Obama’s legal identity problem
By Doug Hagmann
This week, Ohio private investigator
Susan Daniels filed suit in the Geauga County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas to
petition the Ohio Secretary of State to remove Barack Hussein Obama’s name from
the ballot based on alleged inconsistencies with his social security number. If
the controversy surrounding Obama’s social security number (SSN) is new or
perhaps confusing to you, the explanation regarding the issuance of social
security numbers is quite simple, but critical to understanding the issue as it
pertains to his identity. As I’ve been an investigator for the last 27 years, I
have a lot of experience in dealing with SSNs, identifying anomalies and
outright forgeries, and possess the same documents, proprietary database
results and associated investigative documents as Ms. Daniels.
A brief overview of SSNs
Every citizen of the U.S., permanent
residents and some temporary residents as defined by the Social Security Act
since 1935, when the New Deal Social Security program began, have been assigned
a nine digit social security number in the following format: 123-45-6789. As
you can see, the number has three “parts” separated by hyphens. Each part of
the number has a specific meaning.
The first three numbers reflect a
general geographical area of issuance, the second two numbers are “group
numbers” that are internally assigned and have meaning but will not be
addressed in the scope of this article. The last four numbers could be
considered serial numbers of sorts, reflecting a numerical sequence between
0001 and 9999 that have a peripheral relationship to the group number but
again, is beyond the scope of this report.
To be factually correct and all
inclusive, I should also note that, starting in 1963, U.S. railroad workers
were exclusively issued numbers between 700 and 728 in place of the
geographical code, although this procedure has since been discontinued. Also,
there are no legitimate SSNs that use 000 or 666 for their geographical code.
The system was designed so that all
social security numbers are unique to each person, never recycled or reused
even after death of that person, and with very few exceptions, are rarely
changed once they are issued. The age when a person was issued their SSNs has
varied throughout the years. Some people born in the early part of the last
century never applied for or assigned SSNs. As time progressed, nearly all
Americans applied for and received SSNs.
Until the Tax Reform Act of 1986,
minors were not required to obtain a social security number at birth, for
example, as the numbers were never intended for identification purposes, but
for income tracking by the IRS and for claiming children as dependents on their
income tax returns. This process gradually changed over the years, and now the
mother or parents of all babies born as U.S. citizens usually apply for the
SSNs shortly after birth.
Changes under Obama
On June 25, 2011, the Social
Security Administration initiated a new policy called the Social Security
Number Randomization initiative, which essentially randomizes the issuance of
SSNs. Perhaps the biggest impact is that a social security number will no
longer reflect the geographical area of issuance. This initiative was
implemented to ostensibly prevent the SSA from running out of numbers in any
geographical area, and to allegedly make identity theft more difficult .
Nonetheless, the timing of this initiative is interesting and not lost by this
author.
The Obama SSN controversy
The initial and primary controversy
over Barack Hussein Obama’s social security number involves the first three
numbers relative to the geographical area of issuance, although is not confined
to that fact alone. We’ll address this issue first, however.
The first three numbers of Obama’s
alleged social number, or the number we know he is using today and has been
using for some time, begins with 042, which denotes that this number was issued
to an individual who had some level of attachment to the state of Connecticut
at the time his SSN application was issued. Based on additional dissection of
his SSN, it can be determined that this number was issued between 1977 and
1979.
It is imperative to note, however,
that the Social Security Administration (SSA) has made slight administrative
changes to the way they issued SSNs over the years, so we must be very careful
when talking or writing in “absolutes” or “absolutely” associating a SSN with
an individual without further identifying information of that person. Despite
such changes, we are aware of other factors about Obama that would permit us to
state, with an extremely high degree of certainty, that both the geographical
area and the time span of issuance are correct.
These inconvenient facts present a
very curious problem for Barack Hussein Obama. At the time that his social
security number was issued, Obama was a teen, living in the state of Hawaii and
had no connection whatsoever to the geographical area associated with his
alleged SSN. Furthermore, the SSN application process at that time was
different than today, making it all but impossible for a teen in Hawaii to
obtain a social security number from Connecticut.
How, then, did Barack Hussein Obama come to be assigned his “current” social security number? What SSN did Obama use while working as a teen in the state of Hawaii? Considering all of the other contradictory identifying information pertaining to Obama, his unwillingness to disclose other vital records, questions pertaining to his passport, etc., this is an extremely serious issue that must be thoroughly addressed and answered.
How, then, did Barack Hussein Obama come to be assigned his “current” social security number? What SSN did Obama use while working as a teen in the state of Hawaii? Considering all of the other contradictory identifying information pertaining to Obama, his unwillingness to disclose other vital records, questions pertaining to his passport, etc., this is an extremely serious issue that must be thoroughly addressed and answered.
Evolving truths
It is with great interest that I
note that several “fact-checking” websites have made certain and almost
non-perceptible changes in their definitions and explanations that appear to
coincide with the Obama-SSN problem, to such an extent that someone without
proper experience could easily accept the Obama-SSN controversy as myth, urban
legend, or attempt to explain the Obama SSN in some other manner. One glaring
example of misinformation, or perhaps outright disinformation, is an
explanation of Obama’s problem by Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly. During The
O’Reilly Factor on April 13, 2011, he was factually incorrect on a number of
levels when he attempted to explain the Connecticut issuance to his audience in
response to an e-mail he received.
Like the entirety of the Obama
Constitutional eligibility issue, there has been so much misinformation and
disinformation that people don’t know who or what to believe. To further
complicate matters, certain self-proclaimed fact-checking websites and even
some news sites have actively edited or even expunged their records regarding
this issue over the last few years, thus creating more confusion for an
inquiring public. As investigators know, guilty persons and accomplices embrace
and perpetuate confusion to hide the truth behind such matters.
What it all means
As a professional investigator since
1985, I have performed countless background investigations of individuals being
considered for board positions at Fortune 500 companies. Like investigator
Susan Daniels, I, too, have access to multiple proprietary databases and
performed the same searches as she has, beginning in late 2008. I agree with
Ms. Daniels in nearly all of her conclusions, and commend her for filing suit
in the state of Ohio. While we might not arrive at all of the same deductions
based on the information known, such differences are minor and inconsequential
to the bigger picture. We both agree, however, on the most important conclusion
of all: it is extremely unlikely that the social security number used by Barack
Hussein Obama was legitimately issued.
If I were to file a background
report of investigation with a Fortune 500 or Fortune 100 client with the
information developed about Barack Hussein Obama, I could only reach one
conclusion with the highest degree of certainty: the man known as Barack
Hussein Obama II would FAIL in all aspects relating to his true identity.
For a Fortune 100 company, that is
problematic. For America, that is terrifying.
Douglas Hagmann, founder
& director of the Northeast
Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private
investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to
fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website.Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com
re: "Until the Tax Reform Act of 1986, minors were not required to obtain a social security number at birth, for example, as the numbers were never intended for identification purposes,"
ReplyDelete--->Just want to let you know that when my son was born in April, 1983, yes, 1983, the hospital gave me a paper to sign because they had applied for a SSN already (without my input). I was older and groggy with recovery from a C-Section for a couple of days.
Just wanted to let you have some