• Meta

  • Click on the calendar for summaries of posts by day, week, or month.

    June 2018
    M T W T F S S
    « May    
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    252627282930  
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Orville on Religion of Peace Update: Musl…
    Desi Chinese on Religion of Peace Update: Musl…
    Oto ekspertiz Kaç li… on Religion of Peace Update: Musl…
    Al Dajjal (@AlDajjal… on Where are the “Moderate…
    esgort on Religion of Peace Update: Musl…
  • Archives

  • Advertisements

51 Bullet-Pointed Facts That Dispute Barack Obama’s Identity & Eligibility to be President of The US

It’s pretty funny that the left screams about “birthers” when it was actually a movement created by Hillary Clinton supporters trying to secure the nomination for Hillary.

Still, the facts keep coming out to show that Obama’s identity has not YET been proven to a Constitutionally satisfactory level, as the article below explains. Will any investigation take place during this term? Not likely since Obama owns the DoJ. The better question is whether or not Obama will be required to prove his identity prior to the 2012 election. Or will he just be given a pass since he was already “the president?”

Since some states have enacted laws requiring more stringent oversight of the certification process, I’d say even if by some remote stretch of the imagination Obama were to win the election, certification of said election won’t go nearly as smoothly, and as blindly as it did in ’08.
+


http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/06/congress-refuses-to-investigate-obamas.html

From Conception…To Election

“Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains Natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution…” Pen Johannson


Saturday, June 25, 2011

Congress Refuses to Investigate Obama’s Illegal Presidency Because They Fear “Black People Behaving Like Animals”

Sentiment Among Congressional and Judicial Leadership Insults Black Americans While They Ignore a Greater “Silent” Threat From Vintage American Wrath
by Dan Crosby
of The Daily Pen
NEW YORK – There’s a scene in the movie “Payback” when the movie’s protagonist is holding a gun to the head of a scared street hustler from whom he is attempting to extract the real identity of a lying, cheating, thief who stole from him. At one point, after the hero forcibly rips a piercing from his nose, the little weasel cries, “If I tell you his name, he will kill me.”He then pulls back the hammer and presses the muzzle into the hustler’s sweating forehead and says, “What do you think I’m gonna do? I’m here now, holding the gun to your head. Worry about me.”

Now that Congress has made the choice to aid and abet Barack Obama in his theft and corruption of the U.S. Presidency, the legislative branch of American government, like the Judicial Branch before it, has become the proverbial, pathetic hustler trying to deny and suppress the truth about Obama’s identity.

What is congress afraid of? The loss of American sovereignty? No. They could care less about the blood ransom paid to even have a constitution or the sacrifices made for 300 years to call ourselves an independent, sovereign nation. Maybe Congress is afraid of the legislative failure of our Constitutional protections? Nope. They think rights are given by government, not God.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Investigation reveals numerous bogus claims on Obama resume

Well, this explains a lot.  Mostly it explains why Barry can’t seem to get ANYTHING right when it comes to the Constitution.

But if this is true, the much larger and darker question that no one seems willing to ask, who “created” Obama and got him elected?

 


http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/investigation-reveals-numerous-bogus-claims-on-obama-resume?render=print#print

 

Investigation reveals numerous bogus claims on Obama resume

In what is being called ‘the biggest hustle in human history,’ a special investigation has discovered numerous bogus claims on Barack Obama’s resume, including the outright lie that he was a ‘Constitutional scholar and professor.’

The claim turns out to be false.

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon).

As investigators delve further into the background of Barack Obama, a disturbing picture is emerging of a man who is not who he claims to be.  The information the public has been told concerning Obama is turning out to be false–fabrications and inventions of a man and an unseen force behind him that had clear ulterior motives for seeking the highest office in the land.

According to a special report issued by ‘the Blogging Professor,’ the Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama.  The report states that Obama was unqualified, that he was never a ‘constitutional professor and scholar,’ and that he never served as editor of the Harvard Law Review while a student at the school.

The real truth is that Barack Obama was merely an ‘instructor’ at Chicago Law School, not a professor.  Commonly, instructors are non-tenure-track teachers hired by colleges and universities to teach certain courses for a salary that is well below that of Associate Professors or full Professors.

In the hierarchy of higher education, the status of instructors is below that of associate professors and professors because they lack the credentials.

In fact, it can be safely concluded that the claims of Barack Obama concerning his educational credentials and work history in higher education are a complete sham.  The President of the United States is a complete fraud.

According to Doug Ross:

I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about “Barry.” Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn’t even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn’t have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement).

