Blue Team Action Item: Research why the Supreme Court is compelled to hold a new hearing on Obama’s eligibility to hold the presidency

Posted on February 17, 2011 by Kevin DuJan // Action Items, Blue Team - Research, Hillbuzz

Drudge has linked this story from World Net Daily that notes the odd decision by the Supreme Court to hold a new “conference” on Obama’s eligibility to hold the presidency.

Let’s research WHY the court could be compelled to do this.

It MUST have something to do with the fact that Obama has no birth certificate on file in the Hawaiian Hall of Records with the name “Barack Hussein Obama” on it — since his original Hawaiian birth certificate with that name was sealed in the 1970s when he was adopted in Indonesia by Lolo Soetoro, his stepfather.  At the time of adoption, a child’s original birth certificate is sealed away and replaced in the Hall of Records by a new birth certificate that bears the adopted parents’ names and the child’s new name, if a new name is given.

This is what happened to Obama, when he was renamed “Soetobakh” by his mother and stepfather at the time of adoption.

In Indonesia, there are no last names.  The man who adopted Obama is routinely called “Lolo Soetoro”, but in reality his name in Indonesia is just Soetoro.  ”Lolo” is a nickname — but on documents in the West, Soetoro seems to have used the name “Lolo Soetoro” because he needed to complete a first and last name line on documentation.

There are a couple names that could appear on the birth certificate Hawaii has on file for the current US President because of the odd circumstances involved in Indonesian names.  Here are a few options:

* Soetobakh Dunham

* Soetobakh Soetoro

* Barry Soetoro

* Soetoro Soetobakh

The reason Obama has spent so much time and money hiding his original birth certificate is because his adoption in the 1970s, and the bizarre, Klingon-sounding name “Soetobakh” are just so strange and difficult to explain to Americans.

I know in comments on this thread another debate will emerge about what happens to a child when he is adopted, and I will continue to maintain that the child’s original birth certificate that was created on the day he was born is removed from the Hall of Records and sealed by court order…with a new birth certificate created and filed in its place that changes the parents’ names to that of the adoptive parents, altering the child’s original name as well if the parents renamed him during the adoption.

I insist this because I have several friends who are adopted, as well as friends who have adopted children.  In all of these instances, the children’s adopted names are on the long form birth certificates on file for them in their respective states. Additionally, the adoptive parents’ names are what’s listed on the children’s birth certificates…NOT the birth parents.  The birth certificates with the birth parents’ names on them are filed away by court order and sealed from public view.  I am not even certain if the adopted children are able to obtain their own original pre-adoption birth certificates without a judge signing off on that.

The man who calls himself “Barack Hussein Obama” was indeed born in Hawaii in August of 1961…but his legal name is either Barry Soetoro, Soetobakh Soetoro, Soetoro Soetobakh, or Soetobakh Dunham.

There are myriad very messy constitutional and legal issues that arise from the fact the current US President has engaged in an orchestrated conspiracy to hide his long form birth certificate and actual legal name.  THAT is why so much money and energy has been lavished on the efforts to keep his secret.

I wonder if the efforts underway in ten states (and counting) to require the production of an original long form birth certificate for presidential candidates to appear on the 2012 ballots has anything to do with the Supreme Court’s sudden interest in holding a conference on Obama’s eligibility.

Obama, as president, has turned into another Jimmy Carter in office…but in terms of his adopted name change he actually has something in common with Gerald Ford…who was born “Leslie Lynch King Jr.” in 1913.

His mother remarried, and at the time of that marriage her new husband adopted Leslie Lynch King Jr. and changed his name to “Gerald Ford”, the name Ford used for the rest of his life, including the duration of his accidental presidency.

What would have happened if, as president, Ford decided to use the name “Leslie Lynch King, Jr.” on official documents?

Would they have been legal, since his birth certificate was changed at the time of adoption to read “Gerald Ford”?

This is the exact boat “Obama” is in, since his legal name was changed to Soetobakh-something-or-another the way little Leslie Lynch King’s name was changed to Gerald Ford.

I have yet to see anyone make this connection in any articles related to this subject, so I would love help researching any other instances of someone ignoring a legal name change and conducting official business under a nickname that’s completely different from what’s listed on that person’s birth certificate.

Has there ever been an instance like this?

Gerald Ford’s name was changed at the time of his adoption from a name that bears no resemblance at all to it….but Ford kept his adopted name as an adult and used it in his presidency…unlike Obama who reverted to his birth name but does not seem to have ever completed the necessary paperwork in Hawaii to change his name from Soetobakh-something-or-another BACK to “Barack Hussein Obama”, which was the name this political chameleon decided would take him farthest in life (and he was right!).

There are all sorts of interesting legal questions that arise from this.

Maybe you can help raise them in the thread below as a first step to sleuthing out answers for them