Ex-CIA Agree Govt is Covering Up Phony Birth Certificate to Prevent “Black Backlash”
Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, the chief of Stand Up America, a national security expert and Fox News contributor, says the “Certificate of Live Birth” released in April by the White House as “proof positive” of President Obama’s Hawaiian birth is a forgery, but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a “black backlash” if the failings of the nation’s first black president are revealed.
In an interview today with Greg Corombos for WND, Vallely, who previously has expressed concerns about whether the Obama administration is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, said, “His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii nor released from Hawaii hospital there, Kapiolani hospital there, if it in fact did exist.”
“We’ve had three CIA agents, retired, and some of their analytical associates look at it, and all came to the same conclusion, that even the long-form was a forged document,” Vallely said.
“No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don’t want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas,” Vallely said.
“But that’s a very poor excuse for not taking necessary steps to make sure this president in fact is a legitimate president under Article 2 and he is a born U.S. citizen.”
The departments of government designed to uncover wrongdoing, in this case, are on the wrong side, he said.
“I think they’re (the FBI) covering for this administration. I think the corruption within this administration is so proliferated through the agencies of government now, we’re just in a bad situation here. I think the lack of confidence in our government is growing and many feel that not only all the members of Congress but even our courts are corrupted at this time,” he said.
The questions over Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the requirements in the Constitution that call for a “natural born citizen” have been raised since before he was elected.
Harold
ACGR's "News with Attitude" 
Fair enough, you’re right. Feel free to post on my site, I promise I won’t take it so personally!
I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories either. When I post on your site, it is not necessarily for YOU. It is for someone else who might read it. Your “lost citizenship in Indonesia” theory was worth commenting on because someone, obviously not you, MIGHT believe it.
For those who read this who still might believe that Obama became an Indonesian citizen, he didn’t–and you can check with the Indonesian Embassy. And for those that think that Obama might have lost his US citizenship or Natural Born Citizen status, he didn’t–and he couldn’t.
John, since you do not subscribe to the crazy “lost citizenship theory”, I have greetings for you, and I hope that you also enjoy your life.
Hi Ellen1
thanks for spending so much effort on this non-issue “theory” of mine. I was hoping it would have been obvious from the few comments I left, that I don’t really care about the issue, since the entire scenario was hypothetical and unresearched. As you even quoted me saying, I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories. Thus, I don’t care. maybe you could lighten up and enjoy life.
Re: “I doubt that of I wanted to move to another country that I could not remove my childs citizenship. ”
You cannot. There have been Supreme Court rulings on the matter. Moreover, think of the situation. You are not your child. Your child has the right to decide, and the courts have ruled that she or he cannot do that until becoming an adult.
Re “conspiracy theories”. I tend to laugh at them all because I am to cynical to believe that there is anyone efficient and organized enough to carry off a big conspiracy.
So, “”IF I were to subscribe to a birther claim….I’d be more inclined to affirm mine.”
Since your claim is illogical, and there is no proof for it–a child cannot lose US citizenship, Indonesia has said that he was never an Indonesian citizen, etc.–therefore you should not subscribe to any birther theory. And, for good reason, they are all crazy.
Still, the “remove the child’s citizenship” theory is one of the craziest.
I doubt that of I wanted to move to another country that I could not remove my childs citizenship. But regardless, I don’t subscribe. Conspiracy theories. And I said if, the key word being if, I were to subscribe to a irther claim, id be more inclined to affirm mine.
Re: “After his birth, when his parents moved to Indonesia, they relinquished his American citizenship and adopted an Indonesian citizenship in order to go to school and obtain whatever benefits one might be entitled to as an Indonesian citizen>”
First, it is legally impossible for parents to relinquish the US citizenship of their child. The courts have ruled repeatedly that they have not got the power to do that.
Second, relinquishing citizenship, your own citizenship, can only be done IN WRITING filed at the legal US office that handles it, which would have been a US Consul’s office. No such document has been found.
Third, Obama was never an Indonesian citizen, as a call to the Indonesian Embassy in Washington will confirm. The US State Department also stated in a legal filing that Obama was never an Indonesian citizen.
Fourth, the claim that you had to be an Indonesian citizen to attend school in Indonesia turns out to be false–you can ask the Indonesian Embassy about that too.
Fifth, since Obama did not relinquish his US citizenship, he did not have to apply to be reinstated.
