not true. Ive read the exact law from 1941. Have you? It was talking about a child born here. Don't spread dis-information if you don't really know or won't actually look it up

Please go ahead and provide a citation or link to the law, O-wise-one. The sooner you do, the sooner we will demolish you.

First off, I am not a "birther" as such, but I was in agreement with Trump that producing the long form would put the issue to rest. His being born in the US or not is hardly the biggest problem we have coming from this president. I would think that the hyenas in his own party would have outed him long ago if he was born in Kenya. Democrats would eat their own young to obtain more power.

I do, however, think that it is possible that this could be a forgery. Anything can be forged. New $100 bills can be counterfeited, you think a birth certificate would be a challenge to someone who knows what they are doing? Why has it taken so long? Perhaps it has taken this long to install people in the Hawaii Dept. of Health who can create all the documentation necessary.

Or, he was actually born in Hawaii.

I think either scenario is possible.

This whole ordeal, regardless if the document is legit or not needs to also be looked at in a competitive sense.

Trump won against Obama. Trump took control, gave the American people what he promised to give them, and took the initiative, which is the characteristic of a leader. The whole cloud of Trump being a "birther" is void because citizens want results and for things to get DONE! Trump did this and showed he is reliable and had the sources to support his endeavors.

Additionally: This is a certificate of live birth, not the actual birth certificate. Correct me if I am wrong?

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by filosophia
so show me where in the federal code of regulations it defines natural born? All you defined was nationals and citizens. And sorry, the "code of federal regulations" is not good enough. You have to look at the definitions used at the time of adoption of the constitution, not hundreds of years later.

Show me a definition of "natural born citizen" used at the time of the drafting of the constitution then. Preferably a dictionary, perhaps some contemporary government documents. Don't forget to source it.

Will a record from the first congress in 1790 do? Quite a few people were involved in both it and writing the Constitution, you know.

First Congress, Session II, Chap. 3, Section 1:

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House Of Represenatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled... And the children of such persons naturalized,dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of such naturalization shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens. Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

Addtionally, in the margins of the record, where it is summarized, it says "Their children residing here, deemed citizens. Also, children of citizens born beyond sea, &c. Exceptions."

First Congress records. Pages 103 and 104 are the relevant pages.

Now, a few words about your original question, what was said and how it can be interpreted.

You specifically said "at the time of the drafting of the Constitution." I guess you have to make up your own mind if 1790 was close enough to be considered "at the time" of the constitution. As I said, before, there were a lot of people involved in both. So, you are going to have people that helped write the Constitution that were also in the first congress. Because of this, you can easy make the argument that the people who wrote the Constitution knew there was stuff to clear up, so they clarified and defined "Natural Born Citizen" as soon as possible (first congress).

One other item that I guess might be debatable is the line "Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States." It doesn't say "whose fathers have never been citizens." Just if they were residents. Obama Sr. was a resident of the U.S. for 2 years before Obama Jr.s birth.

Note: This same document can prove that IF he had been born in Kenya, he was still a Natural Born Citizen due to his mom.

reply to post by ih8dogfarts



He was NOT born Barry Soetoro. He was adopted at age 5 by Lolo Soetoro and moved to Indonesia with his mom and step mom. He couldn't go to school in Indonesia unless he was a Indonesian citizen as was Indonesian Law. He went to school there several years before his mom shipped him to grandma's. He signed in at his indonesian school as "Barry Soetoro"


but....he was not born that way

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Now, if the White House would propose legistlation to entirely quash this for all future elections, I would be really impressed! Obama could say, "I ponied up my BC, and I want to see the State Department issue a directive that all future candidates prove their eligibility BEFORE a rumor like this can grow legs, and future presidents can focus on the business of running this country and making it great once again! YES WE CAN!!"

Ha, and I don't even really like the guy.

question1:

Obama certificate # 641, two days later certificate # 637

?

Is it wrong that Im getting so much pleasure out of this? I can now look at some pple and say..'I told you that you were a dumb effer'?

you really should site the source of these questions...
source

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
• If the original document was in a bound volume (as reflected by the curvature of the left hand side of the certificate), how can the green patterned background of the document's safety paper be so seamless?

• Why, if Obama was born on August 4, 1961, was the “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” four days later on August 8, 1961?

• What is the significance of the smudges in the box containing the name of the reported attendant?

• David A. Sinclair, the M.D. who purportedly signed the document, died nearly eight years ago at age 81. So he is conveniently unavailable to answer questions about Obama’s reported birth.

• In the “This Birth” box there are two mysterious Xs above “Twin” and “Triplet.” Is there a sibling or two unaccounted for?

• What is the significance of the mysterious numbers, seen vertically, on the document’s right side?

• Finally, the “Signature of Local Registrar” in box 21 may be a desperate attempt at establishing the document’s Hawaiian authenticity. Note to forgers: It is spelled “Ukulele.”

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by wakeupcall1111
Oh brother. His parent's race are listed as Caucasion and African? What a bunch of crap. No one used those terms in that day. I was born 12 days after Obama, same year, and my birth certificate says father and mother listed as White - not Caucasion. FOUL - FAKE once again!

Here’s the certification of live birth of the son of a birther (Miki Booth).

Can you tell what’s listed as race of parents? Is this person’s birth certificate a fraud too?

aptness, that certificate was from 1981!! Things were much different 20 years later! The world was much more PC! Yes, I believe in 1981 we were using more politically correct terms - my daughter was born in 1982 as a "caucasion" - not in 1961 though!!!

reply to post by xavi1000


One would like to believe the accusations will go down the toilet!
*****************

But, there are some people who find misinformation infinitely more entertaining than the truth, and won't let it go when the truth is confronting them like it has been the last few days.

They also have trouble admitting they were wrong, in the foolish little game they were playing.
Egos. But, I expect the more reasonable will at last, accept it, so we will likely see a reduction of "birthers".
Thank goodness. Silly, silly mess, and it has been from the outset.

reply to post by 2ndFUTURE


Show your source or it didn't happen.

Originally posted by freakjive
you really should site the source of these questions...
source

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
• If the original document was in a bound volume (as reflected by the curvature of the left hand side of the certificate), how can the green patterned background of the document's safety paper be so seamless?

• Why, if Obama was born on August 4, 1961, was the “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” four days later on August 8, 1961?

• What is the significance of the smudges in the box containing the name of the reported attendant?

• David A. Sinclair, the M.D. who purportedly signed the document, died nearly eight years ago at age 81. So he is conveniently unavailable to answer questions about Obama’s reported birth.

• In the “This Birth” box there are two mysterious Xs above “Twin” and “Triplet.” Is there a sibling or two unaccounted for?

• What is the significance of the mysterious numbers, seen vertically, on the document’s right side?

• Finally, the “Signature of Local Registrar” in box 21 may be a desperate attempt at establishing the document’s Hawaiian authenticity. Note to forgers: It is spelled “Ukulele.”

Wow .. Busted !! another birther plagiator liar

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by xavi1000

 

It is FAKE... He was NOT born Barack Hussein Obama, he claims this in his own book my friend. He was born Barry Soreto... THIS JUST GOT BIG!

Barry Soetoro

edit on 4/27/2011 by theindependentjournal because: Spelling fix

I am not looking to offend but you are either un-informed or stupid.

He was born Barack, went by Barry in his youth.

Richard/Dick, Molly/Mary, Lucy/Lucille, Bob/Robert, Teddy/Theodore, Trish/Patricia etc. etc. etc.

WOW...I am always amazed at the crazy state of peoples mind when they make this claim. It speaks to the utter abandonment of reasoned thinking.