Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent Social Security Number. “xxx-xx-4425” is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number.

For Immediate Release:  – 12/07/2011

For Further Information Contact:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire

555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12

Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

Cell (610) 662-3005

(610) 825-3134

(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]

Fax (610) 834-7659


Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent

Social Security Number “xxx-xx-4425”

is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number

Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States Due to His Lack of U.S. Natural Born Status

(Lafayette Hill, PA – 12/07/11) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama on August 21, 2008 challenging Obama’s lack of “Constitutionally Eligibility” to serve as President of the United States stated that Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not using a fraudulent or stolen Social Security Number.  Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was legally assigned Social Security Number xxx-xx-4425.  Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not Constitutionally Eligible to serve as President of the United States due to his lack of being a “Natural Born” United States Citizens as a result of him being born in Kenya and his mother not being old enough to confer Natural Born citizenship status upon him and his Adoption / Acknowledgment by Lolo Soetoro in the Country of Indonesia, making Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro an Indonesian Citizen.

Mr. Berg stated, “I am pursuing the eligibility questions regarding Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro.  My goal is to pursue the issue in each and every state in the United States.”

Mr. Berg continues, “I am repeatedly contacted about Obama’s use of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 and the word on the Internet that the number in use by Obama was originally assigned to Jean Paul Ludwig born in 1890 in France, who is now deceased.  All over the Internet there are articles and posts that Obama stole Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number and Obama is using Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number fraudulently.  There are also posts all over the Internet that Obama is using a deceased person’s Social Security number.  This is NOT true.  Mr. Berg continues, “when false information is put out on the Internet and filed in our Court’s, it takes away from the factual issue that Obama is not Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States.  False information regarding the eligibility of Obama makes the question into the lack of Constitutional eligibility of Obama serving as our President a laughing stock.”

The Social Security death index is located on the Web at http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi.  The Social Security death index has the death records, along with Social Security number, of every person in the United States ever assigned a Social Security number who has died.

A simple search of the name “Jean Paul Ludwig” born in 1890 returns no results. See the print-screen attached hereto.  A simple search of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 returns no results for a death of any individual using that number.  A simple search for “Jean Ludwig” returns several deaths, but only one in that name born in 1890, and as can be seen, the Social Security number of this particular Jean Ludwig does not match, nor is it similar to Obama’s Social Security number xxx-xx-4425. See the copy attached hereto:

Berg continued, “Simple searches show that the information pertaining to Obama’s Social Security number being previously assigned and that Obama is using a fraudulent Social Security number is false information and does nothing more than discredit the true questions into Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro’s Constitutional Eligibility to serve as our President of the United States.”

Questions have also been raised regarding the fact Obama’s Social Security number was issued out of Connecticut instead of Hawaii and that Obama never resided in Connecticut.  The state and/or office that issued a Social Security number and/or card is not always the same as where the person the number being assigned to resides.

A brief look at the history of Social Security numbers available through Social Security at http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/firstcard.html shows that the State who issues a Social Security number does not have to be and may not be the state in which the person resides.

The “First” Social Security Number (SSN)

Issued Through Local Post Offices

Since the Social Security Board did not have a network of field offices in late 1936, it contracted with the U.S. Postal Service to distribute and assign the first batch of Social Security numbers through its 45,000 local post offices around the country. Of these 45,000 post offices, 1,074 were also designated as “typing centers” where the cards themselves were prepared. The procedure for issuing the first SSNs were that the SS-4 application forms were to be distributed by the post offices to employers beginning Monday, November 16, 1936. These forms asked the employers to indicate how many employees they had at their place of business. Using the data from the SS-4 forms, the post offices then supplied an SS-5 form for each employee and these forms (on which the assignment of an SSN was based) were to be distributed by the post offices beginning Tuesday, November 24, 1936. The completed SS-5 forms were returned to the post office where an SSN would be assigned and a card typed with the name and SSN. This step could happen on one of several ways. The person could return the card in person and wait while the “typing center” prepared their card, or they could hand the form to their local letter carrier, or they could put it in the mail. Once the SSN was assigned and the card typed, the local letter carrier then returned the card to the place of business as a piece of regular mail. The record of the SSN assignment was sent to Social Security headquarters in Baltimore, Maryland, where the master file of SSNs would be kept.

