Thursday, August 19, 2010

Confusion continues surrounding Obama's birth and his religion

Obama himself says he's a Kenyan, not an American:

Listen to him at the beginning of this video saying flatly, unequivocally, that he is NOT an American, that he was NOT born in Hawaii, that he was born in Kenya.

[Note: It was convincingly pointed out to me by a commenter here that this part of the video was altered to make it look like Obama was saying something he was not in fact saying. The producer even identifies himself as "obamasnippets" and that's apparently a site that manufactures this sort of thing. I'm not sure about the rest of the information.]

Did he not know that the Constitution requires him to be a natural born citizen of two American citizen parents when he said that? Who is this man in the American Presidency anyway?

The evidence continues to build with quotes from Kenyans who believe he was born there.

But then there are the birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers on the day of his birth. When I saw these recently, I thought this should end the controversy as it should prove he's a natural born citizen. (But why does Obama himself want to deny this and claim to be a Kenyan?)

But it's not that simple. If you watch the linked video all the way through you'll see that to qualify for the Presidency both his parents would have to be citizens, and not only was his father not a citizen, but after his mother divorced him and remarried and they moved to Indonesia with his stepfather, they became citizens of Indonesia which is enough to disqualify him.

If these things are true it appears he is multiply disqualified to be President of the United States.

Here's another video in which Alan Keyes raises many questions about Obama including his qualifications for the Presidency. From about 1:18 on Keyes describes Obama as a usurper and a destroyer of the nation.

Even with such blatantly reasonable questions to be addressed, there are many who want to bury the truth, who try to smear those who still have doubts, calling them "birthers" as if there's something wrong with their perfectly reasonable questions.

The same video I posted at the top also gives weight to doubts about Obama's religion, although just this morning there is an article up on Yahoo treating such doubts as unfounded and the doubters as unreasonable:
Americans increasingly are convinced — incorrectly — that President Barack Obama is a Muslim, and a growing number are thoroughly confused about his religion.

Nearly one in five people, or 18 percent, said they think Obama is Muslim, up from the 11 percent who said so in March 2009, according to a poll released Thursday. The proportion who correctly say he is a Christian is down to just 34 percent.

...Six in 10 of those saying Obama is a Muslim said they got the information from the media, with the largest portion — 16 percent — saying it was on television. Eleven percent said they learned it from Obama's behavior and words.
Yes, Obama's own behavior and words are really what raise the doubts. On the video above he is shown referring to the Koran as "the Holy Koran" and to Islam as "revealed," which is not the way a Christian would normally speak of the religion, even when speaking respectfully. A Christian regards Islam as a false religion. Obama may be nominally a Christian by his outward practices, but his respect for Islam appears to be above and beyond what a Christian would express, and it's unjust of the media to call questions based on all this flatly wrong.

Keyes is right, Obama is out to destroy the nation and he may succeed with the help of subversives like himself.

As usual, however, I have to point out that God is in charge. This state of affairs could not be happening independent of God, and what could explain this? Why is Islam gaining in popularity in general? Why is the economy on the verge of collapse? Etc. etc. etc. Our enemies are in our midst and gaining on us, our "bread basket," to use a term from the King James Bible, may soon fail. These are among the consequences of disobedience spelled out for the Israelites in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, which we should heed.

Can any of this be reversed at this point? I wish we could see a great groundswell of Christian zeal for repentance and prayer which alone might turn the tide, but although of course we pray for the nation there really isn't the necessary degree of passionate dedication to be found among us anywhere that I can see.

No, I think America is going down. Christians are being marginalized, isolated, and what's left to us is to work to be strong AGAINST the tide, as the body of Christ completely separate from America and the world.


  1. This is a forged video, done by cutting out words.

  2. OK, can you prove it? I looked at your site:

    The video I found employed the same tactic. It showed a rapid-fire series of snippets from Obama speeches in which strategic words were omitted. For instance, when Obama said, "Some people say I was born in Kenya and I am Muslim," the video producer cut out the "Some people say" and left only "I was born in Kenya and I am Muslim."

