Wednesday, August 25, 2010

The U.S. State Department Fails to Address the Meaning of a Natural Born Citizen and to Conclusively Show that Obama Was Born in Hawaii

Recently, WND reported the “State Department is maintaining a "counter-misinformation" page on an blog that attempts to "debunk a conspiracy theory" that President Obama was not born in the United States.” WND states that the State Department is treating the topic as though it were equivalent to those involving space aliens visiting Earth in flying saucers. The WND article is entitled, “State Dept. confirms Obama dual citizen- “Counter-misinformation” website aims to debunk birth controversy” and can be accessed at:

Here is the State Department article as published on the blog:
“The Obama Birth Controversy— By Todd Leventhal, 21 August 2009

During the past year, a number of conspiracy theorists have suggested that President Obama was not born in the United States. If this were true — which it is not — he would not be eligible to be the U.S. president, who must be a natural-born American.

On July 27, 2009, Hawaii State Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino confirmed that Obama was born in the U.S. state of Hawaii, stating:

‘I … have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago ….’

In 2008, examined a copy of Obama’s birth certificate held by the Obama campaign, verifying that it was a real, official document.

Nine days after Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961, the Honolulu Advertiser included among its birth notices, “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama of 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, son, Aug. 4,” which it reprinted in its Aug. 17, 2009 issue. The Honolulu Star-Bulletin printed the identical birth notice one day later, on August 14, 1961. Its former managing editor Dave Shapiro says, ‘Those were listings that came over from the state Department of Health. They would send the same thing to both papers.’

Interestingly, determined that Obama was originally both a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies from 1961 to 1963 (because his father was from Kenya, which gained its independence from the British Empire in 1963), then both a U.S. and Kenyan citizen from 1963 to 1982, and solely a U.S. citizen after that.’” See:
Who is Its blog section, “About Us,” informs us of the following: “State Department’s Bureau of International Information Programs (IIP) engages international audiences on issues of foreign policy, society and values to help create an environment receptive to U.S. national interests. IIP communicates with foreign opinion makers and other publics through a wide range of print and electronic outreach materials published in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Persian, Russian, and Spanish. IIP also provides information outreach support to U.S. embassies and consulates in more than 140 countries worldwide.”

What is interesting is that there were only three comments allowed to be posted to this Leventhal article that appear at the blog. Commenting was then disabled. This is unbelievable given the huge public outcry over the unresolved question of whether putative President Obama is constitutionally eligible to be President. The answer to this anomaly is probably found at the blog itself which states: “This blog has been archived. This content will remain available but will not be updated and commenting is disabled.” How convenient for the State Department to publish such drivel and then prevent the interested public from commenting on it.

This new State Department “myth” and “conspiracy” article, other than conceding that Obama was at least born with divided allegiance and loyalty to both the United States (which assumes that he was born in Hawaii) and Great Britain which at age two transferred to allegiance and loyalty to Kenya, adds absolutely nothing to the already existing information and arguments on the question of whether putative President Obama is an Article II "natural born Citizen." The article is incorrect in stating that Obama’s Kenyan citizenship expired in 1982, for it actually expired in 1984, if he did not confirm it. It simply repeats the worn-out arguments supporting Obama's presidential eligibility (, the two newspaper birth announcements, and what Hawaiian officials in carefully parsed statements said in 2008 and 2009) and stamps them with the imprimatur of officialdom (the U.S. State Department no less). One has to wonder why after over two years of debate on the question of where Obama was born, the only evidence that the State Department has of Obama being born in Hawaii is what Mr. Leventhal has published in this article. Why does the State Department not tell us that it has officially examined Obama’s 1961 contemporaneous birth certificate and the hospital records relating to that birth (that should be available if Obama was born in the Kapi'aloni Hospital as he claims) and has confirmed with that hospital that he was in fact born there? The article also misses and probably intentionally avoids so much of the pertinent information and points on the Founders’ and Framers’ natural law and law of nations definition of an Article II "natural born Citizen" (see Obama - Maybe a Citizen of the United States but Not a "natural born Citizen" of the United States at: ) and on the question of whether Obama has conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii (see A Catalog of Evidence - Concerned Americans Have Good Reason to Doubt that Putative President Obama Was Born in Hawaii at: ), both questions having absolutely nothing to do with conspiracy theories or whether the moon landing occurred on a Hollywood stage. The piece is nothing more than a manipulation of selective information to reach a desired result, a technique that various bodies have used in addressing the question of whether Obama is eligible to be President. This is typical official propaganda.

I am now working on a petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court for the Kerchner et al. v. Obama/Congress et al case. The Kerchner plaintiffs and I will appreciate the support of all those who want the question of Obama's eligibility brought to justice and decided by the rule of law rather than by a biased voting majority, the two major political parties whose only purpose appears to be to gain and maintain power, and all their friends and our enemies who stand to gain in one way or another by the status quo and/or by the radical changes Obama has planned for our Constitutional Republic. We have to convince the Supreme Court that it should accept the Kerchner case for review because it presents important issues which the Supreme Court should decide and that the Kerchner plaintiffs do have standing to bring their claims against Obama and Congress.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
August 25, 2010


A request from CDR Kerchner:

Also, please cast your votes to Help the Cause to get the word out:
1st: Vote for Mario to be a guest on Judge Andrew Napolitano's Freedom Watch TV show: Please add your vote here (in addition to making a comment if desired) to get Attorney Mario Apuzzo on the air with the Judge Andrew Napolitano to discuss this issue. Go to this link and click on the VOTE button and cast 3 of your 10 votes for Mario Apuzzo. Don't just make a comment only. That does not count as a vote. Be sure to VOTE too:

2nd: Vote for the show topic to be "natural born Citizenship". Please add your vote (in addition to making a comment if desired) for this new TV Show topic suggested by JTX at the Judge Andrew Napolitano "Freedom Watch" TV show suggestion forum. Go to this link and click on the VOTE button and cast 3 of your 10 votes for the show topic to be "natural born Citizenship". Don't just make a comment only. That does not count as a vote. Be sure to VOTE too:

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress
Please if you can, visit this site and help the cause:


jayjay said...


The Cert writ pertains to the "standing" issues ruled on by the lower courts, but might it be possible to throw in a hint to the SCOTUS Justices to the effect that due to the Constitutional importance and effect upon the entire country that, rather than just a remand to the lower court to hear on merits, that SCOTUS itself CONSIDER the possibility of assuming the case on original jurisdiction since the matter is so strenuously intertwined with both the U. S. Constitution AND the meaning of the term "natural born Citizen" and SCOTUS itself must needs be the final arbiter on those matters.

If they were to take note and assume original jurisdiction it would HUGELY shorten the time frame for a decision rather than allowing the eligibility issue to bounce/circulate around in the lower courts potentially for several years.

After all, the lower courts have made it very clear they do not wish to hear about any merits of the case and will certainly continue that approach with ANY remand. In the meantime our country and its people are suffering greatly from the acts of the man (some of which are pretty clearly unConstitutional) who has never shown himself to be legally eligible to hold the office he now occupies.

Enough is enough ... in fact, it is too much!!!

bdwilcox said...

'State Department is maintaining a "counter-misinformation" page on an blog'

The better name for this is THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH.

Is it just me or has reality eclipsed the Twilight Zone?

Dixhistory said...

This is not rocket science! Those in power are hell bent on doing away with the rule of law and the US as it was supposed to be.

I see no way they can be stopped other than through the action of plaintiffs like Charles. May God bless you and all the other plaintiffs no matter the outcome. May you all be well and prosper.


cfkerchner said...

Hi JayJay,

The term "original jurisdiction" as allocated to the U.S. Supreme Court, as I understand it, has a very limited role prescribed precisely for it in the Constitution. So while I agree there is a need to argue in the Writ of Cert filing that SCOTUS take the case and decide it as soon as possible due to the national security implications of further delay in resolving this major constitutional crisis, since only they can rightly and finally decide what the term "natural born Citizen" means in the U.S. Constitution to constitutional standards, the words to describe the process by which they would take the case and decide it immediately would not be described, imo, as being under the "original jurisdiction" clause of the U.S. Constitution. Again, that is my understanding.

As we don't wish to discuss specifics or strategies of the Writ filing in an open blog until it is filed, I suggest you write privately to Mario Apuzzo and discuss your ideas and suggestions with him. Again, I agree time is of the essence in getting this matter resolved. And Attorney Apuzzo is fully aware of that.

CDR Kerchner (Ret)
Pennsylvania USA

P.S. This Writ of Certiorari filing to the U.S. Supreme Court will be costly. If you can help us and support the cause with a donation, please do so at this site:

cfkerchner said...

An excellent new video published at YouTube by a follower of Mario's blog:

5 Minutes About Obama's Eligibility

If the person who sent me this by email wishes to stand up and take a bow for an excellent job, it is well deserved.

Good job! Bravo Zulu!

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

Bill Cutting said...

The Alantic Monthly 1916

Our Country Divided


“Our country furnishes many examples of that curious phenomenon, double allegiance. All persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are declared by the Constitution to be citizens. This is true of the children of non-naturalized aliens domiciled here. But the children of aliens have the same nationality as their parents, according to the laws of nearly all foreign countries, and such children are therefore subject to a double allegiance. In this way, if a German living in this country chooses not to accept the citizenship which we so generously urge upon him, his children born here may, when they grow up, disclaim their American citizenship. A young man born here of alien parents may, if he goes to Europe for study, be forced into the army, and the United States will be powerless to protect him, even though he intends to return and reside here. Even if the alien father be naturalized here, the minor son born here before the father’s naturalization, if he returns to his father’s native country, is liable to be seized and compelled to perform military service, and his American citizenship will prove to be a mere fiction. If a German domiciled here is so attached to the memories of the fatherland as to refuse the proffer of American citizenship, and his children while growing up are diligently nurtured in the same sentiments of loyalty, they cannot be relied on by the United States in time of war as Germany and France are now relying on their subjects at home. If in addition to this consciousness of divided allegiance, there are family ties and expectations of inheritance in the old country, it is clear that the Americanism of such persons, considered as an asset in time of war with Germany, must be charged off as worthless, if it be not an actual liability.”

I submit that in war time a US President with dual allegiance must be charged off as worthless, if not be an actual liability.


Unknown said...

Awesome video!!! I'm passing that one around. The John Jay quote to Geo Washington nails it IMO.

cfkerchner said...

Take a look at the top headline at the Drudge Report tonight 29 Aug 2010. Obama is whining to NBC's Brian Williams in an interview about people wanting to see his birth certificate and that they think he's a Muslim. His religion is a red herring he's throwing out. But his birth certificate is the issue really bothering him and any real investigative discussion of him not being a "natural born Citizen" of the USA to constitutional standards. He's worried. We're breaking through. Obama is obviously noticing that people are getting wise to his con job about many things in his early life.

Headline and quote from Obama at Drudge Reports tonight 29 Aug 2010 -- "I can't spend all my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead" ...

Permanent link to coverage of the interview at

We're breaking through. The message is getting to the people despite the main stream media cover up and trying to protect their anointed one, Mr. O. And its getting Obama nervous. And he should be. He's conned the whole nation as to who he really is. And for sure, he's not a "natural born Citizen" of the USA and is not eligible to be Pres and CINC.

Keep spreading the word about this grifter and his lack of transparency about his early life and all the hidden and sealed records. Post this link and essay everywhere.

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

puzo1moderator said...

Posted on behalf of 'William' a follower of this blog who is having technical problems posting. Is Google up to dirty tricks again on behalf of Obama?

Part 1
Please post my response to the recent article pertaining to the U.S. State Department Mis-information officer explanation of Obama' BC. It follows.....
Having reviewed the released U.S. State dept opinion, given by one Mr. Leventhal and listed as the Mis-information officer, I have a few topic points for Mr. Leventhal. He (Mr. Leventhal) has highly Mis-Characterized the obama BC as a conspiracy theory and bundled it with true subjective conspiracy theories.

Let's talk about "conspiracy theories" briefly. First, most all conspiracy theories cannot be proven or disproven within a lifetime, if ever. The reason is simple; the "theory" lacks data (information) to collect in order to form a basic hypothesis. Secondly, there must be a data collection system in place whereby the integrity of the data is reliable. Lastly, the data (information) must be measureable (usually weighted against the posed theory or hypothesis).

According to the Mis-Information officer Mr. Leventhal, the Obama BC issue is identical in its nature as UFO's, Aliens, who shot JFK and a lump full of other categories.
It would take Mr. Leventhal the ability to rely upon complete stupidity of the general public as his best weapon, possibly 2 ounces of ignorance and coupled with a witches brew of mind tricks - mostly his own - to believe one gram of his claims. The problem with playing with magic is that the magician may be exposed themselves.

Having publically stating in his own opinion, it appears to me that he is attempting (wrongfully) a redundant regession analysis to "prove" Obama was in "fact" born in Hawaii. This is a serious err on his part. His "Proof of data"? He said she said......
continued ...

puzo1moderator said...

Posted on behalf of 'William' a follower of this blog who is having technical problems posting. Is Google up to dirty tricks again on behalf of Obama?

Part 2
Evaluation of his complacement-with-intent-analysis (maybe why they call it mis-information) leads to very simple questions; as maybe he should have consulted with a data gathering information officer prior to the release of his opinion.

According to Mr. Leventhal, the Obama BC issue is a non-topic and "Proven Fact" that obama was born in Hawaii. But we must question the logical analysis that Mr. Leventhal used to arrive at his "factual" conclusion.We need not dig deep as he directly tells us how he derived at such.

To parapharase Mr. Leventhal, he used 1) Obama"s word, 2) A Governor's word, 3) A State Employee's word, and 4) A websites word. Therefore, without any other known data points he concludes that without doubt, Obama was born in Hawaii. Interesting isn't it?

So Mr. Leventhal, according to your own use of disproving a conspiracy theory, I ask that you remove the "UFO" conspiracy theory from your website list, due to your own analysis. It now must be a "fact" that "UFO's" are real.

Allow me to use your own redundant regession analysis for data integrity and direct correlation between your Obama was "factually" born in Hawaii and UFO's. As you claimed Mr. Leventhal, your determination of analysis relied upon the 4 different groups of people that claimed upon their word, was truth. 1) was a President word, 2) was a Governors word, 3) was a State Employee's word and 4) was a website.

In 1974, while traveling to Bakersfield California, a soon to be President, Ronald Regan personally witnessed a UFO. He later a President recalled the incident. An Arizona Governor witnessed as well as many others, upfront and personally, multiple UFO's. In addition, Illinois State Police also personally witnessed a UFO incident. Lastly, the website "" confirms all their individual claims.

Therefore Mr. Leventhal, by your redundant analysis, which I have applied, UFO's are real and no longer a conspiracy theory. I have applied the same for the UFO theory. 1) the word of a President, 2) the word of a Governor, 3) the word of State employee and 4) a website that confirms.

Please remove UFO's off the list of conspiracy theories Mr. Leventhal; by your own analysis, they are Real and the "facts" (according to you) "Prove it". If anyone disagrees with you that you have now factually proven that UFO's actually exsists, move those doubters into the "conspiracy theory" category, as you have now given the data and facts.

puzo1moderator said...

Posted on behalf of 'William' a follower of this blog who is having technical problems posting. Is Google up to dirty tricks again on behalf of Obama?

Part 3
I could add many additional redundant examples using Me. Leventhal analysis, Nixson and Clinton come to mind.

As Clinton declared "I never had sexual relations with that woman", would give credence to Mr. Leventhal. Now you have a presidents word. Most all Democrat leaders and Governors decry that Clinton is innocent. Then you have at the State level elected officials declairing the same. Lastly, you have a website, such as huffington post also defending and declairing its a lie.

Therefore, according to Mr. Leventhal, having the word of a President, the word of Governor, the word of State officials and the Huffington post, Clinton and Monica was a conspiracy theory, using his own analysis.

But that was quickly proven wrong when the merits of the case were allowed in a court room.

puzo1moderator said...

Posted on behalf of 'William' a follower of this blog who is having technical problems posting. Is Google up to dirty tricks again on behalf of Obama?

Part 4 as a P.S.
In summary, and please post this.

Aside from the most critical constitutional question which is the NBC definition, of which we know the answer, I am simply addressing and arguing against the MSM, the Court and the U.S. State dept rediculous redressed claims. As my late Mother use to say during my youth as I was at times attempting to pull the wool over her eyes during mistchief; "Son, I was born on a day, but it wasn't yesterday".... I always wondered why she never bought the stories of being late for supper, of course until I myself became a parent.

We the people, are now the parents of our founding fathers dreams, the union of a free Republic. The tourch and light of liberty is ours to carry and ours to pass to the next generation, our children, our grand-children and America's children, of all color and creed, without deviations and flaws.

Mario and Charles, you are true patriots and I dearly admire your hearts content.