Main Menu

It’s raining FOIA’s

Just when you thought it was safe to put the umbrella away, yet another FOIA response, this from Kenneth Allen, asking about President Obama’s stepfather and his records as an exchange student. I include it here for reference. The interesting thing for me is just how much paperwork the federal government keeps.

Allen v USCIS/DHS FOIA Release – Lolo Soetoro(Obama's step-Father) U.S. Records – 7/29/10 by ObamaRelease YourRecords

48 Responses to It’s raining FOIA’s

  1. avatar
    Sef August 1, 2010 at 9:29 pm #

    The interesting thing for me is just how much paperwork the federal government keeps.

    There’s the story, possibly apocryphal, of a guy back in 50’s who asked the government for 1 of everything they had. He got a boxcar full of stuff.

  2. avatar
    AnotherBird August 1, 2010 at 9:51 pm #

    97 Pages… Most are on one issue, and explains why she when the Indonesia.

  3. avatar
    kimba August 1, 2010 at 10:05 pm #

    These documents tell a very painful family story of hardship. Lolo gives as his reasons for wanting to stay because his family would face emotional hardship if they were separated, but economic and social hardship if Ann and Barack moved to Indonesia with him. It looked like at one point, the INS and State Dept people were sympathetic to their argument, but then they were told the Indonesian government wanted him to return. We have read Barack’s story of his recollections of his life in Indonesia as being relatively happy. If they did experience economic and social hardship while there, it seems Ann must have done a very good job of shielding him from it. Many of us can tell stories of growing up to find their parents really struggled, but never knew it at the time. Imagine the courage it took for her to leave the safety of her parents and go somewhere unknown, and bring her little boy, to keep her family together. After reading this I feel even more respect for Ann Dunham. And I feel a little creepy for reading something that is really none of my business. I suppose there will be much speculation about the redacted parts. More information for the birthers, but guaranteed they’ll just find more wrong with it.

  4. avatar
    Rickey August 1, 2010 at 10:17 pm #

    The letter to the Department of State which is stamped October 6, 1967 is instructive.

    We now know that Lolo Soetoro left Hawaii for Indonesia in July, 1967 (I can’t make out the exact date, but it was July 20 or later). Note that the letter actually says 1956, a common typographical error for a typist (typing 56 when you mean to type 67). The letter confirms that Stanley Ann and Lolo were married on March 15, 1965. The letter also identifies Barack Obama as Stanley Ann’s “6-year-old United States citizen son by a prior marriage.” It further identifies Obama as Lolo’s “stepchild,” which demolishes Sven’s theory that Lolo adopted Obama.

    Elsewhere I see what appears to be a marriage certificate, but it is a very poor copy and I can;t make most of it out.

    And then there is a memo dated September 4, 1967:

    Pursuant to inquiry from Central Office regarding the status of the applicants’ spouses’ child by a former marriage. The person in question is a United States citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii, Aug. 4, 1961.:

  5. avatar
    Rickey August 1, 2010 at 10:24 pm #

    Well, I take back part of my above comment. It now looks like Lolo returned to Indonesia in July, 1966. There is a memorandum dated August 21, 1967 which states that at that point he had been working in Indonesia for the past 13 months.

  6. avatar
    Rickey August 1, 2010 at 10:28 pm #

    Further clarification: a memo dated December 19, 1966 says that Lolo left Hawaii for Indonesia on June 20, 1966.

  7. avatar
    Rickey August 1, 2010 at 10:40 pm #

    I found a readable copy of the marriage certificate on page 92. Clearly they were married at Molokai on March 15, 1965.

  8. avatar
    Sean August 1, 2010 at 11:50 pm #

    So, according to the US Government in 1967, Barack Obama II was born in Hawaii.

    So now it isn’t just Hawaii’s government saying he was born there.

    Take that Orly!

  9. avatar
    katahdin August 2, 2010 at 12:06 am #

    Sean: So, according to the US Government in 1967, Barack Obama II was born in Hawaii.So now it isn’t just Hawaii’s government saying he was born there.Take that Orly!

    But don’t you understand? The conspiracy is bigger than we ever Imagined. It clearly started with the administration of that noted commie LBJ, and has continued through every administration since.

  10. avatar
    Gregory August 2, 2010 at 12:28 am #

    katahdin:
    But don’t you understand? The conspiracy is bigger than we ever Imagined…

    You are absolutely correct. Information that – at first glance – might appear to discredit any claim that Obama is not a U.S citizen – is in reality simply more evidence of the conspiracy’s breadth and effectiveness…

  11. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 2, 2010 at 1:31 am #

    kimba: These documents tell a very painful family story of hardship.Lolo gives as his reasons for wanting to stay because his family would face emotional hardship if they were separated, but economic and social hardship if Ann and Barack moved to Indonesia with him.It looked like at one point, the INS and State Dept people were sympathetic to their argument, but then they were told the Indonesian government wanted him to return.We have read Barack’s story of his recollections of his life in Indonesia as being relatively happy. If they did experience economic and social hardship while there, it seems Ann must have done a very good job of shielding him from it. Many of us can tell stories of growing up to find their parents really struggled, but never knew it at the time.Imagine the courage it took for her to leave the safety of her parents and go somewhere unknown, and bring her little boy, to keep her family together.After reading this I feel even more respect for Ann Dunham.And I feel a little creepy for reading something that is really none of my business.I suppose there will be much speculation about the redacted parts.More information for the birthers, but guaranteed they’ll just find more wrong with it.

    I agree that Dr. Dunham seems to have been a remarkable woman. And I wouldn’t feel creepy reading about this stuff – it isn’t often you get to read historical source material, and as a result you have gained an appreciation for the mother of a POTUS and passed it along to other people, that seems like something you should feel good about to me…

  12. avatar
    SvenMagnussen August 2, 2010 at 6:29 am #

    Rickey: The letter to the Department of State which is stamped October 6, 1967 is instructive.We now know that Lolo Soetoro left Hawaii for Indonesia in July, 1967 (I can’t make out the exact date, but it was July 20 or later). Note that the letter actually says 1956, a common typographical error for a typist (typing 56 when you mean to type 67). The letter confirms that Stanley Ann and Lolo were married on March 15, 1965. The letter also identifies Barack Obama as Stanley Ann’s “6-year-old United States citizen son by a prior marriage.” It further identifies Obama as Lolo’s “stepchild,” which demolishes Sven’s theory that Lolo adopted Obama.Elsewhere I see what appears to be a marriage certificate, but it is a very poor copy and I can;t make most of it out.
    And then there is a memo dated September 4, 1967:Pursuant to inquiry from Central Office regarding the status of the applicants’ spouses’ child by a former marriage. The person in question is a United States citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii, Aug. 4, 1961.:

    Barack became Lolo’s stepson on March 15, 1965, the day Stanley Ann and Lolo married. For a non-Hague convention country adoption, the adoption process is not instantaneous. The adoption was not finalized until 1967. It was in 1967 that Stanley Ann amended her US Passport application to change her name to Stanley Ann Soetoro.

    Barack’s Form SS-5, Soc Sec Application in the mid-70s is confirmation Barack was a legal resident of the US and not a US citizen. He may have become a naturalized US Citizen after that. The point is that he was not a US Citizen when he came back to America after living abroad.

  13. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 6:39 am #

    SvenMagnussen: Barack became Lolo’s stepson on March 15, 1965, the day Stanley Ann and Lolo married. For a non-Hague convention country adoption, the adoption process is not instantaneous. The adoption was not finalized until 1967. It was in 1967 that Stanley Ann amended her US Passport application to change her name to Stanley Ann Soetoro.

    Barack’s Form SS-5, Soc Sec Application in the mid-70s is confirmation Barack was a legal resident of the US and not a US citizen. He may have become a naturalized US Citizen after that. The point is that he was not a US Citizen when he came back to America after living abroad.

    Wow! It’s hard to pack more wrong in two simple graphs, especially as a comment to what preceded it.

    My dog (admittedly a border collie) exhibits better cognitive thinking than that.

  14. avatar
    Northland10 August 2, 2010 at 7:22 am #

    SvenMagnussen: Barack became Lolo’s stepson on March 15, 1965, the day Stanley Ann and Lolo married. For a non-Hague convention country adoption, the adoption process is not instantaneous. The adoption was not finalized until 1967. It was in 1967 that Stanley Ann amended her US Passport application to change her name to Stanley Ann Soetoro.

    Sven… when writing a story, you do need to make sure your timing is consistent.

    Stanley’s P3 amendment to change name: June 29, 1967 (or so).
    Letter regarding the status of “stepson” by W.I. Mix and later letter from O’Shea: September 1967

    If the process of adoptions was finalized, why did confirm that he was a “stepson” according to the definition?

  15. avatar
    SvenMagnussen August 2, 2010 at 8:31 am #

    Northland10:
    Sven… when writing a story, you do need to make sure your timing is consistent.Stanley’s P3 amendment to change name:June 29, 1967 (or so).
    Letter regarding the status of “stepson” by W.I. Mix and later letter from O’Shea:September 1967
    If the process of adoptions was finalized, why did confirm that he was a “stepson” according to the definition?

    Thank goodness for FOIA b(6) exemptions. Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.

  16. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 8:51 am #

    SvenMagnussen:
    Thank goodness for FOIA b(6) exemptions. Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.

    We know that you will never admit you are wrong and now you suggest that someone might have to make apologies.

  17. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 9:40 am #

    SvenMagnussen: Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.

    Non-subtitled version:

    “Y’all gonna havta trust me — cain’t trust any of them damn n****.”

  18. avatar
    who August 2, 2010 at 10:06 am #

    Interesting group of docuemtns. Thanks for the website and analysis.

    I did find this interesting:

    “…There is nothing in the file to document the status of the spouses son.
    Please inquire into his citizenship and residence status and determine whether or not he is the applicant’s child within the meaning of Section (101) (b)(1)(B) of the Act, who may suffer exceptional hardship within the meaning of Section 212 (e)

    ..Please send it here… for forwarding to the Department of State.”

    August 21, 1967.

    Well whaddya know? An investigation into Obama’s citizenship status. In 1967.

    Shiver me timbers.

    But this will never, never stop those despicable creatures known as The Birthers.

  19. avatar
    kimba August 2, 2010 at 10:11 am #

    “SvenMagnussen 02. Aug, 2010 at 8:31 am

    Thank goodness for FOIA b(6) exemptions. Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.”

    You demonstrate you don’t read thoroughly. The information around the redacted portions suggests by inference that the redacted information is medical in nature and related to Ann Dunham. There is nothing around the redacted portions to suggest they have anything to do with Barack or his status. However, what you prove is the more information birthers get, the harder they work to try to make that information fit their pre-fabricated story. There’s nothing in any of the 97 pages to suggest Barack H. Obama II is anything other than a United States citizen. In fact, it is confirmed in at least 3 places. Now we have not only the State of Hawaii confirming Barack Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug 4, 1961, but the United States govt as well. And we have the proof they conducted an investigation to confirm it.

  20. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 10:17 am #

    kimba: “SvenMagnussen 02. Aug, 2010 at 8:31 amThank goodness for FOIA b(6) exemptions. Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.”You demonstrate you don’t read thoroughly.The information around the redacted portions suggests by inference that the redacted information is medical in nature and related to Ann Dunham.There is nothing around the redacted portions to suggest they have anything to do with Barack or his status.However, what you prove is the more information birthers get, the harder they work to try to make that information fit their pre-fabricated story. There’s nothing in any of the 97 pages to suggest Barack H. Obama II is anything other than a United States citizen. In fact, it is confirmed in at least 3 places. Now we have not only the State of Hawaii confirming Barack Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug 4, 1961, but the United States govt as well.And we have the proof they conducted an investigation to confirm it.

    The next birther meme: “How do we really, really know that the person occupying the WH is the person who is referenced in the COLB?”

  21. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 10:31 am #

    Sef: The next birther meme: “How do we really, really know that the person occupying the WH is the person who is referenced in the COLB?”

    Obviously in birther world the man in the whitehouse is this Doppleganger of said Barack H. Obama who was born in Hawaii. I think their next thing will be obviously his body was snatched by a parasidic alien and because the alien has latched on its not really the same person. Invasion of the Body Snatchers all over again

  22. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 10:43 am #

    SvenMagnussen:
    Barack’s Form SS-5, Soc Sec Application in the mid-70s is confirmation Barack was a legal resident of the US and not a US citizen.

    It is amazing how you know the contents of a document which you have not seen. You must tell me how you do this, as it would come in handy in my line of work.

  23. avatar
    who August 2, 2010 at 10:53 am #

    kimba: “The next birther meme: “How do we really, really know that the person occupying the WH is the person who is referenced in the COLB?””

    I have already heard the next birther theme: “that paperwork comes right off Dan Rather’s keyboard.”

    LOL.

  24. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 11:12 am #

    Rickey: It is amazing how you know the contents of a document which you have not seen. You must tell me how you do this, as it would come in handy in my line of work.

    Magical Thinking
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking

  25. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 12:01 pm #

    who: But this will never, never stop those despicable creatures known as The Birthers.

    When you capitalize it like that, it looks rather like a British comedy program title. I can almost hear the theme music and the laugh track.

  26. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:02 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: Thank goodness for FOIA b(6) exemptions. Otherwise, you might have to offer an apology to me and a few others.

    Funny guy indeed… Despite all the evidence and lacking any evidence to support, Sven still holds on desperately to his myths.

  27. avatar
    G August 2, 2010 at 1:17 pm #

    NbC:
    Funny guy indeed… Despite all the evidence and lacking any evidence to support, Sven still holds on desperately to his myths.

    Sadly, I think that is because those silly myths are all he has going for him… He clings to them because he’s got nothing else.

  28. avatar
    Norbrook August 3, 2010 at 9:12 am #

    SvenMagnussen:
    Barack’s Form SS-5, Soc Sec Application in the mid-70s is confirmation Barack was a legal resident of the US and not a US citizen. He may have become a naturalized US Citizen after that. The point is that he was not a US Citizen when he came back to America after living abroad.

    (sighs) Just when I thought I’d seen about all the contortions I could see from birthers, Sven just has to demonstrate that I haven’t. Allow me to quote the applicable Supreme Court decision Wong Kim Ark:

    VII. Upon the facts agreed in this case, the American citizenship which Wong Kim Ark acquired by birth within the United States has not been lost or taken away by anything happening since his birth. No doubt he might himself, after coming of age, renounce this citizenship and become a citizen of the country of his parents, or of any other country; for, by our law, as solemnly declared by Congress, “the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people,” and “any declaration, instruction, opinion, order or direction of any officer of the United States which denies, restricts, impairs or questions the right of expatriation, is declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Republic.”

    Emphasis mine. Sven, what that means in normal people’s English is that President Obama could not – and his mother and step-father couldn’t – take away his citizenship. He would have had to declare that when he reached the age of majority – adulthood, in other words. Since he didn’t, his citizenship status remained intact – and yes, he is qualified to be the President.

  29. avatar
    Mary Brown August 3, 2010 at 12:19 pm #

    As we have said here many times, they will never stop. They cannot accept a lost election and they can not accept this President. They have a litany of arguments that do not stand up and yet they go on. And they will go on and on and on.

  30. avatar
    SvenMagnussen August 3, 2010 at 1:21 pm #

    Norbrook:
    (sighs) Just when I thought I’d seen about all the contortions I could see from birthers, Sven just has to demonstrate that I haven’t. Allow me to quote the applicable Supreme Court decision Wong Kim Ark:Emphasis mine.Sven, what that means in normal people’s English is that President Obama could not – and his mother and step-father couldn’t – take away his citizenship.He would have had to declare that when he reached the age of majority – adulthood, in other words.Since he didn’t, his citizenship status remained intact – and yes, he is qualified to be the President.

    No! What it means (your quoted emphasis) as it pertains to BO is that a Certificate of Loss of Nationality issued to him as a minor may be revoked without adjudication by a US Court until 6 months after the child’s 18th birthday. A CLN issued to an adult can only be revoked by a US Court.

    If a minor is issued a CLN, then it is valid unless revoked by the minor until he or she reaches the age of 18 1/2 years. After the minor is 18 years and 6 months old, the CLN can only be revoked by a court order.

    The Obama administration has modified the FAM to say a CLN issued to a minor may be revoked until 6 months after the minor’s 18th birthday by filling out a passport application and stating an oath of loyalty to the US. Previous administrations have required a formal statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.

    If BO didn’t renounce his US citizenship, then why change the FAM as it pertains to minors renouncing their citizenship?

  31. avatar
    NbC August 3, 2010 at 1:56 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: If a minor is issued a CLN

    There is no evidence that President Obama was ever issued a CLN.

    Nice speculation at best my friend…

    But under US Constitution, a minor cannot lose his birthright citizenship.

    Simple as that.

  32. avatar
    NbC August 3, 2010 at 1:59 pm #

    Let me qualify that:

    A minor of the age of Barack Obama cannot reject his US citizenship and neither could his parents. Of course, there is NOT A SINGLE SHRED of evidence that President Obama ever lost his US citizenship and scenarios to that extent have all been shown to be lacking in logic reason and factual support.

    Other than that, you may be on to something 🙂

    NbC:
    There is no evidence that President Obama was ever issued a CLN.Nice speculation at best my friend…But under US Constitution, a minor cannot lose his birthright citizenship.Simple as that.

  33. avatar
    G August 3, 2010 at 6:36 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: No! What it means (your quoted emphasis) as it pertains to BO is that a Certificate of Loss of Nationality issued to him as a minor may be revoked without adjudication by a US Court until 6 months after the child’s 18th birthday. A CLN issued to an adult can only be revoked by a US Court.

    If a minor is issued a CLN, then it is valid unless revoked by the minor until he or she reaches the age of 18 1/2 years. After the minor is 18 years and 6 months old, the CLN can only be revoked by a court order.

    The Obama administration has modified the FAM to say a CLN issued to a minor may be revoked until 6 months after the minor’s 18th birthday by filling out a passport application and stating an oath of loyalty to the US. Previous administrations have required a formal statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.

    If BO didn’t renounce his US citizenship, then why change the FAM as it pertains to minors renouncing their citizenship?

    Your CLN speculation doesn’t have ANY support for it whatsoever at all.

    As usual, its just part of your novel fiction idea to garnish your 15 minutes of fame amongst the gullible birther crowd. It must really cheese you off that there are folks out there who buy into the crazy RAP masters nonsense that they are really running the country now, yet nobody will bite on your inane yet novel CLN fiction.

  34. avatar
    misha August 3, 2010 at 6:50 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: When you capitalize it like that, it looks rather like a British comedy program title. I can almost hear the theme music and the laugh track.

    Monty Python meets Benny Hill.

  35. avatar
    misha August 3, 2010 at 6:54 pm #

    misha: Monty Python meets Benny Hill.

    Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDi83T4wEf8

  36. avatar
    ellid August 4, 2010 at 7:57 am #

    SvenMagnussen:
    No! What it means (your quoted emphasis) as it pertains to BO is that a Certificate of Loss of Nationality issued to him as a minor may be revoked without adjudication by a US Court until 6 months after the child’s 18th birthday. A CLN issued to an adult can only be revoked by a US Court.If a minor is issued a CLN, then it is valid unless revoked by the minor until he or she reaches the age of 18 1/2 years. After the minor is 18 years and 6 months old, the CLN can only be revoked by a court order.The Obama administration has modified the FAM to say a CLN issued to a minor may be revoked until 6 months after the minor’s 18th birthday by filling out a passport application and stating an oath of loyalty to the US. Previous administrations have required a formal statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.If BO didn’t renounce his US citizenship, then why change the FAM as it pertains to minors renouncing their citizenship?

    There is not a shred of evidence that the President ever gave up his citizenship, nor was it legally possible for his mother to renounce it on his behalf…nor is there any reason for her to have done so, since SHE never gave up hers.

    Give it up, Sven. You’re wrong, you’ve always been wrong, and you will continue to be wrong.

  37. avatar
    Greg August 4, 2010 at 1:18 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: If BO didn’t renounce his US citizenship, then why change the FAM as it pertains to minors renouncing their citizenship?

    Obama is older than 18.5, so any changes to the law wouldn’t affect him.

    SvenMagnussen: For a non-Hague convention country adoption, the adoption process is not instantaneous.

    Haven’t we been over this, that Indonesia does not allow adoptions of children older than 4 or 5? Obama would have been well over the age limit in 1967.

    SvenMagnussen: Barack’s Form SS-5, Soc Sec Application in the mid-70s is confirmation Barack was a legal resident of the US and not a US citizen. He may have become a naturalized US Citizen after that.

    Show it to us, then.

    You’ve got a pocketful of wishful thinking, Sven, topped with conjecture and encased in poorly reasoned rationalizations.

    Wake us up when you get something resembling evidence.

  38. avatar
    bjphysics August 4, 2010 at 2:21 pm #

    Meanwhile in the Birtherverse

    Over at FreeRepublic (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2564067/posts) a poster named “Tex-Con-Man” is displaying page 40 from the FOIA (Scribd above) the reader is directed to the words: “there is nothing in the file to support spouse’s son citizenship status” as another birther OMG. The fact that the aforementioned lack of documentation of child’s citizenship is cleared up and noted on page 38 is naturally omitted. Other nitwits chime in with the Scribd link (http://www.scribd.com/doc/35192432/Lolo-Soetoro-U-S-Records-Allen-v-DHS-State-and-Allen-v-USCIS-FOIA-Releases-Final-7-29-10, page numbers differ by -1) and note that the FOIA release does not have a copy of President Obama’s birth certificate as another OMG moment. The fact that a living person’s birth certificate would have been redacted from the released information seems to (conveniently) elude them.

  39. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 4:00 pm #

    Doc, the real question will be after you get your request fulfilled & publish it how long will it take the birthers to call it a forgery. Especially if it destroys another of their long-held core beliefs.

  40. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2010 at 4:06 pm #

    Sef: Doc, the real question will be after you get your request fulfilled & publish it how long will it take the birthers to call it a forgery. Especially if it destroys another of their long-held core beliefs.

    Given that I’m not going to put my real name on it, I’m sure they will call it a fake. However, FOIA responses can be replicated by others, so long as they are willing to wait.

  41. avatar
    SvenMagnussen August 4, 2010 at 4:21 pm #

    Greg:
    Haven’t we been over this, that Indonesia does not allow adoptions of children older than 4 or 5?

    The Soetoro adoption process began in 1965 and not 1967. Barack was four. Adoptions are not instantaneous and can take years.

    When it comes to minors, the State Department will issue passports to perspective adoptees pending final adjudication in the adoptees new name; as well as, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality when the destination country is a non-Hague convention country. As I’ve mentioned before, a CLN issued to a minor is revocable without a US Court appearance.

    If the non-Hague Country adoption is not finalized, the perspective adoptee can have the adoptee passport cancelled and be issued a passport in their birth name. But that does not revoke the Certificate of Loss of Nationality. The CLN can only be revoked with an affirmative statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama can produce a passport under Barack Hussein Obama II after the Barry Soetoro passport was issued. The change in the FAM is a perpetuation of the theory his BHO II Passport was a de facto canceling of his CLN. The flaw in this theory is that it lacks a loyalty oath.

  42. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 4:25 pm #

    SvenMagnussen:
    The Soetoro adoption process began in 1965 and not 1967. Barack was four. Adoptions are not instantaneous and can take years.When it comes to minors, the State Department will issue passports to perspective adoptees pending final adjudication in the adoptees new name; as well as, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality when the destination country is a non-Hague convention country. As I’ve mentioned before, a CLN issued to a minor is revocable without a US Court appearance.If the non-Hague Country adoption is not finalized, the perspective adoptee can have the adoptee passport cancelled and be issued a passport in their birth name. But that does not revoke the Certificate of Loss of Nationality. The CLN can only be revoked with an affirmative statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama can produce a passport under Barack Hussein Obama II after the Barry Soetoro passport was issued. The change in the FAM is a perpetuation ofthe theory his BHO II Passportwas a de facto canceling of his CLN. The flaw in this theory is that it lacks a loyalty oath.

    Please explain how Perkins v. Elg applies to what you wrote.

  43. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 4:29 pm #

    Sven,

    Please cite an example of a minor child (preferably one under 10 years old) receiving a certificate of loss of nationality due to a foreign adoption (you should also revise your theory in light of the evidence that Dr. Dunham maintained a US passport until her death – unless you’re just a bigot who wants the darkie out of the White House by any means necessary…).

  44. avatar
    JoZeppy August 4, 2010 at 5:08 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: The flaw in this theory is that it lacks a loyalty oath.

    Versus the flaw in your theory that it has no basis in reality?

  45. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 4, 2010 at 5:32 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: The Soetoro adoption process began in 1965 and not 1967. Barack was four. Adoptions are not instantaneous and can take years.When it comes to minors, the State Department will issue passports to perspective adoptees pending final adjudication in the adoptees new name; as well as, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality when the destination country is a non-Hague convention country. As I’ve mentioned before, a CLN issued to a minor is revocable without a US Court appearance.If the non-Hague Country adoption is not finalized, the perspective adoptee can have the adoptee passport cancelled and be issued a passport in their birth name. But that does not revoke the Certificate of Loss of Nationality. The CLN can only be revoked with an affirmative statement of revocation and a loyalty oath.I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama can produce a passport under Barack Hussein Obama II after the Barry Soetoro passport was issued. The change in the FAM is a perpetuation of the theory his BHO II Passport was a de facto canceling of his CLN. The flaw in this theory is that it lacks a loyalty oath.

    No the flaws in all your theories is that they lack a basis in reality. You have shown nothing to prove Obama was ever adopted by Soetoro. There is no documentation proving this adoption took place. There is no proof he denounced his citizenship nor that there was a Certificate of Loss of Nationality, or that he changed his name or applied for a passport under another name. All you have is mindless speculation

  46. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:36 pm #

    The Soetoro adoption process began in 1965 and not 1967. B

    Note the absence of ANY EVIDENCE to support this. Even though in 1967, the INS determines the child to be a US citizen.

    Given that Barack was under 14 and that parents cannot abandon a child’s citizenship, I find your ‘argument’ to be somewhat flawed.

    Nice try though. At least you do not let facts affect you.

  47. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:37 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Please explain how Perkins v. Elg applies to what you wrote.

    Do not bother Sven with facts… His speculations rely on a position of ignorance.

  48. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 5, 2010 at 12:29 am #

    NbC:
    Do not bother Sven with facts… His speculations rely on a position of ignorance.

    I know, I was just wondering why Sven believes that his opinion trumps the opinion of the SCOTUS…