    You've asserted it, you've offered all kinds of analogies to explain how you think it was done, but you haven't shown that it in fact was done in this case. Can you?

    Is the original available somewhere? I don't see or hear anything in the video that makes me suspect it's been tampered with, no jumps, no hesitations. If it was, it was a surprisingly smooth job.

  3. Yes. I can prove it was forged.

    For Obama to say that he was born in Kenya requires that he WAS born in Kenya. (He wouldn't lie about it, why should he?)

    If a person were born in Kenya, she or he would need a US travel document to get to the USA. That would be either a US visa on a foreign passport or the change to his mother's US passport to include him. One or the other would have had to have been applied for at a US Consulate in Kenya and granted before the child would be allowed to enter the USA.

    If such a document existed, it would be easy to find because the records of the application for the visa or for the change to the mother's passport would still be in the files of the US State Department, filed under applications for visas and applications for changes to passports in Kenya in 1961. The Republicans were in charge of the US State Department until January 2009. No such document has been found. No such document exists.

    Obama was not born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii, as his official birth certificate from Hawaii shows, and the facts on it were repeatedly confirmed by the officials in Hawaii. Obama has already posted a copy of the official birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth, which is the only birth document that Hawaii has been sending out since 2001. Hawaii no longer sends out copies of the original birth certificate, only of the official birth certificate: The Certification of Live Birth.

    Obama's Kenyan grandmother, by the way, never said that he was born in Kenya. She said in the tape recorded interview that he was born in Hawaii, where his father was studying, and she said in another interview that the first that her family had heard of Obama's birth was in a letter from Hawaii.

    So, there is no evidence that Obama was born in Kenya (which would have been an expensive and dangerous place to take a pregnant woman in 1961, so it would be unlikely that she went there. And, what are the chances of an American woman going to Kenya, giving birth, and not having pictures of the child with the grandparents?). And there is strong evidence that he was born in Hawaii.

    Obama already said in his book that he was born in Hawaii. So, why would he suddenly say now, in the face of all this evidence, that he was born in Kenya? It would not be to his advantage for him to say that he was born in Kenya, even if it were true.

    If the video were actually true, you would be seeing all kinds of dramatic consequences. Senators would be calling for investigations. Biden would be getting ready to move to the Oval office.

    Nothing is happening. The video is forged, like the "birth certificate" that the guy claims to have obtained in Kenya that used USA date formats and not Kenyan date formats.

  4. OK, your points make sense, but all you are giving is reasoned conjectures about what you think must really have happened, not proof about the video itself. I still don't see any evidence on the video itself of clarifying parts having been removed and I would think it shouldn't be too hard to come up with the original of that talk to show it one way or the other.

    I agree, it DOES seem quite odd that Obama would be claiming to be a Kenyan, but it nevertheless looks as if that's exactly what he did. I also don't see why that segment would even be included if it had been tampered with since the video goes on to give other arguments that have nothing to do with what Obama said. Assuming it's accurate, that segment serves mostly to suggest that Obama's self-identification is not American rather than as proof of where he was born. The video does go on to an interview of a Kenyan who believes he WAS born there, however. Was THAT forged?

    There are apparently reasonable questions about the Certification of Live Birth document, but The best evidence I've seen for his birth in Hawaii is the newspaper birth announcements I link in my blog post.

    However, as the video goes on to report, even if he was born in the US, the fact that Obama's father was not an American citizen disqualifies him from being "natural born" in any case, AND his apparent citizenship in Indonesia later adds another disqualification.

    I wish I believed you were right about how there would be dramatic consequences if it were true, but I think there have been plenty of incidents related to the Obama Presidency that should have had such dramatic consequences but haven't. I don't trust the government machinery to react as it should about such revelations any more. I see people rationalizing away all kinds of enormities to protect this presidency while heaping unjust smears on people who raise reasonable questions about it. Not that there can't possibly ALSO be some underhanded stuff going on against Obama, but we need REAL FACTS, not all the speculation we get.

  5. Re: I still don't see any evidence on the video itself of clarifying parts having been removed and I would think it shouldn't be too hard to come up with the original of that talk to show it one way or the other.'

    Probably, but I do not have it.

    Re: "even if he was born in the US, the fact that Obama's father was not an American citizen disqualifies him from being "natural born" in any case, AND his apparent citizenship in Indonesia later adds another disqualification. '

    You are truly credulous. The meaning of Natural Born at the time of the writing of the Constitution was simply "born in the country." In those days it was used as the equivalent of Native Born, which was not a popular phrase at the time. Natural Born was used all the time by American writers, and it was always used to mean that someone was born in the country. It was NEVER used by any Americans at the time to mean "two citizen parents." NEVER, and I have gone through the complete writings of Adams and Hamilton and Madison. Madison, by the way, said that there was one sole criterion of allegiance in the United States, the PLACE of birth.

    Re Indonesia. It is really quite easy to show that Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia, just call up the Indonesian Embassy in Washington and ASK. They will tell you, as they told me, that Obama was never a citizen.

    Even if he had become a citizen of Indonesia (and he didn't), it wouldn't affect his US citizenship, which cannot be lost but only renounced in writing, and there is no such document. It also would not affect Natural Born status, which relates to birth and obviously cannot be taken away by something that does not relate to birth.

    I noticed another proof of the video being forged. Look at the faces of the audience when Obama allegedly says 'I was born in Kenya." Their faces do not change. If he had revealed that he had been born in a foreign country, there would be shock and amazement on their faces, but they do not change at all.

    This, plus the proof that Obama was born in Hawaii and could not be born in Kenya without proof in the form of a US government travel document issued in Kenya, shows that the video was forged.

    Re "unjust smears." Is it "just" to forge a video? Is it "just" to forge a "Kenyan birth certificate?" Is it just to claim that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya, when the transcript shows that she replied "America, Hawaii" when asked where Obama was born? Is it "just" to say that Michelle said that he was born in Kenya, when she said it was his native country, meaning the same as Ireland was to Kennedy and Reagan, the country of their family's ancestry?

  6. You haven't produced the necessary proof of any of this, your assertions are really no better than those in the video as far as evidence goes, but you may be right nevertheless. There's something very suspicious about the way Obama has been acting about his citizenship all along, however, something that should have been easy to clear up but seems to have taken dealings behind the scenes and money as well.

    I think a great deal of the suspiciousness comes also from the impression that he shows little regard for America or Christianity, much more for Islam (speaking of it as "revealed") and foreign countries (bowing to foreign leaders). No one can approve the alteration of facts if that has really been done, but people are rightly suspicious of this man and it doesn't help that ALL we hear from his defenders is ridicule of those suspicions.

    There is an obvious big problem with the idea that merely being born on US ground makes you a citizen, so that I have to hope there was an implicit assumption of parental citizenship that can be shown eventually.

  7. Re: "There is an obvious big problem with the idea that merely being born on US ground makes you a citizen.'

    There is no problem at all.

    the US Constitution's Amendment 14 - says:

    "1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

    ALL persons born in the USA are citizens unless they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA. The only persons who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA when they are in the USA are foreign diplomats and the children of foreign diplomats.

    Until 1925 Indians on reservations were not considered subject to the jurisdiction of the USA. But that was changed by a law in 1925, and now they are.

    the original meaning of Natural Born was simply "born in the country," so anyone other than the children of foreign diplomats who is born in the USA is both a citizen under the 14th Amendment, and Natural Born under the original definition.

    Obama was born in the USA in Hawaii, so he is a Natural Born Citizen. That is why his election was confirmed unanimously by the Congress (not one of 535 members registered a No) and that is why he was sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States.

  8. Re: "Re: I still don't see any evidence on the video itself of clarifying parts having been removed and I would think it shouldn't be too hard to come up with the original of that talk to show it one way or the other.'