Thus,  the question arises, was the claim that Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review a ‘put-up job’ as well, allowing the student to claim he held this prestigious position without having the qualifications or meeting the requirements of holding that position?  And why?

Further,

Consider this:

1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a “lawyer”. He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that he “fibbed” on his bar application.

2. Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993.

3. So, we have the President and First Lady – who don’t actually have licenses to practice law. Facts.

4. A senior lecturer is one thing. A fully ranked law professor is another. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, “Obama did NOT ‘hold the title’ of a University of Chicago law school professor”. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago.

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school, but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.

These are highly disturbing facts, verified facts from the people who know at the Chicago Law School.

There is more from Ross, however:

6. “He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.

7. The former Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution recently during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

8. The B-Cast posted the video.

9. In the State of the Union Address, President Obama said: “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal.”

10. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?

When you are a phony it’s hard to keep facts straight.

Obama has made sure that all of his records are sealed tight.  And apart from the courageous souls at the various educational institutions who dared to speak the truth, the schools Obama claimed to attend unanimously refuse to release transcripts, records, or other bits of evidence concerning Obama’s presence in their institutions.

BREAKING DEVELOPMENTjust as these disturbing facts come to light about Barack Obama, the White House is busy making deals with numerous ‘journalists,’ promising unprecedented access to the President in exchange for refraining from reporting certain information ‘they may discover.’

 


 

Obama, the African Colonial

This article, written almost a year ago, is one of the most prophetic and insightful I’ve seen describing the person of one B. Hussein Obama, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro.  He is an African Colonial/black nationalist/communist/Marxist.  Could there be a combination in a person more dangerous to America?  There is no other way to say it.  Barack Obama is a threat to American sovereignty and the American way of life.

Barack Obama is going to do everything within his power to destroy American capitalism, and America with it.  He wants power, and he wants it in his hands.  We are to be his piss boys if he has his way.

Not this “boy,” Mr. Obama.  Hearkening back to the scene in Mel Brooks’ “History of the World, Part 1,” we may look like piss boys to you, but I can’t say what you are beginning to look like to most of America.


http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/obama_the_african_colonial.html


Return to the Article

June 25, 2009

Obama, the African Colonial

By L.E. Ikenga

Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama’s skin and instead paid more attention to his cultural identity, maybe he would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa.

Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign “isms”, instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas.

The tropes of America’s racial history as a way of understanding all things black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial.

Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970’s from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come from — also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about to — but at the same time it does.

My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, North) African-Americans like myself — those of us who know our history — have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring inconsistencies:

First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire consequences for this country.

Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa’s long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these complexities — particularly the relationship that has existed between the two continents over the past two centuries. Europe’s complete colonization of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being one of them.

The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC’s have no real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC’s use aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama’s Muslim heritage).

On the other hand, AC’s strive to be the best at the culture that they inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and business moguls; this is all well and good. It’s when they decide to engage us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted.

The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. (… jet-setting all over the world, flying Michelle to New York in AF1 for a date, taking the wife and kids along on official trips so they can vacation in France, playing more golf in 1 year than Bush played in 8, flying in pizza chefs from halfway across the country for parties, etc., etc., etc.  Ever see “History of the World, Part 1?”  Obama thinks is good to be the king, and that we are all piss boys.) The ACP blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated in Africa. (Can you say Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his radical black nationalist message?  I knew you could.) However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the “will of the people” becomes completely irrelevant.

Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here playing (colonial) African politics as usual.

In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father — an eloquent piece of political propaganda — Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father’s legacy; this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama.

Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama’s African colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book — from his feigned antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as distracting elements that get in the way of “progress”.  (On p. 308 of Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an “ancient loyalties”.)

Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led — oftentimes to their own slaughter.

Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all forms of democracy.

Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you:

  1. Convince the people that “clinging” to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) identity or history is bad and regresses the process of “unity”. British Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the state. “Tribalism” made the imperialists have to work harder to get people to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many “educated” Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own tribes.
  2. Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone to have a “fair shake”. Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. They are interested in controlling all.
  3. Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what Africa needed. Many of today’s Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can’t find a job? 
  4. Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that were being used to engineer “progress” (which the British had confiscated from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind the African independence movements of the1950 and 60’s. What will a post-Obama America look like?
  5. Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for itself.

America, don’t be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political power can only become one thing: a despot.

L.E. Ikenga can be reached at leikenga@gmail.com.
+


Justice Clarence Thomas: We’re ‘evading’ (the question of) eligibility

Justice Thomas is right.  The question of Obama’s LEGITIMATE eligibility is a big steaming turd that no one wants to poke.  Liberals don’t want to poke it because it would lessen or delay their hold on power.  Republicans don’t want to touch it because they have allowed their spines to be removed by the democrats over the last two decades.  They don’t want to be seen as “kooks,” or “conspiracy theorists” which is how they would be painted by the liberals.

