Sorry, WorldNetDaily: Kenya wasn't a republic until Dec. 1964
August 03, 2009 12:47 am ET by Jeremy Schulman
WorldNetDaily and the right-wing fringe are very excited about their scoop that Orly Taitz has "released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth" for President Obama. According to WND, "Taitz told WND that the document came from an anonymous source who doesn't want his name known because 'he's afraid for his life.' " So in order to believe Taitz and WND, one would have to assume that this document was requested 45 years ago, preserved that entire time, withheld through the entire election and transition period, and yet somehow ended up in the hands of someone sympathetic to Orly Taitz.
DailyKos' David Waldman has identified what appears to be an even more glaring problem with WND's latest smoking gun. The document posted by WND purports to have been produced by the "Republic of Kenya" on February 17, 1964. But Kenya didn't even become a republic until December 12, 1964. An article from that day's Washington Post, for example, reported that "Kenya became the newest republic within the British Commonwealth at midnight."
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
I'm sure another document will appear from another 'anonymous' source with corrections.
Hilarious.
Oh good heavens. Read the article! It's dated December 12, 1964 and says:
- "the newest republic within the British Commonwealth"
- "Jomo Kenyatta ... became the new republic first president"
- "farewell ceremonies for [the] British Governor General"
- "Kenya ... has now shed its dominion status"
How much clearer does it have to be that the change from "dominion status" to "republic" took place on December 12, 1964?
Doesn't change the fact the above is still a forgery, though.
I am quite sure that the staff at WND didn't actually do much leg work in their research assuming the day of independence was the day of change and not bothering to verify anything...google leads to the fact of independence more than the fact of final republic and for WND to go THAT far in researching is a stretch considering most of the crap that comes through (e.g., Corsi's insistence that Obama pushed a bill in the Illinois legislature calling for the murder of babies that lived through a botched abortion)
That is the argument.
The birthers have paid it a visit.
The droolers are losing it.
Only thing that solves it is time and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils.
These people have now apparently convinced themselves that they are right and all deception that suits their purpose is now justified to them in their addled little brains for the noble purpose of bringing down Obama.
Other than that, point out the errors to their crazy talk, give them as little publicity as possible (that is what it is really about anyway, and move on.
I was very moved by the ad links, so that I could purchase all the DVD, et al that shows that Obama is not an American. Nothing like milking the capatilist system as much as possible.
The problem is in the disruption to the political discourse that this has caused. Congressman actually fear having town halls or their equivalent with the constituents of their district because of the disruptions that "tea bag" protesters and "birthers" are causing. Meaningful debate about honest issues are being drowned out by the minority voice of a lunatic fringe.
This is affecting the morale of our millitary, burdening our courts, and I believe it is emboldening our enemies with this kind of dissent.
I call it as I see it, and this kind of behavior, as demonstrated by World Net Daily, is seditious. Orly Taitz's behavior is nothing short of treasonous.
Just shameful, and you are so "RIGHT" in saying how this "craziness" disrupts the political discourse in America away from pressing issues like with HealthCare Reform. Just shameful, shameful, shameful. And, MSM "LOVES" it.
And I'm pretty sure trying to pass of fake documents as real is indeed a violation of the law. I just want to see the full weight of the relevant laws come down on these people.
It is important to understand that the Democrats will not be in power for ever. The Republicans will have power again - perhaps even sooner than we think. It was not long ago when Republicans were charging dissenters with treason for disagreeing with the President and challenging the election results in 2000 and 2004.
Any wild charges of "treason" or otherwise only justifies wild charges when they are made by the other side.
We need to learn to be patient and trust that righteousness will ultimately prevail. Any concern about the birthers is misplaced anyway. Their argument is invalid. If it was valid, I would be on their side. I have no need to believe things that are not true.
I am refering to Orly Taitz and her actions and behavior. If she has conspired with foreign entities to obtain this B.C. and these documents turn out to be falsely produced by foreign interests in Kenya or elsewhere and were introduced into our American court rooms as evidence to discredit or even overhrow a democratically elected President, then what other conclusion can you make.
In my opinion, that's treason.
Regardless of the outcome, this issue is extremely divisive to the general population and in the interest of passing gay marriage and granting amnesty for foreign born residents, I think Obama should just provide the relevant paperwork once and for all.
Every other president did, including John McCain (born in Panama).