So the first card was issued, sometime in mid-November, 1936, somewhere in one of 1,074 post offices to someone whose identity and SSN are unknown. In theory, the first card should have been issued on November 24th, but there have been reports of cards showing earlier dates. It is not clear whether the cards with earlier dates were actually issued on that day or whether some post offices predated some of their cards. If the 45,000 local post offices followed their procedures, no cards could have been issued before November 16th, and none should have been issued before November 24th. But here again, there is always the possibility that some local post offices failed to follow their instructions. The best we can say with certainty is that the first SSN was issued sometime in mid-November 1936. In any case, on whatever day the first card was issued, hundreds of thousands of SSNs were probably issued on that same day, so many people had Social Security cards issued on the very first day they became available.

The First Official SSN

Once the SSN records were received in Baltimore they were grouped in blocks of 1,000 and the master records were created. On December 1, 1936 the first block of 1,000 records were assembled and were ready to start their way through the nine-step process that would result in the creation of a permanent master record and the establishment of an earnings record for the individual. When this first stack was ready, Joe Fay, head of the Division of Accounting Operations in the Candler Building, walked over to the stack, pulled off the top record, and declared it to be the official first Social Security record. (This was the first point in the process where there was enough control to designate an official first card–it would have been impossible to try and identify the first card typed in one of the 1,074 typing centers around the country.) This particular record, (055-09-0001) belonged to John D. Sweeney, Jr., age 23, of New Rochelle, New York. The next day, newspapers around the country announced that Sweeney had been issued the first SSN. It would be more accurate to say that the first Social Security record was established for John David Sweeney, but since master records were invisible to the public and the Social Security card was a very visible token of the program, the newspapers overlooked the nuance. And so John David Sweeney, Jr. is the closest thing we have to the first person to have received a Social Security card–although his status is more symbolic than actual.

So now that I have given a bit of history, how in the world could someone be issued a SSN in 1890, when the first batch of social security numbers were NOT issued until 1936?
According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

(V)=(Verified) Report verified with a family member or someone acting on behalf of a family member.  (P)=(Proof) Death Certificate Observed.

You can now order the SS-5 Form for deceased individuals directly from the Social Security Administration online at https://secure.ssa.gov/apps9/eFOIA-FEWeb/internet/main.jsp.

Information from http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/ssn/geocard.html

The Social Security number is a nine-digit number in the format “AAA-GG-SSSS”. The number is divided into three parts. The Area Number, the first three digits, is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1973, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the office code in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1973, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant’s mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, neither prior to 1973, nor since.

Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving south and westward, so that people on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality are exhausted, new areas from the pool are assigned, so some states have noncontiguous groups of numbers.\

Complete list of area number groups from the Social Security Administration

The middle two digits are the group number. The group numbers range from 01 to 99. However, they are not assigned in consecutive order. For administrative reasons, group numbers are issued in the following order:

  1. ODD numbers from 01 through 09
  2. EVEN numbers from 10 through 98
  3. EVEN numbers from 02 through 08
  4. ODD numbers from 11 through 99

As an example, group number 98 will be issued before 11.

  • The last four digits are serial numbers. They represent a straight numerical sequence of digits from 0001-9999 within the group.

Berg continued, “Soetoro/Obama’s social security number was NOT stolen from an individual born in 1890 who is now dead.  Attached is a screen shot from the social security death index, running Soetoro/Obama’s social security number.  If in fact, Obama was using a stolen number from a man born in 1890, who died, it would be showing in the Social Security Death Index.  As you can see from the attached picture, no death’s are returned using Obama’s number.  Anyone can check the Social Security Death Index (SSDI) by going to http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/.

Berg continued, “The Social Security office in the state of Maryland issues Social Security numbers and cards for people residing all over the United States.  Just like in the 70′s, local Social Security offices were and continue to be back-logged, thus Maryland issues the numbers and cards as do other less busy Social Security offices.  The state that issued the SSN number and card is not always and does not mean the person had to reside in that state.

Berg continued, “The Birth Certificate issued by Obama on national Television, is believed to be a forgery – it is NOT a long form Birth Certificate.  Even if Obama could produce a long form Birth Certificate, which is highly doubted, it fails to answer the questions into Obama’s adoption and/or birth acknowledgment in Indonesia.”

