Dark Suspicions/ Deep Secrets

From:  The Daily Pen WIKIPEDIA: THE HOSPITAL NAME CHANGES In the original ‘Early Life’ section of Barack Obama’s biography, beginning on March 3, 2004, it was stated that he was born in Queens Hospital. It was later clarified as Queens Medical Center. The ‘Early Life’ section which contains information about Obama’s birth first received specific revisions by ‘HailFire’ on September 13, 2006 when he or she removed the reference to Queens Medical Center. No explanation is given for the removal of the phrase “…at the Queens Medical Center” from the Barack Obama page and no cited source was given as a reference for removing the information. No information was entered to replace the blank entry for nearly 2 years, until June 7, 2008 when a revision attributed to the username “G.-M Cupertino” was made which contradicted the original entry as the hospital Obama was born in. The significance of June 7, 2008 is significant because it is one week before Obama released his ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ on the internet which was stamped by the Hawaiian Registrars office, June 6, 2007. Many believe the date of the stamp on the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ is wrong by one year due to a clerical oversight and therefore the date was actually, June 6, 2008. The date suddenly becomes very signifcant! A review of the “G.-M. Cupertino” User contributions page revealed this user has nearly 30,000 edits with a predominant history of revisions mostly to articles containing information about foreign celebrities, figures and leaders. Most interestingly , however, it reveals that this user only made revisions to Barack Obama’s biography page twice, out of 30,000 edits! One of the edits was to add “Kapiolani Medical Center” as the name of hospital to his birth information. On July 12, 2009, another edit war began in another Wikipedia article called “Obama’s Early Life and Career”. This time the article was edited back and forth saying that Obama was actually born in either Hawaii or Kenya. Less than one week later, the Obama campaign allegedly, and conveniently, mind you, posted the infamous Hawaiian ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’, a fake birth certicate, on three separate websites which shows his birth location as Honolulu, Hawaii. Despite the fact that the Hawaiian ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ contains absolutely no information about the hospital of Obama’s birth, the Wikipedia affair is symptomatic of how the media and the internet is used as a tool to reinforce the permission for uncorroborated, irresponsible information that is not proven…or provable. The simple fact of the matter is that no official records have ever been provided from any authoritative source to prove that Barack Obama was born in Kapiolani Medical Center for Women & Children. More than a year later, no changes have occurred to the birth information on the Barack Obama article, mainly due to page security measures. This information is erroneous and has never been confirmed by primary sources or documentation from the Hospital, any birth records or eye witness accounts. Ever! On January 24, 2009, just days after his inauguration, Barack Obama sent a letter to Kapiolani Medical Center (See Appendix) on the occasion of the hospital’s centennial celebration, in which Obama allegedly wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your voice of supporters.” Liars and abettors propped the letter as proof of Obama’s Hawaiian birth…since, after all, it was written by…well…Obama, himself, of course. It was later determined by administrators at Kapi’olani that the letter was a fake, probably sent by deranged Obama hacks desperate to create a chain of evidence to support the falsehood that he was born in Hawaii. Somehow, it does not strike confidence in the mind to take the word of this man about his actual identity. Unfortunately, Obama has yet to offer any proof that he was born in America, let alone Hawaii, let alone Honolulu…let alone the Kapi’olani Medical Center. A letter claiming to be verification is just another piece of propaganda like a Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” and 78,000 Wikipedia edits.