Even IF Obama was born in Kenya, he's already cemented his accomplishments. If he was no longer president tommorow, he would still be famous forever.
nevermind... carry on.
But never mind that. Please explain why you find this document credible, but not the ones provided by our own state of Hawaii, not to mention the newspaper announcements placed a few days after the date given on the Hawaiian birth certificate..
Fail.
So, (again in hypothetical terms) were he born abroad, his claim to what level of citizenship would very much depend on her actual citizenship status at that moment and the Laws in effect at the time. It would also factor in to the marital status and the citizenship of the Father and the legal attachments of the country of birth. (Notable exceptions would be Public Service i.e. Diplomats, Military personnel etc) Generally, a child born in wedlock follows the condition of the Father, whereas a bastard follows the condition of the mother, as with slaves and livestock. (Nothing personal there, I assure you, its simply age-old legal Maxim. You can read up on Bracton for the details, but pre-1964 Kenya was solid British Empire)
As to the rest, if he were indeed born in Kenya before that county's independence, he would be a British Subject in some form or another. (depending on how the Empire set up that regime) Undoubtedly someone in Britain will eventually dig that sort of inconvenient tidbit up, if it exists.
However, it is relevant to note that Common Law (understood by the Founding Fathers) might well side with Obama, and, it is worth noting as well that the first six Presidents of the United States in fact began their lives as British Citizens!
"Natural born" means "citizen by birth". I.e., "naturally" a citizen, rather than "naturalized". Obama never had to become a citizen because he always was one by virtue of his birth to an American citizen.
That's obvious to anyone who isn't a total moran.
Maybe you wouldn't have to "keep explaining it to people" if you just cite a source, ANY source, that says you have to have American parents to be eligible to be POTUS. The Constitution only says "a natural born citizen"; it doesn't say what it means.
As I understand it, there are 2 types of citizens; NATURALIZED (meaning that they applied for received US citizenship) and NATURAL BORN (born on US soil).
Nonetheless, Arthur, Wilson and Hoover all had a foreign born parent and were born after the United States came into existence.
Too few understand that fact, or how it works.
State and National citizenship are two entirely different animals.
A good place to start would be at the Supreme Court itself and look into the actual history and of the Law, as with decisions and learned treatises on the subject
Its all out there for you to find and make up your own mind about, as well as decide which side of the contested/evolving parts you would freely choose to be on (had you been taught enough in schools and by the media to understand just how fundamental it is to all of our Freedoms, liberal and conservative alike).
Didn't sound at all as if you truly comprehended the way of it, at first. Its sadly become an esoteric area of study for the general population.
Many have mis-associated all that with the fringe and the tin-foil hat types, which admittedly there are those who have tried to run out of bounds with the ball. Nothing could be further from the facts though. Our governemt adheres to and uses these Prnciples and Precedents every day, albeit against us, for the most part.
If he is truly a natural born citizen why on God's green earth would he not simply release his long form birth certificate. Instead he is spending huge sums of money to block it's release. Could it be it doesn't exist. Why was he not completely vetted before his nomination? He has successfully proven, you can buy the White House.
Anybody still harping on this non-issue simply looks, well, simple. It's all a bit tin foil hat.
God save us from ignorant fools like you.
So you admit that the real reason for this mess is to subvert the election process? You want this to be true because you cannot accept the results of a free and fair election?
It does not matter what you think. The voters disagree with you. That does not give you the right to subvert the choice of the people.
Because he does not have to. The State of Hawai'i Department of Health has stated that they have seen the original and Obama is a "natural born citizen". They have also stated that the COLB proves Obama's citizenship for "all reasonable purposes".
1. There is no evidence Obama has spent a dime specifically doing this.
2. Besides, even if that were true, litigation is expensive. Just ask Sarah Palin. Is she guilty simply because she is (according to her) spending a lot of money fighting litigation?
The State of Hawai'i Dept. of Health says it does. They are called "officials" for a reason.
Yes.
And you have successfully proven that there are some pathetic sore losers out there.
"Constitution: 12 December 1963; amended as a republic 1964; reissued with amendments 1979, 1982, 1986, 1988, 1991, 1992, 1997, 2001; note - a new draft constitution was defeated by popular referendum in 2005"
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ke.html
It declared independence on 12/12/63, but did not become a Republic officially until 12/12/64.