Is it crazy, kooky, or weird to pursue the TRUTH?  If so, them I am a kook.  I want to know the truth, regardless of who the truth is about.  Were it a republican in office, and he were proven to be ineligible, I’d want him removed just as with Obama because THAT’S THE LAW.


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=142101

BORN IN THE USA?
WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Justice Clarence Thomas: We’re ‘evading’ eligibility

Does testimony hint at division behind Supreme Court’s doors?

Posted: April 17, 2010 4:13 pm Eastern
By Drew Zahn

WorldNetDaily


Justice Clarence Thomas

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas told a House subcommittee that when it comes to determining whether a person born outside the 50 states can serve as U.S. president, the high court is “evading” the issue.

The comments came as part of Thomas’ testimony before a House appropriations panel discussing an increase in the Supreme Court’s budget earlier this week.

Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., actually raised the question first amid a discussion on racial diversity in the judiciary.

“I’m still waiting for the [court decision] on whether or not a Puerto Rican can run for president of the United States,” said Serrano, who was born in the island territory. “That’s another issue.”

Yet after Serrano questioned him on whether or not the land’s highest court would be well-served by a justice who had never been a judge, Thomas not only answered in the affirmative, but also hinted that Serrano would be better off seeking a seat in the Supreme Court than a chair in the Oval Office.

“I’m glad to hear that you don’t think there has to be a judge on the Court,” said Serrano, “because I’m not a judge; I’ve never been a judge.”

“And you don’t have to be born in the United States,” said Thomas, referring to the Constitution, which requires the president to be a natural-born citizen but has no such clause for a Supreme Court justice, “so you never have to answer that question.”

“Oh really?” asked Serrano. “So you haven’t answered the one about whether I can serve as president, but you answer this one?”

“We’re evading that one,” answered Thomas, referring to questions of presidential eligibility and prompting laughter in the chamber. “We’re giving you another option.”

A portion of the exchange, captured on video by C-SPAN, can be seen below:

Serrano opened the hearing by noting the jersey number 42 taped to the platform in honor of black baseball star Jackie Robinson, who 63 years ago this week broke professional baseball’s “color barrier” when he took the field for the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Serrano also took a moment to honor the Supreme Court’s first Hispanic justice, Sonia Sotomayor:

“I’d like to note before we begin this hearing that there has been a change at the Court, which has special meaning to the Court, to the American society in general, and to me personally,” Serrano said, “because Sonia Sotomayor comes from the South Bronx, from the area that I represent and the area I grew up in and her parents were born in the same island of Puerto Rico that I was born in.”

Though the hearing was specifically called to address the Court’s request for an increase in funding, the racial themes continued when Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., took Thomas and the Supreme Court in general to task for not employing more minority clerks and staff.

Thomas, in turn, praised the value of having people of diverse backgrounds, career paths and regions of the country serving in the judiciary and on Supreme Court staff.

Serrano then asked if Supreme Court would do well to have justices that weren’t promoted from the appellate courts, but rather came from state courts or even the ranks of elected officials, laying the foundation for the later banter over Serrano as president or justice.

As WND reported, Justice Thomas had previously resurrected a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president not based on his birthplace, but on whether Obama, a child born to a foreign national and admitting dual citizenship, would still be eligible under the Constitution’s Article 2, Section 1 “natural-born citizen” requirement.

Hints of division within the Supreme Court on the issue existed as far back as December 2008, as Justice David H. Souter had initially denied the case a hearing, but Justice Thomas agreed to bring it back for review. The case did not, however, obtain the required approval of four justices to move it forward to a full hearing.

So far, the Supreme Court has not yet heard any case challenging Obama’s eligibility on any grounds.

WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether Obama was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers and the appointment – and payments to one of his eligibility lawyers at a cost confirmed to be at least $1.7 million – of numerous lawyers to defend against all requests for his documentation. That’s in addition to the work done by U.S. attorneys defending Obama’s eligibility, as in this case.

While his supporters cite an online version of a “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii as his birth verification, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

Because of the dearth of information about Obama’s eligibility, WND founder Joseph Farah has launched a campaign to raise contributions to post billboards asking a simple question: “Where’s the birth certificate?”

The campaign followed a petition that has collected more than 500,000 signatures demanding proof of his eligibility, the availability of yard signs raising the question and the production of permanent, detachable magnetic bumper stickers asking the question.

