How Did Obama Obtain a Social Security Number from Connecticut?

Whether your read this entire document or not is not the issue.  The issue is this-"Why does congress not pursue the illegality or legality of Obama's birth certificate or Social Security Number?"

Most obvious answer is that congress is complicit in Obama's illegality of holding office of the president of the United States of America.  Obviously, congress shares Obama's views for the transition of the United States into a socialist nation.

How Did Obama Obtain a Social Security Number from Connecticut?

A BLOGGER’S PERSPECTIVE

by Dwight Kehoe, blogging at TPATH

(Aug. 24, 2011) — Susan Daniels, a private investigator with almost 2 decades of experience has come to a very compelling conclusion – President Obama is using a Social Security number, issued to someone else.  This is, as is the forgery of public documents, a crime.

The SS number Obama is illegally using will not be posted here, but it can be found easily enough if one wishes to verify these facts.

From the age of 15 to 25, there is no record of Obama using any Social Security number.  While in school in Hawaii he may well have been able to get by without one.  However, once he moved to California and began university schooling in Occidental College, he would need to provide one.

Conveniently, all of his college records have been sealed, so there is no way of knowing, at least for now, what SS number he used at that time.  It is possible that the number he used may be at the heart of why he needed a new one.  Maybe he was issued a foreign student SS number along with monetary aid for schooling.  Not knowing the real reason, this of course is just the speculation of this writer, me.  At this point only Obama knows why.

What is known, is that the SS number Obama is now using, does not show up on any data base as being used by anyone, until 1986 even though Social Security records show it was issued in the last two weeks of March, 1977.  The number was issued to a person born in 1890 who apparently applied for it at age 87.

In 1935 when the Social Security System began, many people never applied because it was voluntary.  This person most likely needed to get one very late in life in order to get some benefit or other.  The number never shows up in data bases, so the person must have passed on very shortly after being assigned the number.  This would make this number, a perfect candidate for criminal activity relating to false ID’s.

Enter Bill Ayers, the communist, revolutionary, terrorist that Obama claimed was just some guy living in his neighborhood, who’s children went to school with his, even though Ayers’ children are a half generation older than Obama’s.  Later it was discovered that Bill Ayers, more than likely, wrote much of Obama’s book,’ Dreams From My Father’, as well as holding one of the first Obama fundraisers in his home.

Ayers has said, and proudly so, that a lot of what they did as terrorist bombers and murderers, was producing and falsifying identifications for their criminal activities.  The most effective method was through the use of fraudulent Social Security numbers.  A minimally used SS number issued to an 87 year old would some how seem to be a great candidate for that illegal SS number file.

Even though Ayers was just a “guy in the neighborhood,” if Obama needed to dump his legal SS number, for whatever reason, Professor  Ayers may have taken a break from indoctrinating our youth and reached into his false ID vault and issued him one.

A few final facts about Social Security numbers.
1. No SS number is ever reused, even after the death of the user.
2. SS numbers are issued by state location.  One must live in the state where it is issued.
3. Obama’s natural father, adopted father, mother or grand parents never lived in Connecticut.
4. When the SS number Obama is using was issued by Connecticut, Obama was 15 and living in Hawaii.

The question here is obvious.  Is there no one one in Congress or the media with the backbone to stand up and ask, – What the heck is going on in my country?

Of course, there may well be a very honest and reasonable explanation for this, the forged birth certificate and the very suspicious Selective Service documents.

Someone has “a lot of splainin’ to do.”  Will our Congress and media ever step up to the plate and demand it?

It’s looking very doubtful.

© 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.

Related:

A Different Perspective On…

Occidental College transcripts provides concrete evidence to annul Obama presidency

Interview:  Obama Administration Responsible for Legal Abortion in Kenya

Obama's Secracy and Deceit

Obama: Most Secretive Democratic Presidential Candidate Ever

Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign says his campaign will bring a new level of honesty and transparency to the White House. Obama proudly touts that he and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla, passed a law requiring more transparency via a public database of all federal spending.

But when it comes to offering the public documents about his own public and private activities, Obama’s record for openness gets an "F" grade.

During the heated Democratic primary, Obama complained of the Bush White House being “one of the most secretive administrations in our history” and chided Sen. Hillary Clinton for not releasing her White House schedules.

Ironically, Obama, just days away from possibly being elected president, continues to stonewall a growing chorus of information requests for documents about his legislative, personal health, education, financing, and background -- leaving many voters to cast ballots based on incomplete information.

And serious questions about his past continue to swirl as Election Day looms, fueled in part by his own campaign’s refusal to make relevant documents available.

And the press, usually banging at the door for candidates to make “full disclosure” is strangely quiet about Obama’s stonewalling.

A Newsmax survey of key Obama aspects of Obama’s public and private life continued to be shielded from the public.

Among the examples:

·                          Obama has released just one brief document detailing his personal health. McCain, on the other hands, released what he said was his complete medical file totaling more than 1500 pages. After criticism on the matter, last week the Obama campaign also released some routine lab-test results and electrocardiograms for Obama. All test results appeared normal, but many details about his health remain a mystery.

·                          Obama has refused to offer his official papers as a state legislator in Illinois, and has been unable to produce correspondence, such as letters from lobbyists and other correspondence from his days in the Illinois state senate. There are also no appointment calendars available of his official activities. “It could have been thrown out,” Obama said while on the campaign trail during the Democratic primary. “I haven’t been in the state Senate now for quite some time.”

·                          Obama has not released his client list as an attorney or his billing records. Obama has maintained that he only performed a few hours of legal work for a nonprofit organization with ties to Tony Rezko, the Chicago businessman convicted of fraud in June. But he has not released billing records that would prove this assertion.

·                          Obama won’t release his college records from Occidental College where he studied for two years before transferring to Columbia.

·                          Obama’s campaign refuses to give Columbia University, where he earned an undergraduate degree in political science, permission to release his transcripts. Such transcripts would list the courses Obama took, and his grades. President George W. Bush, and presidential contenders Al Gore and John Kerry, all released their college transcripts. (McCain has refused to release his Naval Academy transcript.)

·                          Obama’s college dissertation has simply disappeared from Columbia Universities archives. In July, in response to a flurry of requests to review Obama’s senior thesis at the Ivy League school, reportedly titled “Soviet Nuclear Disarmament,” Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt told NBC News “We do not have a copy of the course paper you requested and neither does Columbia University.”

·                          The senator has not agreed to the release of his application to the Illinois state bar, which would clear up intermittent allegations that his application to the bar may have been inaccurate.

·                          Jim Geraghty of the National Review has written extensively about Obama’s unwillingness to release records related to clients he represented while he was an attorney with the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill, and Gallard. Obama was required to list his clients during his years in the Illinois senate. “Obama listed every client of the firm,” Geraghty reported, making it impossible to discern which clients he represented.

·                          Obama has never released records from his time at Harvard Law School. 

·                          Obama has even made sure that his wife’s school records are sealed until after the election.

·                          Obama also has not disclosed the names of small donors giving $200 or less to his campaign. An exception to the finance-reporting laws exempts the campaign from reporting those who donate less than $200, but that law never envisioned the more than $300 million that has been raised by Obama in small amounts. The Republican National Committee has released its small donors, as well as McCain’s, on a public database.

On several occasions, the Obama campaign has offered to provide additional information to reporters if they have specific questions or issues. And in some cases, it has done so.

When Internet rumors began to fly that perhaps Obama was born outside the United States, for example, the campaign ultimately released images of a birth certificate that verified his birthplace as Honolulu, Hawaii. When that led to suggestions the birth certificate had been altered, the campaign again responded, allowing reporters to examine the actual birth certificate, complete with raised seal, although tampering is still a question.

Such instances of cooperation pale, however, compared to the many unanswered questions surrounding Obama, such as the financing of his education, and requests for the complete release of all donors to his campaign… and the list goes on.

Of course, candidates are often reticent to disclose any information that opposition researchers could use against them.

But Politico.com notes that the Obama’s failure to share documents is “part of his campaign’s broader pattern of rarely volunteering information or documents about the candidate, even when relatively innocuous.”  So the obvious question must be “why”?

The hue and cry from the media for disclosure usually forces candidates to release sought after documents. But the press has largely acquiesced to Obama’s stonewalling.

Does anyone really think for a moment that Obama will be more forthcoming or honest with the American people when he is President, with a record like above??