EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

Obama's Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - EDA CAD Electronics - Obama's Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National

Jimmy Gaffner

Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:01 am   

WHERE LIES GO TO DIE – Evidence discovered shows British
Protectorate of East Africa recorded Obama’s birth records
before 1963 and sent returns of those events to Britain’s 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 Arpaio’s Cold Case investigative group has
concluded the only law enforcement analysis of the image of
Obama’s 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. Constitution’s
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
Obama’s literary agent in which he claimed he was born in Kenya.
Prior to Obama’s ensconcement to the White House, many
international stories also stated that Obama was Kenyan-born as
did members of Kenya’s legislative assembly. Since then
information on Obama’s 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 Obama’s
family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to
Obama II’s birth.

Based on procedures defined in Britain’s 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 you’ve returned to the United

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
Majesty’s 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

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 Kenya’s 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

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, Obama’s 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


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.


For someone who wanted to remain in America, it’s difficult to
imagine any reason why Barack Obama’s 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 Obama’s birth
suggest the goat herding elder Obama didn’t “get the memo” that
he was a daddy.

On August 31st, 1961, just weeks after Obama’s 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.

Obama’s omission of the birth is astonishing and illogical given
the fact that the acknowledgement of the birth would have
fortified Obama’s 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 Obama’s
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.


However, the sad and pathetic truth about Obama’s 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 mother’s probable sexual involvement with
multiple men associated with the radical socialist movement in
1960’s 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
Obama’s claims of natal legitimacy as president.

If Obama’s cause as a usurper of power is to avenge his father’s
culture, he made the worst possible error in lying about who he
is. Vintage America is on to him. Their instincts are slowly
turning Obama’s fantasy of a socialist utopia for those he
believes are humanity’s 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 Hawaii’s 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 father’s 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 Obama’s 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 Obama’s 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 Obama’s 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 Obama’s actual
natural born identity and, in their dereliction, have conjured a
legal fantasy filled with pressurizing wrath in which a
candidate’s 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.


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.

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

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 Dunham’s
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.


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 Obama’s 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 Obama’s relationship with Dunham would have raised

suspicions. Immigration fraud was rampant during Hawaii’s
foreign birth accommodation era in the 1960’s.

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
Dunham’s case there was an added risk to the relationship for
Obama…she was pregnant.

It appears, from the contents of documents in Obama’s 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

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. Hawaii’s child welfare
statutes indicate the “statutory” father’s 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 child’s welfare. This law is intended to
protect the child if the mother dies.


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 Obama’s 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

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 Obama’s natal history and

Liars and abettors in media and government, drudging on behalf
of the Obama administration, have anchored their Alinsky-style
ridicule of those questioning Obama’s eligibility in a delusion
that he must be legitimate because his birth was announced in
two Hawaiian newspapers.

The elder Obama’s 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
mother’s 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 mother’s 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 mother’s return, the local Health Department was obligated
to provide one under the Model State Vital Statistics Act of
1942, Section 8 of Hawaii’s Public Health Regulations and HRS

The impact of population figures on the Hawaii’s 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.



Robert Baer

Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:46 am   

Jimmy Gaffner wrote:
....You _DO_ blabber on and on; best keep it short and to the point.

Then again, who the F cares,now that the Constitution has been
trashed for years?

Cade Larson

Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:34 pm   

On 10/28/2012 10:46 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Jimmy Gaffner wrote:
...You _DO_ blabber on and on; best keep it short and to the point.

Then again, who the F cares,now that the Constitution has been trashed
for years?


New income data from the Census Bureau, tabulated by former Census
income specialists at the nonpartisan economic consulting firm Sentier
Research, reveal that the three-and-a-half years of the Obama Presidency
have done enormous harm to middle-class households.

In January 2009, the month President Obama entered the Oval Office and
shortly before he signed his stimulus spending bill, median household
income was $54,983. By June 2012, it had tumbled to $50,964, adjusted
for inflation. (See the chart nearby.) That's $4,019 in lost real
income, a little less than a month's income every year.


Whether or not Americans choose to believe him, there's no denying the
fiscal reality created by the rollout version of President Obama last
year, as detailed in the Congressional Budget Office report released
yesterday. For the second year in a row, fiscal 2010 will see a
trillion-dollar deficit—an estimated $1.35 trillion, or 9.2% of GDP,
which is down slightly from last year's post-World War II record of 9.9%.

The slow pace of economic recovery has contributed to a collapse in
revenues, down to 14.8% of GDP in 2009 and an estimated 14.9% this year.
That's well below the modern historical average of about 18.1%, and it
is a reminder that economic growth is the most important contributor to
smaller deficits. Had last year's "stimulus" worked half as well as the
White House advertised, these deficits wouldn't be as large.

But as the nearby chart shows, Mr. Obama's major contribution to
deficits has been a record spending spree. In 2007, before the
recession, federal expenditures reached $2.73 trillion. By 2009
expenditures had climbed to $3.52 trillion. In 2009 alone, overall
federal spending rose 18%, or $536 billion. Throw in a $65 billion
reduction in debt service costs due to low interest rates, and the
overall spending increase was 22%.

In one year.

CBO confirms that Democrats have taken federal spending to a new and
higher plateau: 24.7% of GDP in 2009, 24.1% this year, and back to an
estimated 24.3% in 2011. The modern historical average is about 20.5%,
and less than that if you exclude the Reagan defense buildup of the
1980s that helped to win the Cold War and let Bill Clinton reduce
defense spending to 3% of GDP in the 1990s.

This means that one of every four dollars produced by the sweat of
American private labor is now taxed and redistributed by 535 men and
women in Congress.


According to one hospital, layoffs of workers have already begun as a
result of the new law. Leaders of Memorial Hospital in South Bend,
Indiana, said that although "the economy sparked this problem...the
Obama Health Care Reform Act gave the hospital a one-two punch. While
more people may soon get more health coverage, Obama's plan cuts
reimbursement dollars for hospitals at a time administrators say they
could use them most."

Obamacare includes $575 billion in cuts to Medicare to pay for a
Medicaid expansion and a new entitlement program, which will provide
generous subsidies for middle-class Americans to buy insurance. The cuts
include slashes to hospitals' reimbursement rates.

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - EDA CAD Electronics - Obama's Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map