"No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you imagine." J. Edgar Hoover
BIRTHERS PRODUCES OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE FROM YET-TO-EXIST NATION
I was tempted to buy the misspelled website domain.
If anyone actually reads the article over at WorldNetDaily, the document was issued as a "Certified Copy" in 1964. To quote the article: "WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical." And they still refer to the document as 'alleged'.
Now there is an interesting theory floated that this copy may have been issued due to the divorce of Obama's mother from his father in Jan. 1964 (see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306640/posts?page=227)
Anyone see the duck walking yet?
As liberals are so fond of saying... Minds are like parachutes they work best when open... don't they now...
Thank you for that reliable link to the *freerepublic!* Sadly, you are not joking.
You will have to forgive me. I am unfamiliar in the ways of freeper-logic. According to the document itself, it was created before Kenya became a "republic". How did the document know to change it's letterhead because it is a republic...now?
"Hi, I am Barack Obama's great uncle. I am currently in hiding while I try to gather funds to make my escape from Kenya, with Barack's original Kenyan birth certificate. I was there when he was born and now my life is in danger. Please help me escape my country and I am sure that you will be justly rewarded, once the evidence in my posession sees the light of day. I accept Paypal, Money orders, or cash."
But this Orly Taitz... I realize that her looks in no way reflect the veracity of her claims (or the lack thereof). But come on... if you wanted to look up a picture of the poster child of conspiracy theory craziness, don't you think it would look similar to her? I mean, her entire appearance just screams "Batshit crazy".
These outlets will play it either as a joke or as serious news. I am waiting for the FOX text below their story to say something like "Authentic Kenyan Birth Certificate?"
This is a chance for some of these news organizations to step up and show that they really are journalists.
Any bets on who does what?
He related this to the Kerry campaign in 2004 and how the lies about the swift boat incident and that Kerry lied to get his medals. Kerry denied it but wouldn't dignify the lies with an emphatic retort... and as Bill Maher said, "We all know how that ended up"
I know it would be impossible for President Obama to stop the birthers, but at least make an un-official organized effort to debunk them or expose them for who they really are.
Just another of a long string of 'inconsistencies'.
>>Finally, Officials of Coast Province General Hospital reported: “We do not have computerized records going back to the 1960’s and can only sort through our archives by hand,” Dr. Christopher Mwanga, an administrator at the Mombasa hospital tells GLOBE. “We have searched for all the names of babies born on Aug. 4, 1961, and have not found the name of Barack Hussein Obama. That is all I can tell you.”
Debunking-the-unbearably-stupid...
It appears to me the birthers just want more personal information about Obama (from his "long form") - not to prove citizenship (Obama has already done that), but so they can gin up even more theories or embarrass Obama in some way.
The will accept a Certificate of Live Birth but i guess you are too dense to understand the difference between a CERTIFICATE and a CERTIFICATION.
a. APPLICANTS BORN IN THE UNITED STATES: Submit a previous U.S. passport or certified birth certificate. A birth certificate must include your full name, the full name of your parent(s), date and place of birth, sex, date the birth record was filed, and the seal or other certification of the official custodian of such records.
Obama's COLB meets those requirements.
Here is a link to the full application.
http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html
The site says:
*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth.
Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.
Hawaiian CERTIFICATIONS of Live Birth fall into this catagory and require other documentation for a passport.
Call them at 877-487-2778 and ask them.
I then informed the woman that the State of Hawaii no longer issues the long form and that I would be using a Certification of Live Birth.
She asked if the information I mentioned in the application above was on the Certification of Live Birth. I told her that it was there (as it is on Obama's COLB). She said that as long as I have the information listed above the document would be acceptable.
Call them and ask. If Obama had presented his COLB as it is depicted in the photos, he would have not had any problem getting a passport.
Thanks for the number. It was a great help.
1. Full Name
2. Full Name of Parents
3. Date and Place of Birth
4. Sex
5. Date the Birth Record was Filed
6. Seal or other certification of the official custodian of such records
Obama's COLB has it all.
Besides, considering the State of Hawaii no longer issues the "long form" birth certificate, what would be the point of issuing anything that would not be good enough to use to obtain a passport? That would be very implausible, but logic does not stop the birthers apparently.
It is a CERTIFICATION of Live Birth, a completly different type of document.