Berg said, “I have received many calls claiming Obama could not have lost his U.S. citizenship by his mother’s acts of expatriation.  In part this is true, however, the Nationality Act of 1940, revised 1952, Section 318(a) states, “A former citizen of the United States expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents and who has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents may be naturalized upon filing a petition for naturalization before reaching age of Twenty-Five [25] years and upon compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws with the following exceptions:  (b) No former citizen of the United States, expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents shall be obliged to comply with the requirements of the immigration laws, if he has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents, and if he has come or shall come to the United States before reaching the age of Twenty-Five [25] years.  (c) After his naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status as if he had not been expatriated.”

Berg continues, “Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act, as you are swearing allegiance to another Country.  Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, which is why he had to stop in Indonesia first.  Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia.  Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan.  Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams From My Father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother.  But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro.  In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA [Freedom of Information] request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama.”

Berg said, “Despite the above however, Indonesia required Obama/Soetoro to do a bit more upon his 18th birthday.  In fact the Indonesian law gives until the age of Twenty-One [21].  Soetoro/Obama would have had to sign an Affidavit relinquishing his Indonesian citizenship and said Affidavit had to be sent to the Indonesian Government before reclaiming any U.S. citizenship he may have once held.

When it comes to the citizenship of individuals in other countries, we are prevented from interfering, Hague Convention 1930. During the late 60′s all the way up until 2006 Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship.  In 2006, Indonesia changed their laws to permit dual citizenship; however, Indonesia has had its battles with enforcing their new law permitting dual citizenship.

From the legal research we have done, it appears that Barry Soetoro [a/k/a Barack Obama] became an Indonesian citizen.  When Soetoro/Obama was approximately four [4] years old his parents divorced and thereafter, Soetoro/Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia.  Evidence points to the fact that Lolo Soetoro either signed a government form legally ‘acknowledging’ Soetoro/Obama as his son or ‘adopted’ Soetoro, either of which changed any citizenship status Soetoro/Obama had to a “natural” citizen of Indonesia.

At the time Barry Soetoro was in Indonesia, all Indonesian students were required to carry government identity cards or Karty Tanda Pendudaks, as well as family card identification called a Kartu Keluarga.  The Kartu Keluarga is a family card which bears the legal names and citizenship status of all family members.

Soetoro/Obama was registered in a public school as an Indonesian citizen by the name of Barry Soetoro and his father was listed as Lolo Soetoro, M.A according to the Indonesian school records.  Indonesia did not allow foreign students to attend their public schools in the late 1960’s or 1970’s, and any time a child was registered for a public school, the child’s name and citizenship status were verified through the Indonesian Government. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Chapter 13, Law No. 62 of 1958 (all citizens of Indonesia have a right to education).  There was no way for Soetoro/Obama to have attended school in Jakarta, Indonesia legally unless he was an Indonesian citizen, as Indonesia was under tight rule and was a Police State. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Law No. 62 of 1958.  These facts indicate that Obama/Soetoro is an Indonesian citizen, and therefore he is not eligible to be President of the United States.

Under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son, it deems the son, in this case Soetoro/Obama, an Indonesian State citizen. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 62 of 1958 concerning Immigration Affairs and Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata) (KUHPer) (Burgerlijk Wetboek voor Indonesie).

Furthermore, under the Indonesian Adoption Law, once an Indonesian citizen adopts a child, the adoption severs the child’s relationship to the birth parents, and the adopted child is given the same status as a natural child and the child takes the name of his step-father, in this case, Soetoro. See Indonesian Constitution, Article 2.

The Indonesian citizenship law was designed to prevent apatride (stateless) or bipatride (dual) citizenship.  Indonesian regulations recognized neither apatride nor bipatride (stateless or dual) citizenship.  Since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship; neither did the United States (since the United States only permitted dual citizenship when ‘both’ countries agree); and since Obama/Soetoro was a “natural” citizen of Indonesia, the United States would not step in or interfere with the laws of Indonesia. Hague Convention of 1930.”

As a result of Soetoro/Obama’s Indonesian ‘natural’ citizenship status, Soetoro/Obama could never regain U.S. ‘natural born’ status, if he in fact he ever held such, which we doubt.  Soetoro/Obama could have only become ‘naturalized’ if the proper paperwork were filed with the U.S. State Department, after going through U.S. Immigration upon his return to the United States; in which case, Soetoro/Obama would have received a Certification of Citizenship indicating ‘naturalized’.