Posted by Penbrook One at 2:20 AM
From: http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/DailyPen00.htm
Honolulu, Hawaii At the center of the war over Barack Obama’s illegitimacy as president are a series of deep seated, unanswered questions about the detailed involvement of several municipal employees and officials within the government of the State of Hawaii.  From former governor, Linda Lingle’s convenient deniability to former Health Department director, Chiyome Fukino’s intentionally misleading statements about Obama’s vital records.  From the blatant, dismissive ignorance of Hawaii’s legislature about the difference between “U.S. Citizenship” and “Natural-born citizenship“, to the claims by a former Honolulu senior elections office clerk that the State of Hawaii does not possess an original, 1961 Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Obama, the State of Hawaii has emerged as the primary, perhaps unwitting, co-conspirator in keeping Obama’s identity a well kept secret from the American people. Now, however, a new investigation of Hawaii’s Election Commission and the laws used by the state’s Office of Elections to approve or deny candidates for inclusion on presidential ballots raises shocking revelations about the administrative power held by too few unaccountable people and their capacity to override the U.S. Constitution.  The evidence reveals that municipal agents, working within the jurisdiction of Hawaii state law and complex administrative rules, opened shadowy legal channels which, ultimately, enabled Obama with an opportunity to usurp presidential power and assault the Constitutional sovereignty of the American people.
“Among the primary objectives of liberal globalists, in concealing Obama’s identity and, ultimately, his illegitimacy, were to endow political power to a like-minded, radical agent who would be willing to “push” extreme doctrine enabling the governmental confiscation of advanced American individualism.

http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/01/o-con-had-legal-help-from-non-partisan.html    The Official Certification of Nomination

The OCON controversy is an example of what happens when dishonest, inferior people try to force themselves into positions of power they are not qualified to assume. Even those who seek to uphold the honorability of service at the local level, within their own party, will eventually refuse to endorse their candidacy if the disparity of legal qualifications becomes irreconcilable. Not only was the dual OCON a deceitful maneuver by Nancy Pelosi and DNC to synthetically place Obama’s inauthentic candidacy onto Hawaii’s presidential ballot, it violated Constitutional election law requiring that each state maintains the sovereign authority to grant or deny ballot inclusion based on their own standards.
Most egregious, however, the agents running Obama’s political machine, those of legal mindedness, knew beforehand this very intraparty conflict legally enabled the Chief Elections Officer of Hawaii, Kevin Cronin, to invoke an obscure law and approve Obama’s inclusion on the Hawaiian presidential ballot…even though Obama was never determined with irrefutable documented evidence to be constitutionally eligible to appear on the ballot.
THE “O” CONRecall, over the past two years, we became familiar with the furor over the Democrat Party of Hawaii’s refusal to certify Obama’s constitutional eligibility. The DPH is the Democrat Party authority in Hawaii in charge of requesting, reviewing and verifying the legal qualifications of a candidate’s eligibility for inclusion on the Hawaiian ballot, in compliance with state and Constitutional election laws.

Ultimately, the DPH’s rejection of Obama was due to a refusal by Obama to make available the original documented evidence confirming his eligibility. However, this justifiable lack of certification by the DPH was followed by a covert attempt by the Democratic National Committee, chaired by Nancy Pelosi, to artificially proclaim Obama eligible in Hawaii by submitting two separate, sworn Official Certifications of Nomination (OCON) for Obama, each containing different legal language. Both versions of the OCON were sent to the Hawaiian Office of Elections while only one version was submitted to other states’ Election authorities. The DNC’s fraudulent OCON was an obvious, desperate attempt to control damage and prevent Obama from being disqualified from the Hawaiian ballot and prevent public awareness of the DPH’s refusal to certify Obama’s eligibility.

The Official Certification of Nomination is a legally required document submitted by each party’s state and national authority to every state elections committee authority prior to each election. It affords the Chief Elections Officer in each state with the documented legal assurance that the candidates seeking inclusion on their state’s ballot are indeed certified as constitutionally eligible to serve the office they seek.

Unfortunately, the violation committed by the DNC’s falsified certification is that there was no evidence to support claims of Obama’s eligibility. The DNC simply fabricated reasons over the authority of the state party authority in order to force Obama’s candidacy onto the Hawaiian presidential ballot. Of course, Democrats claim there was no impropriety on the part of Pelosi and the DNC. However, they have failed to explain why the state party authority refused to certify Obama, due to his lack of legal qualifications, while the national party authority simply certified Obama, ignoring that same lack of legal qualifications. The lack of accountability makes the Democrat Party appear pathetically disreputable. The DNC is not served by the multiple state party authorities, it is there to serve the state party authorities. Federal constitutional law prescribes the mandates for Presidential eligibility, but state authorities have the responsibility for validating candidate authenticity for their own ballot.

