Were Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro’s passport applications really destroyed?

NO EVIDENCE HAS SURFACED OF THE ALLEGED “DESTRUCTION” OF PASSPORT RECORDS

by Sharon Rondeau

The Department of Justice was created in 1870 but did not assume law enforcement activities until after the passage of the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887

(Nov. 21, 2010) — The Post & Email has been investigating the statement of Mr. Jonathan M. Rolbin of the U.S. State Department to Mr. Christopher Strunk in a July 29, 2010 letter which explained why some of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro’s passport applications were allegedly not released as a result of his Freedom of Information Act request.

In regard to FOIA requests, the U.S. Department of Justice website states:

Enacted in 1966, and taking effect on July 5, 1967, the Freedom of Information Act provides that any person has a right, enforceable in court, to obtain access to federal agency records, except to the extent that such records (or portions of them) are protected from public disclosure by one of nine exemptions or by one of three special law enforcement record exclusions. The FOIA thus established a statutory right of public access to Executive Branch information in the federal government.

Jonathan Rolbin appears to have been an attorney practicing in California prior to joining the Obama regime.

As stated in our report of November 2, The Post & Email contacted the GSA, which denied ever having given a directive to destroy passport records.  In August, Mr. William Richardson had investigated Rolbin’s claim and reported that the GSA had been “taken by surprise” and was in the process of contacting its attorneys about the matter.

Strunk claims that the GSA gave no such directive in a Supplemental Brief filed on August 18, 2010 sent to Mr. Brigham Bowen at the U.S. Department of Justice, the same attorney who denied Mr. Kenneth Allen the records on Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Obama, which Allen had requested in February 2009.

As suggested by the GSA, The Post & Email contacted Mr. Jay Olin at NARA on September 18 about the destruction of records but has received no response at all after two months.

Therefore, the following letter has been sent to Mr. Jonathan M. Rolbin at the State Department as a Freedom of Information Request:

November 21, 2010

Mr. Jonathan M. Rolbin, Director
Office of Legal Affairs and Law Enforcement Liaison
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Passport Services
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Mr. Rolbin:

RE: YOUR LETTER TO MR. CHRISTOPHER STRUNK DATED JULY 29, 2010
PASSPORT APPLICATIONS OF STANLEY ANN DUNHAM OBAMA SOETORO

Like many people, I have been investigating the background and eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama for the presidency for more than two years. Because he has refused to disclose much of his background, including an original birth certificate, school records, medical history, family photographs, and college transcripts, and there is much circumstantial evidence which contradicts his given birth story, I was intrigued at the passport applications which the State Department released to Mr. Strunk as well as the documents which were either withheld or unavailable.

In the above-referenced letter which bears your signature, a copy of which is enclosed, you stated, “Many passport applications and other non-vital records from that period were destroyed during the 1980s in accordance with guidance from the General Services Administration.”

Given that statement, I wrote to the General Services Administration and received the enclosed response which contradicts your claim that the GSA provided any “guidance” for passport applications from any era to be destroyed.

As you can see, the GSA employee advised me to write to Mr. Jay Olin of the National Archives and Records Administration, which I did on September 18, 2010. In violation of the Freedom of Information Act law, Mr. Olin has failed to provide me any response whatsoever.

It therefore appears that there is no documentation available to support your statement that passport applications from the early 1960s or any other time were ordered “destroyed” by any governmental or non-governmental department, unless you yourself can provide such.

I am therefore making a Freedom of Information Act request to you for the appropriate documentation which authorized the destruction of the aforementioned records. As I am sure you are aware, The National Archives website states that there is a very formal process in place to authorize the destruction of any records, so if it happened, there must be documentation of it.

It is interesting that the records on Ms. Dunham Obama Soetoro which appear to be unavailable for public scrutiny are those from the time when her son, Barack Hussein Obama, was allegedly born, and also that no U.S. hospital claims to be his birthplace. Are the records unavailable because Ms. Soetoro was out of the country in 1961 and Obama was therefore born in a foreign country, contrary to his story, and which could render him ineligible for the presidency? Your letter to Mr. Strunk does not state that there were no passport applications made by Ms. Soetoro before 1965 but rather suggests that they existed but were destroyed. To me, that means that Ms. Soetoro applied for a passport for travel abroad before 1965, and as in later records, her destination, expected length of stay, and reason for travel would have had to have been provided.

Given the spontaneous claim by members of the Kenyan Parliament last March that Obama was born in Kenya and that the United States has a “foreigner” as president, it would seem of paramount importance for someone to locate a microfiche or microfilm of Ms. Soetoro’s applications so as to determine where she was when her son was born.  This would seem to be a matter of grave national security which I would expect the State Department to take very seriously.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Very truly yours,

Sharon Rondeau

We will report if and when a response is received from Mr. Rolbin.

So who is lying, and who is telling the truth?

27 Responses to "Were Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro’s passport applications really destroyed?"

  1. John   Thursday, December 2, 2010 at 1:54 PM

    Do yourselves a favor and make sure you and all of your friends vote in 11-2012. It is the most powerful act you can do to utterly stop the progression of socialism/communism in its tracks. The people who have fallen for this madness of socialism are utterly uneducated and without any semblance of understanding of history and the forces at play for the past 2000 years. Socialism is spiritually of the anti-christ. For Marx himself hated Jesus and the work of religion and the positive aspects it has done for the past 2000 years. There is much to be considered with this in mind and the Universities throughout the world have chosen a position in emnity with religion and the teachings of Jesus. You’ll find that the state arrogated to itself the credibility of science to shore up its credibility since the idea of Potifex Maximus was assigned to the Papacy and revoked from the emperors of Europe. The spirit of the anti-christ is alive and well. My opinion on this is very well rooted in my studies of history and civilizational development for the past 3000 years or so. Obama is not only not the Messiah he is neither Luke Skywalker where he thinks the force is with him. He is fantasizing about who he is and what his mission should be.

  2. Texoma   Thursday, November 25, 2010 at 11:48 PM

    From our Declaration of Independence:
    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

    Obama’s occupancy of the Presidency is a usurpation. It would not be unconstitutional. It would be our right and our duty.

  3. Karen   Wednesday, November 24, 2010 at 10:01 AM

    Most likely — and hopefully — Condi was advising Obama re: how to deal with the Russians. Condi Rice is an expert on the Soviet Union/Russia. . .and she speaks fluent Russian. Years ago, she even managed to put Breznev in his place. ;-)

  4. Daniel Cutulla   Wednesday, November 24, 2010 at 5:24 AM

    > there is not further reason to remain in the Union until such time Soebarkah is put on trial

    That is exactly what the enemies of the USA want – push the states toward leaving the Union. You know “divide et impera” – “divide and conquer”?
    What more could America’s enemies want than the Union breaking apart, turning one strong country into 50 weak countries and undermining our identity as Americans?

    I say NO to ideas that threaten the Union. They’re unconstitutional, dangerous and, I dare say, treason.

  5. Vic Hern   Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 5:06 PM

    We can speculate about Rice meeting Obama all day, and of course we must…..

    1) Social call, since she appeared to support his candidacy? I doubt it.

    2) More details about the investigation results? 50-50 I’d guess.

    3) A personal message of possible good or bad news relating to the incident? Possibly
    with a message of personal support.

    4) To tell him she knows to whole story and others do also, and to shape up or else,
    or better change your strategy or you are finished, as in a threat or an offer he can’t
    refuse from some third interested/informed party? 50-50 I’d say.

  6. Chris Strunk   Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 4:55 PM

    The Blue bloods’ Step-in Fetch-it radical Muslim not only is implementing Shariah Law but has fundamentally transformed the Federal relationship with each state of the several states to such a degree there is not further reason to remain in the Union until such time Soebarkah is put on trial along with the traitors who put him in office.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/42235272/NOM-for-FAC-w-Summons-and-FIRST-AMENDED-COMPLAINT-Strunk-v-Paterson-Et-Al-w-Exhibits-NYS-29642-08

    25. That Defendant ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI, (Defendant Brzezinski) individually with his place of business at Columbia University in the City of New York School of Foreign Affairs 2960 Broadway New York, NY 10027-6902, is both a blood member of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) on “the right” and of the Scottish Rite Freemason Grand Lodge of Philadelphia on “the left” working for the Jesuits against the sovereign interest of the USA;
    26. Defendant Brzezinski‘s world outlook and agenda by evidence of writings acts for the Society of Jesus that eclipses all other influences on SOEBARKAH, McCain and Calero.
    27. That Defendant Brzezinski has managed a crucial role for the Vatican State as a member of the SMOM and as a Freemason of the Philadelphia Grand Lodge to create global regionalism that subsumes national sovereignty and as Former National Security Adviser to President Carter expressed his view of regionalism at Mikhail Gorbachev’s October 1995 State of the World Forum, that quote:
    “We cannot leap into world government in one quick step…The precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization.”
    28. That Defendant Brzezinski advised the SOEBARKAH and McCain campaigns, and used his sons, Mark who was a member of the advisors in the SOEBARKAH Campaign and Ian who was an advisor on the McCain Campaign, all done in exchange for his sons’ government employment and furtherance of the enterprise corruption.

  7. SapphireSunday   Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 2:40 PM

    The pre-1965 paper application exists, unless that’s one of the items “sanitized” when Obama’s passport file was broken into in March 2008, the same time that the FactCheck photos of the alleged COLB were taken.

    Recently, Condoleeza Rice, who was Sec. of State when the investigation into that breach took place, went to the WH to personally meet with Obama. Why?

    She knows everything that the investigation revealed, in that very heavily redacted report. But a reporter’s anonymous source did say that the breach, carried out by employees of John O. Brennan, now of Obama’s administration, was intended to sanitize “embarrassing” information.

    Perhaps the guy who wrote that memo about the records was putting forth a plausible story to “explain” the disappearance, anything other than to tell the truth–that perhaps they were destroyed via the same method Sandy Berger used to extract and destroy documents from the National Archives.

    The microfilms are another story. They weren’t accessible to Brennan’s employees. I would surely love to know why Condoleeza Rice met with Obama.

  8. Bob1943   Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 9:02 AM

    Thanks Birdy & MRR,

    I don’t suppose a FOIA request would suffice to find out what the discussion with the Justices was all about?

    Looking at what has occurred with this issue since that meeting really makes me want to know what was said….and why Alito refused to attend.

  9. MRR   Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 1:27 AM

    Bob, Yes there was such a meeting. I saw pictures on the internet showing the SCJs that agreed to the meeting in a room and another where they were walking down a hall. I believe it was Samuel Alito who would not attend the meeting.

  10. old1   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 11:15 PM

    If we can’t arrest this usurper it’s time to open our eyes and see that a Communist coup took place in 2008. Hopefully we put a stop to it this month but they are World wide and have very deep pockets, we won the last battle but the war is still in full swing. What’s next? Will this foreign dictator refuse to act on the decision from our SCOTUS & continue to evade Constitutional Law?

  11. Papoose   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 7:59 PM

    bogus potus strikes again.

    L I A R S

  12. Mike   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 6:39 PM

    Some more on Mr. Rolbin….

    http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/07/doj-civil-division-honors-staffers/

    “He is recognized for his exemplary role in defending the Department of State in the Castelano v. Clinton class action.”

    What was Castelano v. Cinton about…..

    http://www.rushpassport.com/blog/tag/castelano-vs-clinton/

    “The case, known as Castellano vs. Clinton, came about as a response to the claims of several people, who allege that there are discrepancies in how the passport expediting officials reviewed the passport applications of those who were born with midwives.

  13. Mike   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 6:27 PM

    Mr. Rolbin would appear to be an inner circle insider…not a simple bureaucrat.

    http://peacecorpsconnect.typepad.com/communitynews/2010/02/romania-jonathan-rolbin.html

    Attorney general Eric Holder and assistant attorney general Tony West recently awarded Jonathan Rolbin (06-08) with a special commendation for his work with representing the Department of State in litigation. Rolbin worked in private law practice for 12 years before joining the Peace Corps. Upon returning from his service, he became a Department of Justice trial attorney in the Office of Immigration Litigation. Rolbin just recently joined the State Department, where he works as the director of legal affairs and law enforcement liaison in the Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services.

  14. Paul   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 4:37 PM

    Those who are complicit have nothing to loose and therefore have a wide berth in what they believe they can do to hide soetoro’s illegal alien status. This is not to say that there are those in positions in the federal government with access to the documents/records that would convict soetoro of multiple criminal charges (including treason). We need one of them to come forward (deep throat 2). Otherwise, this “problem” will be resolved in another manner that doesn’t involve soetoro’s citizenship status.

  15. Kingskid   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 2:33 PM

    Sharon, after working for the fed gov’t for 32 years, I can tell you from my own experience that the only way you will get anywhere is to twist their arms as high up their backs as possible. You do this by elevating the issue as high up as you can go. I suggest you start with the Inspectors General at NARA, GSA, and if there is a Chief Inspector General. Then, you may want to petition whatever Congressional committees (current and incoming to build an audit trail) that’d be appropriate, and I can think of many that should be informed of your efforts and the stonewalling you are getting. Go after them with everything you’ve got, let them know you are on their tail and will elevate and make as much noise as you can until they provide what is releasable under FOIA. The only thing fed bureaucrats understand is persistence and possible embarrassment by those who can make life unpleasant for them. Go for the jugular!

  16. Birdy   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 1:14 PM

    There was a private meeting, not a secret meeting. It was Justice Alito who did not attend the meeting. This meeting was just before the court was to decide on a request for a Writ of Certiorari on a case about Obama’s eligibility. It was not appropriate and should never have happened.

    It’s very interesting that Justice Alito recently announced that he will no longer be attending Obama’s State Of the Union speeches. Justice Alito is also the Justice who mouthed “that’s not true” during Obama’s last State Of the Union speech.

  17. Birdy   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 1:04 PM

    I found a US State Department website today titled “Obtain Copies of Passport Records” that states that passport records are maintained from 1925 to the present (http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/npic/npic_872.html)

    The following is from the website:

    There are two options for obtaining copies of your passport records:

    1. Passport Records for Issuances 1925 – Present
    1. Requesting Your Own Record
    Passport Services maintains United States passport records for passports issued from 1925 to the present. These records normally consist of applications for United States passports and supporting evidence of United States citizenship, and are protected by the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 USC 552(a)). Passport records do not include evidence of travel such as entrance/exit stamps, visas, residence permits, etc., since this information is entered into the passport book after it is issued.
    etc. etc. etc.

    So, if I applied for a passport in 1961 and I make the request today to get a copy of that application, then this site says I should be able to do so.

    It is a blatant lie to imply that they could not find the earlier SAD applications because they may have been destroyed on GSA orders. This is an obvious cover-up by the Obama administration.

    Perhaps they can not find them because Lt. Quarles Harris had them destroyed on Obama’s orders. Lt. Quarles Harris was killed shortly after his intrusion into the passport records was made public. As they say, dead men tell no tales.

  18. kittycat77   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 12:21 PM

    Most everything about BO’s life is a facade. What about the new article at WND about old newspaper articles from 1990 saying that BO went to Southeast Asia when he was 2? This would make the request for information of different years, or maybe you have requested earlier years for Ann Dunham’s passport.

  19. Tom   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 11:54 AM

    The “paper” records, documenting SA Dunham’s travels for the period in question, exist and were never “destroyed”. Keep ’em weaving their web

  20. Bob1939   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 11:45 AM

    I truly believe that you’ve nailed it ! That is precisely what is happening, and I’m sure many other Americans are coming to that realization too.

  21. A pen   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 11:06 AM

    It ought to be obvious the stalling is intended to secure this president to the end of his term. Anything less would require the public be informed they have been duped intentionally. The real problem they all worry about isn’t the public reaction but the legal action that would hold the entire government responsible for the constitutional breach, the suffering of socialists unconstitutional proceedings and the treachery of their opening the borders and aiding our enemies. Given that, even after the departing of the fraudulent POTUS there will be every attempt made to obfuscate the legal process of uncovering the truth and prosecution the fraud. What we are up against is government cabal. While some are guilty of treason there are many just complicit in the fraud and some just powerless to act who had better have proof they tried somehow to inform an authority. What a filthy mess. Heads must roll.

  22. bill   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 10:26 AM

    Here is a little freedom of information html file that you can download and attach to emails to friends and neighbors if you should have a mind:
    http://www.4shared.com/document/n06iwPvp/NoticeOfServicejpg.html

  23. Romo Cop   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 10:07 AM

    Exxxactly. This has to be the case. There is no way they would destroy (legally) records without a backup, especially since it supposedly happened when she was alive, as Bill states.

    GOOD, smart work. I hope it is fruitful. This COULD be the smoking gun …

    or the beginning of the “embarrassment” — either one is cool with me. Even if he never gets ousted (he won’t) I want irrefutable evidence that the man was a deceiver or at the very least, someone who hid many things and lied about others …

  24. Tim   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 9:44 AM

    This all goes back to Ronald Reagan’s story about his years in some military office. He has located a room full of some unnecessary old documents and suggested to his supervisor to make this room usable for more important purposes by simply disposing of these documents. His supervisor said that it was a brilliant idea but he needs to make copies of all documents he was disposing of… This is the way the government operates, then and now. It’s highly unlikely that the records were completely destroyed.

  25. Bill Gerard   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 8:06 AM

    I like where you specifically asked for a microfiche or microfilm copy of her applications. They have been playing a word game saying that the paper records were destroyed. That may be true, but by law before any paper records were destroyed a microfiche or microfilm copy had to have been made. If they come back and say there are no microfilm or microfiche copies, they are lying. After all, she was still alive in 1985. Those were documents that she still had a legal interest in. By law, they could not have destroyed them without her consent.
    ——————
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: I picked that up from the National Archives website. They have very strict rules about destruction of records, and it appears that the normal procedure is to back up everything before following through with any approved-in-writing destruction process.

  26. Bob1943   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 7:44 AM

    Thank you Sharon……I like the way your wording is so clear it will be very hard for them to say, after a few months probably, “we didn’t understand the request”.

    About the SCOTUS decision on the Kerchner case due tomorrow, I just remembered the meeting that was said to have occurred between all but one SC Justice and Obama just before he was sworn in. Sometimes I wonder if the meeting was to gain assurance from the SC that they would never make the decision they should make tomorrow to accept Commander Kerchner’s case. Was there really a secret meeting between the SC members and Obama just prior to his being sworn in?

  27. Tim   Monday, November 22, 2010 at 12:17 AM

    No foreign government seems to be willing to sign any serious agreement with the US. Perhaps, they are concerned about the eligibility of the US president? This is yet another reason for expeditious clarification of the eligibility issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.