Berg continued, “Regardless, we have been unable to locate any records indicating that Soetoro/Obama attempted to and/or actually did take the proper steps through the State Department in order to be here in our Country legally”.

Further, there is no evidence that Soetoro/Obama ever ‘legally’ changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama – therefore his legal name is still ‘Barry Soetoro’.

Donations are needed ASAP and very appreciated

to help cover our expenses to continue to Defend “our” Constitution

I am requesting everyone to please contribute $2.12, $20.12, $201.20, $2,012.00 or $20,120.00

so we can expose Soetoro/Obama in 2012 for the fraud he is in each and every State !

You may donate on our web site:  obamacrimes.com

For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:


Obama Press Release 12 07 11

36 Responses to “Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent Social Security Number. “xxx-xx-4425” is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number.”

  1. Dear Mr. Berg, thank you for your hard work on this. I still have some doubts about your reporting on this. It has been verified multiple times that there is NO match been the given SSN shown on Obama’s tax returns and his name according to E-verify. I presume that would be regarded as a definitive source since employers are expected to use it to check the SSN of employment applicants.

    Also, yours is not the only account of how SSN’s were recorded and administered. Yours is the first to use 1973 or so as a cutoff point.

    Moreover, efforts to get his SS-5 have been stonewalled repeatedly. We did get Stanley Dunham’s SS-5 and it has quite a few irregularities on it.

    Also, all those deceased folks in Hawaii with CT SSN’s could easily have been retirees from CT. You didn’t show their original addresses.

    This is from the ..geocard.html link.

    “Since 1972, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card.”

    This begs the question. His application would have been of Connecticut origin since assignment was based on the zip code on the application.

    So, Mr. Berg, while you have done a yeoman’s job in providing more information to consider in this debate, I’m not sure it hit the mark.

    • 4Zoltan says:

      Cort – The President’s SSN has been plastered over the internet for the last three years, it is probably flagged in the SSA system. That’s why e-verify shows that result. It is also possible that by now he has been assigned a new number

      The …geocard.html link also says this:

      “Note: One should not make too much of the “geographical code.” It is not meant to be any kind of useable geographical information.”

      The first three digits of a zip code indicate the state. In 1977, the President was living at his grandparents house in Honolulu. The zip code was 96814. The digits 968 indicate this is the state of Hawaii. The digits 068 would indicate this is Connecticut.

      Since 1972 all SSNs were assigned and issued from Baltimore, Maryland. So one explanation is that a clerk/typist transcribing the SS-5 card may have keyed in 06814 and a SSN with a Connecticut prefex was assigned to it.

      • Actually this transcribing error explanation concocted to protect the chosen one was debunked a long time ago.


        Listen from 51:28 – 54:34

        • 4Zoltan says:

          Hi Mark – I listened to the entire interview with Susan Daniels and found several errors (lies?) in her responses.

          1.) She says that one of the reasons she looked into the President’s SSN was the “pseudo-urgency” of the TARP Bill. Since the TARP Bill was passed under President Bush it could not have been a reason to search for then-Senator Obama’s SSN.

          2.) She asked you “why would his sister, his half-sister, have a Hawaiian Birth Certificate [she meant SSN]“. A professional investigator with 18 years experience would know that Maya Soetoro did not move to Hawaii until 1988 and probably obtained her SSN at a much later date than President Obama. The fact that Maya’s SSN has a Hawaiian prefix actually increases the likihood that the President’s SSN is the result of a clerical error (more about that later).

          3.) She mentions that President Obama did not start to use his SSN until 1986. A professional investigator would know that people’s entries into public databases is usually the results of a major credit purchase, condo, house or car. But using the 1986 makes it sound like this is something unusual.

          4.) After you mentioned the SSA’s “geographic code” disclaimer, she says, “what you just read is an outright lie and was added to the Social Security site. Because I printed everything off their site two years ago and none of that was there.” This is completely false, the wayback machine website shows that archived versions of the Social Security site had this same note back in 2001. A professional investigator would have been able to do the basic research necessary to find this out.