    I'd like to repeat the internal proof that the audience does not register surprise when Obama's supposed to have said that he was born in Kenya. Surely they would register surprise of an American president had said that he was born in a foreign country, especially since that president has been saying that he was born in Hawaii.

    The fact that there was no surprise indicates that words were cut out of what Obama said, making it mean what Obama never said. It would have been highly surprising, astonishing, to the audience if he had said it, but they are not surprised or astonished. He didn't say it.

  9. OK, I'll accept that criticism, along with the information someone posted at your blog that the first part was fabricated at obamasnippets, a site apparently devoted to put-ons. That's deplorable and I hate being taken in by such things.

    I'm not sure where it leaves the overall message, however. There are still people who insist that natural born citizenship does require citizen parentage, and I've seen the Federalist papers referred to for reference. Surely you can agree that a foreigner coming here for the purpose of giving birth in order to give the child American citizenship can't be what the Constitution had in mind.

  10. Let us suppose that two foreigners come to America illegally and have a child and she grows up and enters politics, and she is a good person and smart. Why shouldn't the American people have the choice of voting for her? Sure, her parents did something illegal, but she didn't.

    IF it were the law that the children of foreigners, or illegal foreigners, were not considered Natural Born Citizens, well then I would agree with you. But that is not the law.

    We actually have had a president with two parents who were not American citizens. To be sure, they were not illegal aliens, but they were both foreigners. That was Andrew Jackson.

    Yes, he was born during the period of the "grandfather clause of Article II, meaning that he was born before the Constitution was adopted, but that did not make him any less a great president.

    Re; "There are people who insist that Natural Born citizenship requires citizen parentage."

    They are wrong. There have been many federal cases in which the US-born children of one or two foreigners are declared by the court to be Natural Born Citizens. A search of the writings of American leaders at the time of the writing of the Constitution shows that they never used the phrase Natural Born to mean two citizen parents or even one citizen parent. They always used it to mean "born in the country."

    The Federalist papers does not discuss Natural Born status. It surely would have discussed it if Natural Born had meant anything other than the common use of the phrase at the time, which was "born in the country."

  11. So let me understand: Do you believe that foreigners getting pregnant with the sole aim of giving birth inside American borders in order to give the child -- and the parents as well -- the benefits of American citizenship, even qualifying for taxpayer money with the delivery and other needs, is within the meaning of the Constitution? What if the entry of the parent(s) is illegal by our laws? Does that put them under the jurisdiction of a foreign power? Oh, right, that's only for DIPLOMATS, not your ordinary illegal alien.

  12. I believe that the parents did something illegal but that the child did not do anything illegal. I believe that under the current law, which we can change of course, the child is a Natural Born US citizen.

    Hence, if she is a good person and smart, we have the right to vote for her.

    A person who is in the USA illegally is as much subject to the jurisdiction of our laws as a person who is here legally. The only people who are not subject to our laws are foreign diplomats. The concept of subject to the jurisdiction is really quite simple. It means that if there is a US law, everyone in the USA must obey it, except for foreign diplomats (and they really should obey it, but if they don’t we cannot prosecute them, only send them home). At one time US law held that Indians on reservations were not subject to US jurisdiction because there was an idea that they were still sovereign tribes, but we changed that in 1925.

    As for changing the Constitution to make the children of illegal immigrants no longer citizens. I would support this idea, but unless we also change the rules on 'ex post facto" laws (which are banned in the Constitution), it cannot apply to people who are already here.

    Some say that it can be done by ordinary law. That is highly unlikely since the 14th Amendment is absolutely clear. A Constitutional Amendment would take a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and three-quarters of all the states. That is unlikely to happen for a very long time.

    Re paying money for the children of illegals. It was their parents who broke the law, not them.

    Is it expensive to pay money for the children of illegals? Of course, but other things about obeying the Constitution are expensive too, like presidential elections every four years and juries of 12 persons and grand juries. If I had to decide between sending children of illegals to school and sending a mission to Mars, I'd pay for the school.