Hawaii’s remote, ridiculous legal moorings have become legendary during the saga of Obama’s fake identity. By now, the entire world is at least familiar with HRS 338-17.8 which actually obligates (not, “provides the choice” for) the Director of the Hawaiian Health Department to provide official, original Certificates of Live Birth to foreign born children when a least one parent of the child claimed Hawaii as their residence for at least one year prior to the birth. This law is a direct affront to the U.S. Constitutional mandate that a presidential candidate must be a natural born citizen, if the Director of Health in Hawaii assumes jurisdiction in declaring that its citizens are natural born citizens…which Fukino actually had the afoul audacity to do in a formal press release in July, 2009.


5. Suspicious Nomination Certifications  -from “51 Ineligibility Bullet Points”

In July, 2009, documents were revealed showing that Obama was never officially certified to run for president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, by the Hawaiian Democratic Party. On August 27, 2008, the Hawaiian Democratic Party created a customized Nomination Certification document for Obama containing the following words:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”

In comparison, unlike the 2008 Hawaiian OCON for Obama, in every other previous Presidential election, the Hawaiian Democratic Party has certified the nomination of their state’s Democratic candidate with the following words: “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Notice that the wording of HDP’s 2008 Official Certification of Nomination omits the words “…under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Upon receiving Hawaii’s State Nomination Certification for Obama, which omits the reference to the Constitutional legality of Obama’s nomination, the National Democratic Party Office created two separate documents with the same header title, “Official Certification of Nomination”, both versions were signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, and Alicia Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention and notarized by a Denver notary. One of these versions was sent from the National Democratic Party headquarters to each of the 49 states’ Democratic Party headquarters.

However, only the State of Hawaii received an Official Certification of Nomination from the DNC containing the words: “…the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…”

The document then lists Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the candidates. However, the rest of the 49 states received a different Official Certification of Nomination containing the words:  “…the following were duly nominated as candidates of said party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively…”

Why was the state of Hawaii’s local Democratic Party headquarters sent a different OCON document from the National Party headquarters than the other 49 states?

There is strong evidence suggesting that Hawaii’s local Democratic Party officials refused to certify Obama’s nomination as being Constitutionally eligible. As a result, Hawaii’s Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as “Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States”.

Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi, take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal.

This has never happened in the history of America’s vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obama’s candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.


Charles Kerchner · Private
Stanley Ann Dunham a, teenager impregnated by a married 25 year old foreign national, most likely went to Kenya around the end of her first trimester with the intent of having the baby there and giving it up for adoption and rearing by Obama Sr’s family in Kenya. There is no record whatsoever, real or forged or circumstantial, of Stanley Ann Dunham being in Hawaii in the spring of 1961 and most of the summer of 1961. Upon having the baby in Kenya and turning the child over to grandma Sarah Obama, Stanley Ann Dunham a teenager was then to return and go to college and restart her life minus a baby. This type of have the baby out of town and give it up type scenario was done often for pregnant teenagers in the 1960s. Instead she returned with the baby against her mother’s plan. Upon return circa 4 Aug 1961, likely by steamship and……not by plane, the grandma Dunham registered the baby as born in Hawaii based on a sworn affidavit which triggered the two newspaper announcements which were placed in those papers for ALL birth registrations whether done by a hospital or done by sworn affidavit of a relative. I believe that Obama was more likely born in early July 1961, not in August 1961. This was done to get the new child the coveted status of being a U.S. Citizen. U.S. Citizen maybe, natural born Citizen of the United States to constitutional standards… no! Hear more at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZpwcRf3FQ.
CDR Kerchner (Ret): http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com.


The Democratice National Committee felt obligated to remove the ‘constitutionally eligible’ language from the 2008 DNC certification of the Obama-Biden ticket, omitting from the certification the following language – ‘and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.’

Instead, the DNC only certified that the Obama-Biden ticket was duly nominated for the offices of President and Vice President, using the following language – ‘This is to certify that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively:'”

Read more: What did Congress know about ‘natural-born citizen’? http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=317705#ixzz1RanEPwmG


You’re a master of delusional thinking, which emerged with this falsehood; “none of which call into question the veracity of the Hawaiian state officials,”.  The honesty of the state officials is unproven, highly questionable, and presumably compromised by their deep affinity for their state’s golden son.  Why would they care more about fidelity to the truth than protecting their national hero, their socialist compadre, their state’s golden achievement?