          5.) In the discussion the 1890 DOB, she says, “That is, I believe, the year of the person who originally got it.” and “It means something, it definitely means something.” In an affidavit that she filed in Barnett v. Obama, she listed her database listing for President Obama. On the SSN Verifier Page it shows three DOBs (1890, 08/04/1961, 04/08/1961), but her database listings show four DOBs (1890, 1990, 08/04/1961, 04/08/1961). Is the Verifier Page in error? So what is the 1990 DOB, “it means something”, is it the date of birth of the person whose SSN is he is using. In 1977 did he get a SSN for someone born in 1990? A professional investigator would have mentioned this 1990 date especially if it is in their own affidavit.

          6.) Now to the zip code issue. Ms Daniels says that the 96814 is an APO and therefore could not be a typo. But this completely ignores the fact that the Social Security Administration was not issuing a SSN to a particular address but to a particular state. By that I mean that they would only be interested in the first three digits of the zip code. Here is an IRS document that illustrates this fact:


          Notice how zip codes are formatted:

          Hawaii – 967nn, 968nn
          Connecticut – 060nn through 069nn

          The last two digits are ignored when using zip codes to determine a state. So imagine in 1977, a clerk/typist types a 0 instead of a 9. The transcribed form is then assigned a SSN, the system would look at the 068 and assign a SSN with a Connecticut prefix.

          • Phil says:

            Don’t forget, high school and college tracks your transcripts by SSN, in order to attend and graduate you must have a SSN. Obama graduated high school in or around 1979, thus he had to have and use his SSN, so he used it before 1986. If Obama took out any school loans, he had to have used his SSN and he was in college before 1986.

            • sandi says:

              Colleges didn’t need a SS# before attending (Before 1986). SS# weren’t needed other than if you applied for work . It was 1969 before SS# were issued at birth, and not when you were old enough to work, and that was for parents to claim you as a dependent on income tax.

    • john says:

      IRS guy says he got Conn Soc. Sec. # assigned as tax ID # from IRS when he was living in NY and committing tax fraud by avoiding NY taxes

      • Phil says:


        With all due respect, Tax ID numbers are different prefixes, not that of a Social Security number from a particular state. A Tax ID number is 9 characters like a SSN, but different prefixes, then the Social Security numbers issued. Plus, if you run a Tax ID for a background check, the background check notifies you that the number is not a Social Security number. We know for a fact, Obama/Soetoro obtained his Social Security number between 1976-1978 when he was 15-17 years of age.

        Also, keep in mind, we know Obama/Soetoro graduated high School in the United States and attended two [2] separate colleges. High School transcripts as well as college transcripts are tracked and traced by one’s Social Security number.

  2. Critical Thinker says:

    JFK tried to alert us all to untold evil that still exist today. Connect the dots and you will know the EVIL that JFK discovered, and how that has grown in enormity!!!

    OMG!! The (HIDDEN SPEECH OF JFK) dire warning…


    Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/new-bill-allows-military-to-detain-you-indefinitely.html#ixzz1g8zoxuYg

  3. Eric Borgman says:

    Hi, Although there is false information out as to whose SS# “xxx-xx-4425” may or may not have been your assertion that the Social Security Death Index has every Social Security Number listed, I believe, IS incorrect. Only SS#’s of people that collected Social Security benefits are listed from what I understand. People who died prior to collecting or who never collected are not listed. This is why for example William Henry “Chick” Webb the famous big band drummer isn’t listed for instance. So although “xxx-xx-4425” may not be Jean Ludwig’s born 1890 it could be someone elses especially if that is what E-verify claimed.

  4. Robert says:

    You’ve shot down a straw man with the assertion about no one being issued a SSN in 1890. Of course not. But a person with a birth year of 1890 could have been issued a SSN late in life to get Medicare benefits in the 70s.

    • Phil says:

      Yes Robert they could have. The problem is, the number that Obama/Soetoro uses does not appear in the Social Security Death Index, thus, it was not assigned to anyone born in 1890 or anyone prior to Obama/Soetoro.

  5. Kate says:

    According to my 76 year old mother people were not required to obtain a Social Security number until they entered the work force. Employers in 1950 (her era)required hire’s to submit a SS# on their applications. Also, I was born in the mid 60′s and did not obtain my SS# before the age of 10 and I believe the reason for this was because when filing for Income Taxes it became required to have the dependent children as a deduction.