The “certification of live birth” posted online and widely touted as “Obama’s birth certificate” does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same “short-form” document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true “long-form” birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a “natural born citizen,” no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama’s claim to a Hawaiian birth.


We Need to Give Barack Obama More Time!

20 to life sounds about right.


Tangled Web of Lies

Barry/Barack Hussein/Obama Soetoro continues to “misunderestimate” the ability of people to remember things.  He tells little lies that no one will know about, until they uncover them as lies, at which time his “machine” puts up a smoke screen to keep him from having to answer any questions.  Convenient.

Rather than be the “open” and “honest” person he portrayed himself to be during his campaign, Barry/Barack has spent nearly $2 million of his own money to keep all information about him a secret.  He won’t release the REAL birth certificate that he claims actually exists, he seals his college records and papers/writings while a “professor” at Harvard, he hides or downplays his associations with avowed communists and terrorists.  We know nothing about this man.  Based on the amount of things about his past which he has actually and honestly disclosed, Barry/Barack could not pass the security check to get ANY OTHER JOB IN THE GOVERNMENT which requires one.  For the life of me, I still can’t understand why the congress, senate, and supreme court NEVER questioned his eligibility.  But I’ve got a pretty good idea.

The Manchurian Candidate is still undocumented.


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=125351

BORN IN THE USA?

Oops! Obama tells another nativity fib?

Records indicate father not part of Kenyan airlift, as prez said


Posted: February 16, 2010
11:00 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


Barack Obama Sr.

Official documents catch Barack Obama in another apparent misrepresentation of his life story, this time challenging a claim made during his campaign that his father was part of a JFK-era airlift to bring Kenyan students to the U.S. to study in American universities.

WND research indicates Barack Obama Sr. was not brought to Hawaii in 1959 by any airlift of Kenyan students organized by baseball great Jackie Robinson, John F. Kennedy or the African-American Students Foundation, the AASF.

Nor was Barack Obama Sr. on any of the three subsequently chartered airplanes in what became known as the “second airlift” organized by Kenyan Luo politician Tom Mboya in 1960 after the Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation contributed $100,000 to AASF.

Moreover, after a thorough search of the Jackie Robinson papers at the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, WND can find no mention of Barack Obama Sr. in the files on deposit, either as an applicant or candidate for an airlift from Kenya to study in the U.S.

The manifest of the 81 students actually flown from Kenya Sept. 9, 1959, in a plane chartered by Jackie Robinson in conjunction with the AASF does not contain Barack Obama Sr.’s name. Robinson was assisted by singer Harry Belafonte and actor Sidney Poitier.

In Hawaii before first student airlift

By the time of the Sept. 9, 1959, airlift to New York City, Barack Obama Sr. was already in Honolulu, enrolled in classes as an undergraduate at the University of Hawaii.

WND previously published official affirmation from the University of Hawaii that Barack Obama Sr. was enrolled for the 1959 fall term.

The first article documenting Barack Obama Sr.’s presence in Hawaii was by journalist Shurei Hirozawa in the Honolulu Star Bulletin on Sept. 18, 1959, only nine days after the Jackie Robinson airlift.

The article suggested Barack Obama Sr., then fully settled in Hawaii and enrolled at the university, had used personal savings to pay his travel expenses from Kenya to Hawaii and tuition costs at the university.

“But the money [Barack Obama Sr.] saved will only stretch out for two semesters or less because of the high cost of living in Hawaii, he found out,” wrote Hirozawa. “He’ll work, he says, and possibly apply for a scholarship.”

Obama claims JFK responsible

Barack Obama Jr.’s claim that John F. Kennedy brought his father to the U.S. was made in a March 4, 2007 speech, from the pulpit of the historic Brown Chapel A.M.E. Church in Selma, Ala.

Obama declared he owed his very existence to Selma, according to a transcript of the speech and a video clip posted on YouTube.com.

A few minutes into the speech, Obama began discussing the protests in Selma and Birmingham, Ala., that were instrumental to Martin Luther King building the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Obama invented dialogue of Kennedy advisers, musing, “It worried the folks in the White House who said, ‘You know, we’re battling communism. How are we going to win hearts and minds all across the world if right here in our own country, John, we’re not observing the ideals set forth in our Constitution? We might be accused of being hypocrites.”

Obama continued: “This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great-great-great-great-grandfather had owned slaves. But she had a good idea there was some craziness going on, because they looked at each other, and they decided that we know that (in) the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child.”