I saw this passage from Bill Ayers’ book posted: “Instead we began to build ID sets around documents as flimsy as a fishing license or a laminated card available in a Times Square novelty shop called “Official ID.” We soon figured out that the deepest and most foolproof ID had a government-issued Social Security card at its heart, and the best source of those were DEAD-BABY birth certificates. I spent impious days over the next several months tramping through rural cemeteries in Iowa and Wisconsin, Illinois and North Dakota, searching for those sad little markers of people born between 1940 and 1950 who had died between 1945 and 1955. The numbers were surprising: two in one graveyard, a cluster of fourteen in another. Those poor souls had typically been issued BIRTH CERTIFICATES – available to us at any county courthouse for a couple of bucks and a simple form with information I could copy from the death announcement at the archive of the local paper-but they had never applied for a Social Security card. Collecting those birth certificates became a small industry…”

4 Responses to Dark Suspicions/ Deep Secrets

  1. arnash says:

    As WND reported, United Press International and Snopes stated at one time that Obama had been born in Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. But both sites suddenly changed the birth hospital to Honolulu’s Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children.

    At the time, Snopes sent WND a statement reading, “A number of readers have written to us to point out that Wikipedia previously updated their Obama-related entries to resolve the same discrepancy, so we included a similar clarification in our latest round of updates.”
    The same happened with UPI.
    WND requested confirmation from the state Department of Health that the image released by the White House is an accurate representation of the original Hawaii records. Spokeswoman Janice Okubo referred the question to Donalyn DelaCruz in the office of Gov. Neil Abercrombie. DelaCruz did not respond to a WND request.

    WND also requested comment from the White House but did not receive a response.

    Two retired police officers in Honolulu, who asked not to be identified for security reasons, also told WND the White House document is a forgery, and they are trying to identify who created it.

  2. arnash says:

    Polarik’s final report: Obama’s’Born’ Conspiracy
    Forged images, phony photos, and felony fraud

    By Ron Polarik, PhD
    There is conclusive and irrefutable evidence that the COLB imagecreated and distributed by Obama’s campaign to the Daily Kos, Annenberg’s
    Factcheck, and the St. Pete Times, Politifact, is, unquestionably, a falseidentification document. Furthermore, there is conclusive and irrefutableevidence that the photos taken by Annenberg’s Factcheck, in collusion withthe Obama campaign, are themselves,
    false identification documents ,having been made from the same false identification document image, aswell as from additional false identification documents created for thesame purpose; namely, to proffer these false identification documents astrue reproductions of a genuine, Hawaii-issued and certified, “Certification of Live Birth” document, and thereby, intentionally deceive the American public into believing that Barack Hussein Obama is a natural-borncitizen of the United States, and thereby, fully qualified to becometheir President.

    I never imagined that my studies would amount to this. I thought, like mostAmericans, that maybe the information was accurate even though thedocument image was fake. I thought, like most Americans, that Obamawould simply present a copy of his real, original birth certificate, and thatwould be that. Yet, here we are, more than twenty months after Obama announced his candidacy for the Presidency , and nearly three weeksafter the election, and Obama still refuses to show his real birthcertificate!

    Sadly, mainstream media have totally ignored this inconvenient truth andare not even been willing to even look at this birth certificate issue. They areall still in-the-tank with Obama, but even more so now that he is in line tobe President. They all bought into the lies and fraudulent documentsproffered up as evidence on Obama’s qualifications. They have been tooquick to label as “trash” or “garbage” any legitimate questions asked aboutObama’s real birth certificate. Even thigh-ranking governmental officials inthe state of Hawaii where Obama was allegedly born, won’t reveal what’s onObama’s original birth certificate. All they have said is that they have it.They have not said (1) where Obama was born. (2) when Obama was born,or (30 even to whom Obama was born.