    I found this from Wiki: “Before 1986, people often did not obtain a Social Security number until the age of about 14, since the numbers were used for income tracking purposes, and those under that age seldom had substantial income. ”

    Why would we assume that Obama was even issued a SS# at the time of his birth when it wasn’t required to do so at that time?

    Does SSA provide information of when those deceased as well as people still alive the date of when they obtained their SS#?

    • Phil says:

      Hi Kate,

      According to the Social Security Administration, Obama/Soetoro was issued his Social Security number, the one he is using, between 1976 and 1978. During this time Obama/Soetoro would have been 15-17 years of age, which was not uncommon at that time.

      Background checks on individuals, including a Lexis report, will show the time frame in which a Social Security number was issued. The Social Security Death Index will show deceased individuals, and give their full SSN, last known residence, last benefit, if any, etc.

      • Tommy Thompson says:

        Phil, I started with you in the original obamacrimes discussion group. A lot of us are still together at a hidden site that I administer. We’ve done a lot of research on this SS# issue and frankly those who’ve been told of your assertion that Obama’s SS# is not illegal are somewhat dumbfounded. I’m sure you are aware that Obama’s grandmother worked with SS# records in Hawaii. Of course you most likely won’t find a death related to Obama’s SS#. The Hawaiian record keeping system has been a mess. You may want to check out butterdezillion…she has done more research than anybody I know. butterdezillion.com.
        I’m glad to see that you will be trying the approach I suggested three years ago…challenge Obama at the ballot boxes. The SOSs lied to us in 2008 when they said the national DNC certified Obama’s eligibility. Challenging his placement on the ballot shouldn’t require “standing”.

  6. yo says:

    How about showing us some people from the death index that are about obama’s age, and thus could have received their ssn in hawaii from conn at the same time as obama.

    Maybe these old people were issued ssn when hawaii first became a state and didn’t have the apparatus in hawaii.

    And wasn’t obama going by a different name when he supposedly received this ssn. Yes, he was.

    Can’t you just see him going to school or the dmv and giving them a ssn with the name obama on it when he went by the name sotoero?
    That would be rather strange, wouldn’t it?

    • 4Zoltan says:


      “And wasn’t obama going by a different name when he supposedly received this ssn. Yes, he was.”

      Actually, no, he was not using a diferent name. He returned from Indonesia in 1971, he attended school in Hawaii continously from 1971 to 1979. The school yearbooks for those dates all list him as Barry Obama.

  7. tom says:

    B.O. JR’s birth-place is IRRELEVANT vis-a-vis ARTICLE II ‘natural born Citizen’. HE relies upon MAN-MADE Law to sever his foreign ties; any U.S. Citizenship HE may be in possession of, is of a cultivated or cultured form hence NOT “natural” It is affected
    (ie pruning is necessary to PERFECT it)

    affectation~ FREE OF PERFECTION

    • 4Zoltan says:


      Not according to people alive when the Constitution was written.

      “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.” William Rawle, 1826.

      Rawle was a personal friend of Ben Franklin and attended meets at Franklin’s home with other Founders/Framers in the months before the Constitutional Convention. And President Washington named him to be the United States District Attorney for Pennsylvania.

      • tom says:

        “4Zoltan” says, in reply to my post

        “Not according to people alive when the Constitution was written.”

        “4Zoltan” Then proceeds to list …drum-roll please…………….

        ONE person’s opinion — citing tired old ‘Rawle’ quotation

        No Founder/Framer , nor any individual in attendance at the Constitutional Convention agreed to extend invitations to “avowed” NON-U.S CITIZEN, Foreign National Father’s to have their off- spring assume Command-in-Chief of the U.S. Army.
        Trust me , if we could dig up ol’ Billy Rawle ,today; he’d be sure to clarify [t]his statement–that’s if it was , indeed, recorded , initially, with accuracy and in its entirety

        P.S. Spare me & US the Madison number , as well It is a distortion

        • 4Zoltan says:


          “P.S. Spare me & US the Madison number , as well It is a distortion”


          Zephaniah Swift, US Congressman and future Chief Justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court published, “A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut: in Six Books”, in 1795.

          In what is the first legal treatise published in the United States, Swift wrote,

          “The children of aliens born in this state are considerded as natural born subjects and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.“

          Now Tom, you said,

          Tom – “Trust me , if we could dig up ol’ Billy Rawle ,today; he’d be sure to clarify [t]his statement–that’s if it was , indeed, recorded , initially, with accuracy and in its entirety”

          It was recorderd properly in his legal treatise, “A View of the Constitution of the United States”.