Sixth, we know that Obama must have traveled on a US passport when he returned from Indonesia to attend school in Hawaii. That is because: (1) he traveled alone; and (2) If he had used a foreign passport to enter the US he would have needed a US visa on that passport, which would have had to have been applied for in Indonesia. And no such visa, nor any application for such a visa, has been found.
Yes, there is indeed an UNSIGNED application for Obama to attend school in Indonesia, and it claims that Obama was an Indonesian citizen right on it. But it is unsigned. We do not even know that the parents filled it out. It may just have been the clerk, and in any case it is not true, since both Indonesia and the US State Department say that Obama was never an Indonesian citizen.
I’m not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories, in fact I mock those who do. However, if a particular conspiracy theory were to turn out to be true, this is the one I would be least surprised by.
I think my version of the theory (if true) is the most plausable. It is likely that Obama was born in HI. After his birth, when his parents moved to Indonesia, they relinquished his American citizenship and adopted an Indonesian citizenship in order to go to school and obtain whatever benefits one might be entitled to as an Indonesian citizen. Apon return to the States, neither he or his parents reinstated/reapplied/obtained his American citizenship. And this is where the cover-up lies. Since technecally, he was a natural born citizen.
The meaning of Natural Born Citizen refers to the PLACE of birth, not to the parents of the child. That is why the US Congress voted to confirm Obama’s election UNANIMOUSLY. If even one member of Congress thought that Obama was born outside the USA OR that the citizenship of his father had an effect on Obama’s Natural Born Citizen status, the vote would not have been UNANIMOUS–all 535 members.
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
What part of “natural born” don’t you people understand? Was BHOs daddy a US citizen? It doesn’t matter where BHO was born. Both of his parents have to be US citizens for BHO to be “Natural Born”. You OBOTS are side stepping Article 2, Section 1, clause 5 of the US Constitution.
The evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii is overwhelming.
WND has reported that the US State Department checked on Obama’s place of birth TWICE, with five years between the two checks, and each time it concluded that Obama was born in Hawaii. WND then asked how the State Department concluded that? The answer is obvious. What does the State Department normally do to check the place of birth? It asks for the birth certificate. So the State Department in the 1960s and 1970s asked to see Obama’s birth certificate, saw it, and concluded that Obama was born in Hawaii.
This fits nicely with the fact that Obama has now shown both his short-form and long-form birth certificates, which THREE Republican officials in Hawaii have stated are accurate regarding the place of birth. And it fits with the notices of birth in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961.
The claim that the notices could have been placed by lying relatives turns out to be false because whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital, Hawaii insisted on a witness statement.
And the State Department conclusions in its two investigations fits also with the fact that no 1961 US travel document for Obama was found. You know, of course, that if a child is born outside of the USA, the US insists on either a US visa on a foreign passport or the child being entered on his mother’s US passport before being allowed to enter the USA. If such a document existed for Obama in 1961–PARTICULARLY if the birth was in Kenya–it would have been filed away, and the application for it would have been filed away–and the document itself or the application for it would have been found long ago.
Two copies of an official birth certificate, one which the director of health of Hawaii stated that she saw being copied and that the copy was accurate. The facts on both of which have been confirmed by THREE Republican officials. Two checks by the US State Department, both of which concluded that Obama was born in Hawaii. No US travel document in 1961. No Kenyan document (except for obvious forgeries). No Kenyan document even showing that Obama’s mother was in Kenya in 1961. Obama’s Kenyan grandmother saying repeatedly in the taped interview that he was BORN IN HAWAII, and her saying in another interview (Hartford Courant) that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.
Numerous document experts have said that the document was not forged:
For example:
Dr. Neal Krawetz (http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/428-After-Birth.html)
And the conservative National Review : http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-l…
And:
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/29/fox-exp…
And:
http://www.conservativerefocus.com/blog5.php/2011/04/29/fox-news-report-says-layered-obama-birth-certificate-legit-unlayered-certificate-would-raise-problems-huh
Not only a “black backlash”, but a world-wide backlash because for every document he signed, as President – if he is a fraud – would be null and void. In some instances this would be good. In other instances not so good. There is a lot more to this than “black” feelings. A lot of people noted the inconsistencies of the most recent certificate revelation, the first such problem in our history of Presidents.