Kennedy, however, was not in the White House until Jan. 20, 1961, and he did not participate in the organization of the September 1959 airlift.

The historical record is further established by a background memorandum prepared by Sen. John Kennedy’s office in August 1960, while JFK was running for president.

The memo documents that JFK met with Mboya – but after the 1959 airlift had already occurred. Mboya met with JFK at Hyannis Port July 26, 1960, while Kennedy was running for president.

Mboya’s goal was to convince JFK to fund a second airlift of African students to the U.S.

The memo further documents that the State Department, despite intervention by Vice President Richard Nixon, had already turned down Mboya’s request for a second airlift to bring in 200 African students who had received scholarships from U.S. schools.

The Kennedy family, utilizing the Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation, decided to give Mboya a $100,000 donation to pay for the second airlift, in memory of JFK’s brother who was killed in World War II.

Knowing the Kennedy family was going to pay for the second airlift, Nixon prevailed on the State Department to reverse its earlier negative decision.

The African-American Students Foundation, however, decided to accept the Kennedy Foundation’s offer, preferring the willing generosity of the privately offered financing to the obvious hostility the State Department had initially expressed to the group’s request.

Mboya’s decision was a rebuke to Nixon, who had failed to deliver the State Department until after the Kennedy family had stepped forward with funding.

At the time, the State Department was turning down Mboya’s request in deference to the government of Jomo Kenyatta, which had argued, contrary to Mboya, that young, talented Kenyans should study closer to home and attend Makerere College in neighboring Uganda, instead of being trained in American universities.

Still, the myth of JFK’s role in bringing President Obama’s father to the U.S. persisted, reported again Jan. 10, 2008, by Washington-based reporter Elana Schor of London’s Guardian newspaper.

On March 30, 2008, Michael Dobbs published an article in the Washington Post, carefully entitled “Obama Overstates Kennedy’s Role in Helping His Father,” so as not to characterize candidate Obama’s Selma remarks as a lie.

“Obama spokesman Bill Burton acknowledged yesterday that the senator from Illinois had erred in crediting the Kennedy family with a role in his father’s arrival in the United States,” Dobbs wrote. “[Burton] said the Kennedy involvement in the Kenya student program apparently started 48 years ago, not 49 years ago as Obama has mistakenly suggested in the past.”

To correct the “overstatement,” Dobbs incorrectly reported that Barack Obama Sr. had come to the United States in the Sept. 9, 1959, initial airlift organized by Jackie Robinson without the financial support of the Kennedy family.

“There was enormous excitement when the Britannia aircraft took off for New York with the future Kenyan elite aboard,” Dobbs wrote of the first airlift. “After a few weeks of orientation, the students were dispatched to universities across the United States to study subjects that would help them govern Kenya after the departure of the British. Obama Sr. was interested in economics and was sent to Hawaii, where he met, and later married, a Kansas native named Ann Dunham.”

Further corroboration that Barack Obama Sr. was not on the first airlift is provided by Tom Shachtman in his 2009 book, “Airlift to America.”

On page 9 of the book, Shachtman confirms Mboya was unable to transport Barack Obama Sr. to the United States on any of the airlifts organized by Jackie Robinson or the AASF.

Nativity story

WND also has reported that contrary to the president’s statements, his father did not abandon the family in Hawaii when he accepted an invitation to study at Harvard in 1962.

Documents uncovered by WND also have raised questions about whether President Obama’s parents ever lived together as husband and wife, despite Obama’s repeated assertions his parents lived together in Hawaii during the first two years of his life.

WND has reported the only documentation for Ann Dunham’s marriage to Barack Obama Sr. comes from their divorce documents that list the marriage date as Feb. 2, 1961.

In actuality, it isn’t clear Obama’s parents were married, since official records have never been produced showing a legal ceremony took place. No wedding certificate or photograph of a ceremony for Dunham and Obama Sr. has ever been found or published.

WND previously reported Michelle Obama stated at a public event that her husband’s mother was “very young and very single” when she gave birth to the future U.S. president.

+


You’re right, Barry. How could we be so horrible?

Let me see if I understand all this…

  • If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.
  • If you cross the Iranian border illegally you are detained indefinitely.
  • If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.
  • If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.
  • If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from again.
  • If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.
  • If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into political prison to rot.
  • If you cross the U.S. border illegally you get a job, a driver’s license, social security card, welfare, food stamps, credit cards, subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house, free education, free health care, a lobbyist in Washington and in many instances you can vote.

And Our President is running around the world telling how embarrassed he is, how arrogant we are and how we owe the world an apology for OUR bad behavior??????

%d bloggers like this: