This is the place to save specific videos or links that are often referenced or needed  on our blog.


316 responses to “Links

  1. Obama Family Saga Continues


    Natural Born Citizen Discussions in the Late 1800′s

    Shirley, We Hardly Knew Ye. Open Thread! (Updated, twice) Stanley Ann Dunham was first known as Shirley

    Lia”Obama’s Adopted Sister Died Suddenly

    Lia Soetoro Sobah Speaks in her own words…

    What Say U, Same Person or Not?

    Guns and No Roses “Fast and Furious”

    “Jerusalem Is Not Your Capital” ISRAEL

    It’s All in the Obama Family – Continuing family saga information is here.

    January, 2011

    It’s All in the Obama Family or as the Boughs Break

  2. From Commander Kerchner

    [audio src="" /]

    • Wow…..I had not hear of the name Harrison J. Bounel.
      He says that this name is attached in a skip trace to Michelle and Barack Obama at their Chicago address, 5046 S. Greenwood Ave. It’s attached as an alias for Barack Obama to his fradulent Conn. SS# 042-68-4425.

      What are our Congress and law enforcement officials doing? This man needs to be arrested now before he does even more damage to our Country.

    • Just FYI for those interested, it starts at about the 18 min. mark

  3. “The Property” was probably an limited partnership in light of the Olympics 2016. “That Lot” would have come in real handy.

    Ya think?

  4. Landmine.

  5. That link has links to a lot of Obama-related documents, including for his alleged parents.


    This looks like a great site for citing the contradictions. There’s a great list of others on record too.

    (sorry for posting links on Contacts last night.- just noticed.)

  7. Orly’s Lawsuit against the DOH and subpoena to see the Original BC. Information is being compiled here.

  8. This might be THE go-to place for radical connections to Obama:

  9. Miri, don’t click on the actual video, click on the headlines above the videos if you cant get the video. The first one is good but the second video here is the utmost clear and informative. It is sooooooo informative.

  10. This is an excellent library of resources for conservatives!

  11. Time magazine photo spreads of Obama:,29307,1834628,00.html Family photos; looks like the source of all the ones we’ve seen for years.

    The Occidental photos by Lisa Jack.,29307,1866765_1815160,00.html

  12. Sundial – “Breaking the War Mentality” – The essay written by Barack Obama while he was allegedly a student at Columbia University.

    Click to access PPM116_obamaessay.pdf

  13. A slide show of Obama’s family, including an early photo of Stanley Ann in Kansas with mother and aunt:

    See here for comments about this photo by Zenway and others:

    That link has a video with a very good summary of all of Barry’s deceptions. It includes scenes from Odinga’s rioting in Kenya.

  15. Link to an index of a lot of scribd documents related to the legal challenges:

  16. Politifact page with links to publicly available Barry-related “documents” and images:


    Obama’s Dead Pool. List of the conveniently dead.


    The Republican site that tracks the money Obama has put into overseas companies. Our money!

    Even Andrea is left speechless. She has to get back to Sununu because she wasn’t sent the Romney talking points like she gets the Barry talking points daily.


    The case where the SCOTUS ruled that a treaty does not trump the Constitution.

  20. h/t Leza The territorial laws that allowed Hawaii to give bc’s to people born outside Hawaii.

  21. Click to access vsus_1961_1.pdf

    Some data about 1961 birth statistics. It has the racial categories, but nothing about the codes used. Not that I can see.

      • Good find on the document. This document seems to indicate that they DO NOT code the race of the parents at the federal level. The codes given refer to the race of the child. In the federal sense for the CHILD’S race, 9 means “other non-white”. They explain how to classify the parents’ races, but they don’t supply any CODE NUMBER for the parents’ race or any column number on the record for either parent’s race. We see nowhere (that I can remember) any race CODE for Barry the infant wonderchild on his BC. Verna Lee, the SUPERVISOR, who would be consulted, is the one who they say they have on audiotape explaining that she would code a blank field for father’s race as 9. She said in their coding scheme, that meant “not stated”.

        There was no column indicated in that book for father’s race or mother’s race. Therefore, there’s no federal code for that field. One can HAZARD TO ASSUME that if they used codes for those individuals, they would match the codes for the children, but we don’t know that.

        Somehow, someone translated the races of the parents into a code for the child. But there’s no code that I can see for Barry’s race on that birth record. However, the keypunchers WOULD BE WORKING FROM THE PART OF THE BC THAT WE DON’T SEE–that being the medical information where you see all those details like number of pregnancies this mother has had, etc.

        If the Hawaiian code for not stated was 9 and the code for Ann was 1, for Caucasian, then Barry would be 1 for Caucasian. Since they wrote “African” in the race field for BHO Sr., if you believe it was there from the beginning, then you would have to assume that supervisor Verna Lee took that word African and ASSUMED that meant a nonwhite person, following the federal scheme. But surely Verna KNEW that Africa contains MANY Caucasians. Kenya contains many Caucasians. In fact, the guy who just came in second in the Tour de France was KENYAN-BORN and HE’S WHITE AS THE DRIVEN SNOW. Interestingly enough, he just easily changed his citizenship to the UK so he could compete as a Brit. South Africa was full of whites. North Africa is full of whites known as Arabs. Many other African countries have whites. So Verna COULD NOT HAVE ASSUMED that BHO Sr. was non-white, especially with an Muslim name. There was nothing about Kenya on the bc, was there?

        I’m not “sure” that the Daily Pen will respond to ladysforest. They should have listed their source from the beginning.

        That all being said, I hope that the delay in the finding/production of this manual did not give the obots time to create something to confirm the complicit Dr. Con’s con games.

      • Another thing: Unless Hawaii did the keypunching for the feds, then those codes might be internal codes for their local biostatistics. We simply don’t know. It would behoove Corsi to release the audiotape of his conversation with Verna Lee.

        “Revised August 14, 1961”. After Barry’s birth. After the coding was done on his BC? Did they then go back and recode, if necessary?

        If it were I who got this document, I’d post the name of the person who supplied it and the emails going between, a la butterdezillion and Miss Tickly.

    • i definitely read about this way back when i first saw it – on daily pen i guess and i read the actual gov’t documents and looked at the statistics tables. there was definitely a federal coding system used. the coding was not internal. the tables also had number of births for the parents of various races. i will see if i can find the links. some of it was from cdc like link above.

      • If you read the first page of the report, they talk about images on microfilm that they receive from the states. Then they keypunch cards for only 50% of these images. It sounds as if the keypunching and the coding was done at the federal level. So any codes written on the actual bc back in Hawaii would seem to be internal coding. You can see how crummy the images and the penciled in codes look.

        • they count only odd numbers if i remember right. that’s why the certificates had to stay in the batches by geographic location – to get accurate statistics. if it was only chronological then counting every other one might sklew the statistics for region, hospital, home births, etc. if one baby (1) is born in the hospital then chronologically the next one(2) is at a farm, then the next one (3) is hospital then the next one (4) is a farm and every other was counted for statistics starting with (1), then the sample shows 2 of 2 births in hospital or 100% and 0% for farms. but if they stay in their batch it become (1) hospital (2) hospital (3) farm (4) farm and you get an accurate picture of 50% hospital and 50% farm births. the method was mandated by the office of vital statistics

          • It says right on that pdf at ladysforest’s that they “counted” records ending in even digits. IMAGE NUMBERS that end in even digits. We don’t know what the image numbers are. Do they match birth record numbers or not? Maybe it doesn’t matter, so long as they simply code and count half the images.

        • okay, i have several problems with the purported manual. first, it was revised august 14, 1961, so it was not in force at time of birth on aug 4, 1961. second, although i haven’t looked into it i would imagine that a handbook on census statistics would go in effect on jan 1 of a given year because statistics are done yearly and it would skew the results to make any changes midstream. third, the first 9 pages are not there and i wonder what they say because it is my recollection based on previous research that the states do the counting and send the statistics to the feds. the birth certificates themselves are not sent to the feds (for privacy reasons they always remain with the state) therefore they could not be examined and punched at the fed level. the instructions are for the individual state vital statistics office to follow, and it gives numbers for the codes to use – 2 for negro, 4 for chinese or whatever – that indicates that the federal government did in fact determine the coding and instructed the states to use a uniform method. last, i find it very difficult to believe that, if the race of both parents is unknown, that the instruction would be to code the child as white, as opposed to unknown. that just doesn’t make sense if you’re trying to get an accurate statistical picture.

          • The whole thing is there; you have to hit the link to download the entire pdf:

            I remember reading somewhere that the microfilmed images were in 4 places. The local registrar, the state, the feds and the HDOH, IF I remember correctly. The HDOH copy would be the one they coded and kept. This is the one that they’d make certified copies from, back when they actually gave out images of the original document. That’s why the Nordyke copies they got in the mid-60s had codes on them. Only Zullo and Corsi can answer these questions. They need to be asked to explain.


          • okay, i was mostly wrong – this is current procedure,
            from a 2008 report on the history of viatl statistics:

            Click to access NAS%20US%20Vital%20Statistics%20_with%20map_.pdf

            footnote 1:
            The NVSS is based on the local registration of vital events. For births and deaths, this typically works, in outline form, as follows: Demographic information on the birthcertificate is provided by the mother at the time of birth, and medical and health information is based on medical (i.e., prenatal care, hospital, etc.) records. Demographic information on the death certificate is provided by the funeral director based on information supplied by the informant (usually the next of kin). A physician, medical examiner, or coroner provides medical information on cause of death. The completed birth and death certificates are registered with the local or state registrar by, respectively, the hospital records officer or the funeral director. The local registrar subsequently files the records with the state vital registration office, which codes and keys the data and transmits a copy of the electronic file to the National Center for Health Statistics. The state offices are responsible for maintaining archival copies of records and for issuing certificate copies. Upon receipt at NCHS, the data are edited and assembled into national files for analysis and publication. NCHS sets uniform standards for data that will be collected and for item coding.”

            that’s current method, but in 1961, the report on natality,
            section 5, footnote 1
            “The complete r u l e s followed in the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of geographic and p e r s o n a l i t e m s for b i r t h s are s e t f o r t h i n the unpublished i n s t r u c t i o n manual “Coding and Punching Geographic and Personal P a r t i c u l a r s for B i r t h s Ocourrlng in 1961.”
            also, footnote 2: “The geographic code s t r u c t u r e i s given in Vital Statiatics Instruction Manual. P a r t 11, Section C,
            “Geographic Code-Final-Births, Deaths, and F e t a l Deaths Occurring in 1960-61, * National Office of Vital S t a t i s t i c s ,
            Washington, 1961.” and it does say in the report linked above for 1961 that copies of certs were sent to the feds for punching.

            this is interesting – if you look at the model birth cert it has at the bottom the question of whether the child was legitimate or not. this 1961 report states, “The following 16 States did not report legitimacy status on the birth record in 1961: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, and Vermont.” That means Hawaii DID report legitimacy, so where’s the box??

            this shows process at that time. so its possible that the numbers were the state’s coding system for their own reports and for the summary they send to feds, who then also get copies of even numbered certificates and do the counting as well. look at the last page, 288, flow of vital statistics.

            • Hayden, that last link doesn’t work. I don’t see a page 288 on the full pdf.

            • “With the exceptions noted in the next paragraph, natality tabulations for 1961 are based on information obtained from microfilm copies of the original certificates. These copies were received from the registration offices of all States, certain cities, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. The statistical information on these records was edited, classified, placed on punchcards, and tabulated in the National Vital Statistics Division (NVSD). The 1961 birth statistics for California, Georgia, Michigan, and New York City were produced by a somewhat different procedure. The vital statistics offices of these areas coded the information on their certificates according to the rules followed in NVSD. From punchcards prepared for their own use, they reproduced the information required for national tabulations on uniform punchcard forms. The reproduced cards were verified and tabulated with the cards for the other areas.”

              That’s from the pdf Hayden supplied that showed the PROCEDURE used in 1961. This explains what the four areas were that were the ONLY ONES who coded the information AT THE STATE LEVEL and HAWAII WAS NOT ONE OF THOSE AREAS. That means that the codes on the images from Hawaii are on their copies only and were NOT the codes assigned by the federal government for the federal government’s purposes.

              We already have evidence that the coding systems differed because, for one thing, the feds didn’t code the parents’ races. They did code the child’s race. We don’t see a child’s race code on the birth certificate. Hawaii may or may not have coded the child’s race, depending upon whether or not they coded it on the part of the birth certificate that’s not available to the public. However, we do see codes for the parents’ races, which the feds don’t use.

              The feds determine the child’s race based upon the races of the parents, but they don’t CODE or keypunch the races of the parents. It is not likely that the images went to the feds, they coded them, and then they sent coded images back to Hawaii, so that certified copies that the HDOH produced would have the codes. The codes are meaningless to people who need certified copies. The government is wasteful, but that would truly be wasteful and a useless procedure.

              Until Corsi and Zullo respond, I’m believing Verna Lee, who is the only person we know of who actually worked there at the time and knows how this was handled. Corsi should release the audio interview.

          • Click to access nat60_1.pdf

            this is the right url for the flow of vital statistics from 1960. go to the very last page.

            • Thanks, Hayden.

            • About the legitimate/illegitimate box: On the standard BC form, page 228 this link, that box is below the line indicating “for medical and health use only.” This is the portion that is never given to the public, so if it was filled out on Barry’s record, we’re never going to see it. That’s why the coding on the face of the certified copy, available to those authorized to get certified copies, is probably not the information used by the feds. The feds would be working from the “medical and health use only.” Hawaii may have coded the face of the copies that were sort of “public record” in order to allow their clerks and people to gather and create stats about their births without exposing too much personal information. Verna would know.

            • For those who believe that the codes on the face of the Obama LFCOLB correspond to the federal codes seen in the pdf ladysforest received (or even in the 1968 thing Dr. Con cites), there SHOULD BE a code of “1” next to SAD’s birthplace, meaning “native” of the USA. She was born in Kansas. She is a native. There should be a “1” in the box for her birthplace. Instead, there is an “a”. What does that mean? According to the 1961 coding instructions, the code should be “1” for native. Does this “a” come from a later coding scheme? If so, then it indicates that forgers may have been using the wrong coding scheme or used a bc from another year for a template. Their bad, if so. 1968 perhaps? 🙂

              In addition, it seems that some items that are coded on that LFCOLB aren’t even discussed in the FEDERAL coding manual.

      • Hayden, states, cities, and the feds kept biostatistics and reported them the way they wanted to report them. It was for their own purposes. Different entities would have different needs. While the feds might not break down, for example, illegitimate births by “demographic area”, a city might because a city would be targeting “prevention” programs at a particular area or trying to decide where and how to provide outreach for something like prenatal care (or post-natal care). Infant deaths were something cities tracked, in particular, to try to prevent them by focusing prenatal programs at the community level. The CDC would have different “needs” than Honolulu. What happened in the sixties differs a lot from today, when the CDC is SO intrusive as is the NIH and everything else concerning this overweening federal government. Again, look at the first few pages of the pdf. They’re talking about receiving microfilms of the birth record images. They talk also about receiving punched cards from “four reporting areas.” What these reporting areas might be could be important, but I suspect it would be the large cities. NYC, in one report I read recently, was broken down into separate reporting sites. They also talk about records that could be on the films that are “corrections” of previous records, so it seems that they may not have been coded at the state level for FEDERAL purposes. They also talk about states that report on “transcripts”.

        What seems obvious and important: The microfilms of these birth records exist in multiple places, just as previously reported. The “image” number (don’t know if that is synonymous with the BC#) matches from the original to any “corrections” that might appear later on the films. So, where are the original films sent to the “NVSD”?

        I can tell you that this most certainly, beyond doubt, is a keypunch coding manual. There are too many particulars in it that obots would know nothing about. Whether it’s truly from 1961, I don’t know, but it’s important to know WHAT THOSE PENCILLED CODES ARE ON THE HAWAIIAN BC’S and whether they were internal codes or whether they simply microfilmed their records after they processed THEIR copy for THEIR purposes and sent them to the feds where THEY coded them again for their own purposes. I remember Zullo talking about “census” stats and I remember wondering what the census had to do with it. Maybe they did a state census and correlated it to the birth stats. Who knows? Verna Lee might know. Corsi should release the tape of his conversation with her.

        • btw – the obots on obamaconspiracy are trying to say that the coding Zullo displayed in his powerpoint was from 1968, not 1961. they show wt they say is the 1968 version. they say it was “from the federal government” but they link to a non-profit called national bureau of economic research (NBER). I could not determine who was funding nber, but the CEO is associated with Obama’s economic council.

          • Yeah, I know. I saw that on Free Republic the other day. Figures that they will try to refute with sketchy stuff. That’s why I prefer to see the provenance. What you have provided comes direct from the CDC (as if we can totally trust them considering who runs the executive branch). What you’ve found proves that Hawaii did NOT do coding for the feds. At least not according to the policy and procedures and the pdf DOES point out the FOUR exceptions to the rule that coding and keying was done on the federal level from IMAGES of birth certificates. Those exceptions do NOT include Hawaii.


    At the end of that post, I’m keeping a list of scrubbed/disappeared/sealed/destroyed public records pertaining to Obama and/or his family.

  23. verna lee…(above)… if she did code barry’s… check how she writes her
    numbers? not sure they are hers ?… (might be changed also)
    1 into a 9 ?… on BC looks like…
    l into a 9 … look at the placement of the number being low?
    nearer the line.. also last ” l be a V ” the angle is ODD… is half missing?
    Other BC’s shown ? … are they the same coder? (I’m 2 tired 2 think)
    did we find … V Lee’s birthday & month yet? would enjoy it…

    • Change a one to a nine? That reminds me of a great movie. Did you ever see The Verdict, with Paul Newman? The whole case came down to a nurse who kept a photocopy of an admitting sheet for a patient. It was a malpractice lawsuit that hinged upon when the patient had eaten last, before anesthesia. Spoiler alert! (Number one changed to number nine.)

  24. Miri…I think i was 2 young… 1982 ? 30 years ago… with
    newman /c rampling… yes a great flick.. a alcoholic lawyer-salvage
    his career …bho?
    but are the #’s altered? …. or does that make any… sense?
    So on (ladyforest blog up above seo 7/26/12 …3:34pm) I was on &
    she shut down for a bit? last message 7/26/12 at 5:03 pm
    had info…2 read by d/c

    • Well, yeah. It’s an old movie but they show it all the time on cable. I didn’t see it when it was first out, either. 🙂


    List of some of Obama’s Czars and photos of them. Is out of date, but useful, anyway.

  26. FMD FBI files:

    Copy that link and then you can keep bumping the number up to read all of them. For example, is the second group. I haven’t checked to see how many groups there are. Haven’t read them all, either.

  27. Christian Life And Character Of The Civil Institutions Of The United States

    Developed in the official and historical annals of the Republic
    by B.F. Morris

    Click to access Christian_Life_and_Character_of_the_Civi_text.pdf

    That link has a lot of information about Indonesia and Sukarno, in particular. h/t What a Hoot

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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