          But Tom, instead of telling us what you think, or hope, or wish the Founders had said. Provide us with some quotes from the Founders/Framers that “natural born” meant born in the US with two citizen parents.

          • tom says:

            If one is going to take the time to “reply” to something that I’ve said/written ; then I’d suggest that the same- take time enough (however much may be required) to not only read, BUT, FULLY COMPREHEND the ideas, the points , my words were intended to impart to the reader
            To wit: Why, on Earth, would I provide “some quotes from the Founders/Framers” re ‘born in the U.S. of two citizen parents’

            Hint #1 Ya ain’t gonna find any ; not from the core group, at least
            It is not what was meant. While, certainly, the overwhelming majority of ARTICLE II ‘natural born Citizens’ would and will be of this lineage, verifiable. The F/F’s deliberately avoided such restrictive, short-sighted, illiberal language. The term , again, employed —NATURAL–Apparently, many of you including the monitor of this site remain in the dark as to why OUR Nation’s Founders Constitution’s Framers chose to be so circumspect
            NOW, I hate to come across as patronizing but really folks, I and my mates “figured all of this out” as kids; 6th & 7th grade-schoolers.. So I will “provide” you with another hint rather than take your hand and walk you through the whole thing
            HINT #2 ‘Foundlings’ children born of unknown parentage &/or indeterminate origins Of issue ,yesteryear and still today, in spite of the advent of genetic testing DNA etc


            natural~ the classification of organisms (eg. U.S. Citizens) according to relationships based on descent from a common ancestor

            ONE U.S. CITIZEN
            ONE NON-U.S. CITIZEN

            ONE (ARTICLE II) ‘natural born Citizen’

            natural~ faithful rendition of the original, unequivocal
            The above equation yields a “product” which speaks with equal voice and is far from being faithful to its original constitution(in this case, a U.S. Citizen)

            This is so elementary, I have treated on ALL , ages ago; the mis-construed, the mis-apprehensions , contrivances, perversions, exploitations and on and on

            P.S. Swift’s comments, by-the-way, haven’t A THING to do with ARTICLE II Presidential Elg Reqs. However, this citation of yours does serve as a prime example/illustration of what I refer to above

            • 4Zoltan says:


              The problem with your analysis is that it is ignores basic facts. The Founders were familar with the legal term “natural born subject”. They used the terms “natural born citizen” and “natural born subject” interchangeably between 1780 and 1790.

              What Swift and Rawle tell us is the founding generations understanding of the concept of being “natural born”. Anyone born in the United States was “natural born”.

              • Tommy Thompson says:

                Tom,while the Supreme court did declare that a “natural born citizen” is a child born on US soil to American citizen parents (plural) in Happersett v minor it has NEVER EVER referred to a “dual citizen at birth” as a natural born citizen. Citizen yes but NOT natural born. I think this will become increasingly important in the upcoming challenges at each state ballot. If I’m think correctly, the burden will be upon Obama to prove he is a natural born citizen and nowhere in the Constitution or any Supreme Court ruling does it say a dual citizen at birth is a natural born citizen….checkmate.

  8. yo says:

    A commenter at citizenwells.wordpress.com has stated that they found on census forms some of the names from this list. They were people who lived in conn and then moved to hawaii.

    That’s rather significant information regarding whether this list exonerates obama of a ssn crime.

  9. cherrie says:

    We should also remember that people change their SSN and their names often. My daughter has been married twice, therefor a search would show that her ssn has been assigned to three different names. I would also point out that prior to the invention of computers record keeping was subject to a great amount of error. My own father’s name is listed differently on several records (ie, the name on his birth certificate is not spelled the same as the name on his SS card. And his name on militry records doesn’t match either of those documents). I personlly believe Obama’s SSN is a valid number assigned to him. It is apparent that at some point his name was changed and that may have caused some inconsistency in the records. As for his citizenship- Even if he was born overseas (and I doubt that) his mother is a citizen and therefore HE is a citizen. What his parents did when he was four years old cannot change that. This is a big issue as there are thousands of US babies born overseas every year to military members (no, they are not all born on post) and to US missionaries.

    • Phil says:


      Thank you for your comments. Keep in mind, there are specific laws that pertain to birth’s over-seas. The laws are different for U.S. citizens who are in the military stationed over seas and have a child, versus a U.S. citizen traveling over seas and giving birth. E.g., the Nationality Act of 1942 would pertain to Obama/Soetoro being born over-seas, his mother did not meet the residency requirements to pass on U.S. natural born citizenship status to Obama/Soetoro.

    • tom says:

      Yes, B.O. Jr’s Indonesian Citizenship , impressed upon him , as a minor, is irrelevant UNLESS –HE asserted or affirmed such after the age of discretion/majority– in that case HE stands ineligible for the Office He currently occupies

  10. Roger says:

    Phil when do you plan to retract your statement “Obama is NOT using a stolen Social Security number”? Your sole evidence was that several people who lived in Hawaii had Connecticutt SS#. Problem you have is you got the info from the only place you could access from the Social Security Administration – The death list. If you had checked the people on this list you would have found that they all were either born in Connecticutt or lived there when they applied and received their Social Security numbers. Obama was not born in Connecticutt nor ever lived there.
    The people on your list did move to Hawaii and eventually died there. Thus they had Connecticutt Social Security numbers. I’ll look for your retraction.

  11. Berg still never explains how obama got the CT SSN…sure he “COULD HAVE” requested it from a CT office, BUT COME ON!!!…and that list of HI residents with CT SSNs that he says were issued the same time as obama’s? — there is no “issue date” in the data he shows…why does Berg insist on discrediting any birther arguments except his?…makes me suspicious

  12. Harold Pack says:

    This link is to positive proof that Obama is not eligible. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    I am sending this link as I beleive the information it contains is valid, however, I am confident that you have the ability as well as the staff to verify the information on the site. Trust but verify is the rule. Notice that in order to be a Natural born citizen as per the 14nth amendment the requirement is to be the offspring of citizen parents (plural not singular) both parents must be US citizens. These statements by the people who authored and pased the 14nth amendment at the time it was passed are clarification of the original intent of the amendment.
    Original intent: The theory of interpretation by which judges attempt to ascertain the meaning of a particular provision of a state or federal constitution by determining how the provision was understood at the time it was drafted and ratified.
    . http://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html

  13. Dave says:

    Legal, that is, if you’re a citizen. If you’re not a citizen, then a SS # in your name isn’t legal, no matter the process.

  14. YJ Draiman says:

    There is a rule of law in this country and that rule of law must be enforced, without discrimination whatsoever, no matter what the law.

    Obama must abide by the laws of the United States of America

    There rule of law also states that English is the official language of The United States of America and as people living in this country you must understand, speak & write English.

    My parents went to night school to learn English.

    If you care enough to live in this country and enjoy the benefits of this country, it is you obligation to speak the language of this country “English” and abide by the laws which are written in English.

    Do you know any other country in the world that provides the kind of assistance in language barrier as the United States, I do not think so.

    I was very disappointed today, when I went shopping for some vegetables here in Los Angeles, the clerk called the numbers in Spanish and I missed my turn.

    There is nothing wrong with speaking multiple languages; I would say it is a great advantage. You must remember the official language of this country is English, all highway signs are in English, etc., therefore, make it you business to speak it.

    Thank you

    YJ Draiman

  15. Robert says:

    I was born of a US mother and a Canadian father in Canada. I held dual citizenship until joining the US Military at age 19. My Us citizenship derived as follows this quote from the Nationality Act of 1940: Section 201 g.

    “A person born outside the United States and it’s outlying possessions of parents, one of whom is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, has had ten years’ residence in the United States or outlying possessions, at least five of which were after obtaining the age of sixteen years, the other being an alien.”

    In support of what ‘cherrie’ says above concerning her father, there are also misspellings of my birth name in the military and subsequently on my SSN. Reason? During induction processing they did not transcribe the info from your actual certificate (not in my possession at the time) but rather from verbal discussion while shuttling through a line issuing uniforms. So whatever the clerk thought was the proper spelling became your ID and all subsequent papers, right or wrong. As it was only my middle name I paid no attention to it back in the 60′s as I never used it, only the initial.

    What I would like to know; what of the Arpaio investigation claiming fraudulent birth certificate and SS card as the documents had layers when viewed by computer graphics, something that is not possible from a printed document?

Leave a Reply