Obama Citizenship

Eligibility Update: Wikipedia Censors (Again), Grand Jury Memo, $25 million for Birth Certificate, Rumors and Strunk FOIA

By Phil

As WorldNetDaily had originally documented, Wikipedia took people to task over just how much information would be allowed on the President’s wiki entry. Now, after some (including myself) had taken note about another wiki entry concerning the Presidents’ places of birth, they have once again scrubbed another entry.

First, here’s the page — now archived — as it looked like until February 7, 2009. Towards the bottom of the page, it stated the following:

The following Presidents were born British subjects after the establishment of the United States:

• Chester Arthur^[8]
• Barack Obama^[9]

Footnote “9″ referenced the following:

^ British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): “Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.” Since Kenya was a British colony at the time of Barack Obama Jr.’s birth in 1961, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject at that time and therefore Barack Obama Jr. was a British subject at birth.

This is, of course, exactly what I had reported back on December 8, 2008 from FactCheck.org/FightTheSmears.com and is precisely the source that the Defendants used in Hollister v. Soetoro in their motion to dismiss.

Yet, user “Riptor3000″ on February 7, 2009, gave the following reason for the change:

Removed Barack Obama from the list of Presidents born as British subjects; this claim is without merit and politically motivated

What a baseless and meritless claim, per se! Apparently, Wikipedia clearly needs to be FactChecked themselves!

Bob Campbell at AmericanGrandJury.org posted the following grand jury update:

Hi Everyone,

Yesterday was a historic day for the Grand Jury but it is still business as usual. We are processing jury member applications as fast as possible.

I need to get the word out so people understand why we are a little slow right now in responding. We are simply overwhelmed with applications.We have around 300 people waiting in the wings to serve.

We don?t talk much about what is happening behind the scenes at American Grand Jury. There are rules in place to protect the Grand Jury and its members, expert witnessses and others.

Today I am going to take the time to automate the ?initial contact? process so people can move further along without waiting 2 to 3 days for a response. By tomorrow the message system will send an ?auto-response? that explains the Grand Jury process and a link to go and get the Oath of Office form for printing and submitting.

We WANT as many Grand Juries convened as possible.. we have (4) scheduled for May. The Lone Star Grand Jury in Texas is now being scheduled for an online event. Things are cooking here!

Please keep sending your email messages requesting to serve on a Grand Jury.We have saved every one of your requests and will be replying to all of you as soon as possible.

Thank you,

Bob Campbell
American Grand Jury [emphases original]

Someone is offering $25 million for the President’s birth certificate. I can only wonder what the details are for the offer. SonoranNews.com features an op-ed on this offer.

There have also been two rumors floating around that I would like to address:

• New Discovery: 5 Photoshopped images of Obama done by the same user calling her-himself Ducky - one of these 5 images is the Certificate of Live Birth!
• Obama - Smoking gun finally found?

The first is interesting, and if nothing else, shows that the referenced images — including the online certification of live birth — were all edited by the same person. Does this mean anything? Don’t know offhand, as there’s really nothing against which to compare the hexadecimal renderings of the images, both from a technical or an original image perspective.

The second is far more suspicious, if for no other reason than the article’s publish date is April 1. Other than that, multiple searches at AP.org or various search engines produces no way for the article to be sourced. Not only this, but Leo Donofrio’s case could only move forward if Leo attempted to push his issue any further in some way; to date, he has given no indication for doing so. Also, Supreme Court Justices don’t simply respond to “pressure from several groups;” the Justices simply are not empowered to bring cases by themselves.

And finally, Chris Strunk received a response from the Departments of State and Homeland Security on his FOIA request for the President’s records: 

Strunk Answer

I must point out that the denials by DoS or DHS are essentially the result of a pending motion to dismiss (as many paragraphs specifically state). There have been many comments by the opponents of eligibility on my site having already commented on the above response basically saying that DoS or DHS absolutely must have documentation in hand in order to substantially make such denials.

For instance, take paragraphs 33 and 34, the Defendants rightfully state that the certificate (which is different from a certification; I’m not sure if this is a semantics issue or what) is sufficient proof of US citizenship which is, in my opinion, beside the point. We’re talking about natural born citizenship, not mere US citizenship.

Also, take paragraphs 35 and 36. The Defendants deny that the President is not a natural born citizen and that he was born outside of Hawaii. How do they know these things? What documentation do they have that supports the supposition in the affirmative? I don’t think they have such documentation because they’re merely denying a premise that Mr. Strunk has petitioned.

A current listing of eligibility lawsuits and common law/citizen grand jury updates can be found here.

-Phil

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on May 01, 2009 (boomark / email).