Check your facts firts.
The only reason I can see for demanding the more detailed Certificate of Live Birth is to dig up dirt against the president and to provide fodder for the apparently inexhaustible need for new conspiracy theories.
50% of Virginians think Obama was not born here! That is fricken scary. (See talkingpointsmemo.com)
HUH?
And I never heard of a birth certificate not being issued until two and a half years after the birth in question. So why is this supposed document believable when those issued by the State of Hawaii are not?
What a concept. There goes just about every government that ever existed, (certainly every Monarchy, Socialist & Communist State by default) most every politician & pundit, there goes most of pop-culture, most advertising and say goodbye forever to our paper fiat money economic system, many 'religions' (yes that includes you Scilons) and even many personal relationships. The list goes on.
What a wonderful world it could be...
A number of Keyans have posted elsewhere that the document posted by WND looks just like their own birth certificates from the same time period.
Show me a genuine birth certificate from the same time period that can prove the WND a forgery. Your argument does not prove the document false. Find one and post it.
Note that Ms. Taitz has submitted this document to the COURT for validation. In over 30 cases President Obama's Hawaiian COLB documents have NEVER been submitted to a court for examination and validation. They have NEVER been examined by a certified document expert.
Yet Media Matters believes that they are genuine. Let's put both sets of documents to the test and let the chips fall where they may.
Neither document has ever been submitted to a court for verification yet there have been over 30 court cases thus far. Why?
Besides, I am a Kenyan born in 1962 and the Taitz Birth Certificate looks nothing like mine. I do not know what those "Keyans" (Alan Keyes maybe?) have "posted elsewhere".
Read the newspaper clipping. Kenya gained its independence 12 December 1963 and was a dominion in the Commonwealth until a year later when it became a republic within the Commonwealth at midnight 12 December 1964.
See the date above the headline Around the World? December 12, 1964.
http://www.kenyaspace.com/Mombasakenya.htm
http://www.africansafariair.com/mombasacitytour.html
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
Explain that, all you birther idiots!
The stoopid burns! Ow! Make it stop!
Not quite sure of the tax codes of any or all those Nations resemble ours, but if they do, then he surely has either paid or owes quite a bit in taxes to those other sovereigns.
Moreover, the Right of Egress is firmly planted in our system, Oath or Affirmation & such effectively renounces one's citizenship. Technically, if the mother in any way renounced/ex-patriated prior to, her travelling back to the states for the birth would not have conferred anything but her temporary resident status, only his birth on our soil would have attached, and he would be I believe only a generic "U.S. citizen" no different than someone from D.C., Puerto Rico, etc.and not necessarily a bona fide Citizen of one of the several states. If either of his parents claimed him as a citizen of another country, then he would have some form of dual citizenship, and thus dual loyalty.
My point is, even by 1960's standards, there has got to be a much larger paper-trail out there. In all those years of travelling abroad, passports, tax forms, marriage(s), adoptions and so on, there has to be a wealth of supporting documentation and other corroborating evidence.
Generally, the burden of proof is on the accuser(s). So far it seems the "birthers", as they are called, have fallen short of that mark.
As they say in Missouri,,, 'Show Me'.
Ms. has NOT stated that it is authententic; she has asked the court to determine the authenticity.
No one here is an expert on 1960's Kenyan documents (myself included). For all of you who claim that it is a fake, please post copies of a genuine Kenyan document from the same era and point out the descrepencies. If you are an expert on 1960's Kenyan documents, please post your CV.
Otherwise, let's all admit that it will be up to the COURT to decide if the document is fake or not. What you state here doesn't matter.
Also, none of the Hawaiian documents have been examined by a court because in over 30 court cases to date, President Obama's legal teams have NEVER submitted the Hawaiian COLB documents for examination by a court.
At least Ms. Taitz has put the Kenyan document in the court's hand for OPEN legal examination. President Obama should do the same with his COLB and let the chips fall where they may.
1) Compare this to an actual Kenyan BC from the same era. There must be some Kenyan born folks living in the USA today, born in 1961, that have their original BC.
2) Have the Prez rleases his documents. Seems so simple to me. Because he won't be transparent, I suspect he is hiding something, what it is, who knows.
This is not a race, color, or even political issue. It is a Constitutional issue. ANY President should have to prove that they are legially qualified to be elected to the office.