    The answer to “What’s on Barack Obama’s real, original birth certificate”ranks right up there with some of the great mysteries of our time — and thatis really hard to swallow. That a man, with a dubious background, has beenelected to the highest office of the greatest superpower in the world withoutever having to prove who he says he is! That is not “nutty,” that’s just plain insane!

    To validate my findings that the text in this COLB document image was theresult of graphic alternations, and not a result of any printer or scannerartifacts, I made over 700 test scans and images using an actual paper COLB and different scanners that were subjected to different combinations of scanning and image parameters. I was finally able to replicate the Kos imageso closely that other image experts thought it was the same Kos image, andnot my ³clone.´ From this date forward, when I first discovered the evidence of tampering,and regardless of the unfamiliar format of the COLB and the questionableinformation it contained, I collected a great deal of additional evidence, thatthe scanned image alleged to be a true copy of Obama¶s original COLB was forged, and that this altered image of an official state-issued document isnothing less than a
    false identification document as defined by Chapter 18,Section 1028 of the United States Code.
    On August 21, slightly more than two months after the publication of theimage on the Daily Kos and Obama’s website, Factcheck published theirstory about nine photos they claimed were allegedly taken of Obama’s “real “COLB at his campaign headquarters ± the same COLB used to make thedocument image they posted on June 16.There was no longer any question in my mind that the COLB imageFactcheck posted is a forgery and that Obama’s real COLB , as proffered byFactcheck, is a nonexistent document. However, Factcheck created aconundrum for me: if the image Factcheck posted is a forgery of anonexistent document image, then how can any genuine photos be made of it? The answer had to be that both the image and the photos were forgeries.

    I have thoroughly examined the photographs that FactCheck published, andhave subsequently found clear and irrefutable evidence of tampering withboth the alleged COLB objects photographed and with the photosthemselves. One of those COLB objects was, in fact, a printout of a forgeddocument image with the Seal superimposed onto it for the final pictures.

    FactCheck¶s photos reveal both the absence of known, relevant featuresfound on genuine COLBs along with the presence of illogical and impossiblefeatures that would never be found on a real 2007 COLB
    . Specifically, on the COLB objects photographed, the security border closely matches the borderfound on a real 2007 COLB . However, both the embossed Seal and the StateRegistrar¶s Signature stamp do not match
    the same elements found on areal 2007 COLB, but perfectly match those found on a real 2008 COLB; or, in other words, something that would never happen in real life.Hawaii made three important changes to their COLB
    s from 2007 to 2008,including the use of a larger certificate layout, a new security border, and,much to the chagrin of Factcheck and the Obama Campaign, a new Seal andSignature stamp that can now be stamped on a COLB by a machine.With my experience and specialization in document imaging, my findings areconclusive and irrefutable that the COLB images posted by Obama to his campaign website, fight the smears.com, to the
    dailykos.com, a pro-Obama blog, to FactCheck.org , a pro-Obama political research group, and to Politifact.org, are, in fact, image forgeries
    with the intent to defraud theAmerican People into believing that these images were digitally scannedfrom Obama¶s genuine, ³original´ birth certificate.

  3. arnash says:

    The state of Hawaii’s former Health Department chief Chiyome Fukino is the one official who, back when Obama’s long-form birth certificate was guarded more securely than the nation’s nuclear launch codes, supposedly examined the mysterious document and reported back to the state’s governor, and to the nation, that the president did indeed have a birth certificate and she had seen it!

    But just two weeks before Obama finally released his “birth certificate,” Fukino was interviewed by NBC News’ national investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, who reported that Fukino told him she had seen the original birth certificate and that it was “half typed and half handwritten.”

    Problem: The document released with great pomp and ceremony by the White House was entirely typed. Only the signatures and two dates at the very bottom were “handwritten.” What Fukino described was clearly a different document. But don’t yell at WND for that “paranoid birther” story – you can thank NBC for that one.

    Read more: Startling new questions about ‘birth certificate’ http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=296957#ixzz1Lvw4ohUS

  4. arnash says:

    Read about the travesty against established court procedure committed by the Administrative Judge in the Georgia State Ballot suit which challenged Obama’s eligibility, with his Democrat Party attorney not even appearing before the court, yet they court ruling in his favor even in his absence!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: