Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Obama's "Soebarkah" Name Is A Confirmation of Adoption

Back in August of 2010, another name for Barack Hussein Obama was discovered. That name was "Soebarkah" and it was written on a United States passport for Obama by his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. My previous posts contained some information about the "Soebarkah" name, but they were incomplete. Here are the two posts:

Obama Has Another Name - His Mother Wrote 1968 Application To Renew Passport - Video

Is Anything About Obama Genuine, Real or True?

Today, while catching up on my sidebar blog reading, I ran across Lame Cherry's post which gave quite a lot of information about what Obama's adoption name of "Soebarkah" means in Indonesian.

Lame Cherry Blogspot: Soebarkah


As an exclusive as only found here though, the name Soebarkah is a confirmation of adoption, Obama's Muslim status and a sort of strange Islamic prophecy of the day Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro in that it was not in the stars to last.

Soetoro in the name, in the prefix of SOE links the name to Javanese roots and not Indonesian alone. Why this matters is that Indonesian names reflect region, family and often religion. It is quite obvious or should have been by now in no one has noted it, that the name Soebarkah is a combination and not one word.
The name is Soe Bar Kah.

Soetoro signifies the adoptive father as Lolo Soetoro. Bar is obvious in Barack, but also links to the Islamic Aramic in bar means SON. So we have confirmation of this is the Son of Soetoro.

The Kah is interesting in Indonesian, KAH translates as WAS. In names, KAH is added as a suffix to form a question of "Who?"

So what SOE BAR KAH means is literal, and I'm genuinely surprised with even Indonesian "experts" asked to explain all of this, that none of them had any comprehension of the language of their own nation.

Soe Bar Kah means literally Who is this, but the son of Soetoro.

This name is the actual legal title of Barry Soetoro, his bona fides, that he has been legally adopted, is a Muslim and is an Indonesian from the Javan region.

Just as Johnson in Scandinavian means Son of John, and Johnsen in Dutch means the same in different dialect. What this name on a legal document filed in America as a passport for Barack jr. is his legal manifestation that he is Indonesian, not American, as he has renounced his entire ties which bind to these United States.

This name Soebarkah is the legal document which would hold up in Indonesian courts as it requires no other documentation. It appearing on a US document signifies it was in use as Obama's defining name outside these United States.

[T]his is Barack Hussein Obama's legal name. The meaning of it disqualifies him from the White House and exposes him as criminal fraud, as this child had it explained to him completely what this name meant in adoption, Islam and Indonesia, that he was no longer American.
This is why this kid wanted to be "president of some country" as he knew damn well even then that America was off limits due to his being British and Indonesian, but the Empire had many colonies he could be president of one day if he slummed around far enough.

What is troubling in this, is Maya Soetoro knows very well what this all means and she has been covering all of this up as a co- conspirator

Hat Tip:

Lame Cherry Blogspot

P.S. Mr. Cherry reveals his research work from  these sites:

The illegal Social Security number of Obama
Why an illegal needs a Connecticut SSN

Soebarkah's American passport for Indonesian illegals

Indonesian forming names

An Indonesian stab at Obama adoption

Indonesian Suffixes


Found the following little tidbit of information interesting at the Post & Email link:

SHARON: Does everyone have only one name then?

SAM: Only Muslims have just one name. Christians always have given name, baptism name, and surname. The Chinese do as well; they always have three names, and the surname is the first word. For example, with “Sun-e-Wah,” the first word, “Sun,” is the surname. The Balinese people usually have more than one name.

Kind of disputes Obama's claim that he was never a muslim, doesn't it?



Anonymous said...

Adoption in Indonesia requires action by a district court. Such organizations as WND and other birther sites have not even sent their reporters to Indonesia to look at court records to find out whether Obama was adopted. Wonder why not? Because they know that there is no such record.

Also, the US State Department repeatedly denied in a federal court filing that Obama had ever been adopted or that he was a citizen of Indonesia.

Christinewjc said...

Anonymous -

It matters WHERE one looks for information that is purposely being hidden from the public. The FOIA has helped discover the past of Obama that previously was kept from the public.


The Obama File: Soetoro/Dunham Marriage and read all of the history on that page regarding Obama Jr's citizenship in Indonesia. You will read about the "danger" of being known as a U.S. citizen in Indonesia during that era, and the fact that an adoption had occurred in order for Obama Jr. to attend school in that nation.

Euripides said...

Obama doesn't need any other credentials than his poor decisions as president to qualify him as a pretender. Anything else on his dubious past is gravy.

Christinewjc said...

You are exactly right, Euripides!

I never thought that Obama would get away with all of his crimes for this long. However, when he is finally out of office (One Term pResident - OTP!!), it will be a different story. Much of the truth will come out and those who either ignored (or, horribly, supported and agreed with) this teleprompter puppet's radical, socialist, Islamo-Fascist ideology will be put to shame!!

Euripides said...

Maybe he can write his memoirs and expose himself that the New York Times will promote as a "brave" admission from a true giant of a man.

Anonymous said...

There is absolutely no evidence that Obama was adopted, and both the Indonesian government and the US State Department have denied that it ever happened.

Birther media could have sent their journalists to Indonesia to check the adoption filings at district courts, but they didn't. And nothing in any Freedom of Information Act records indicates that Obama was adopted.

John said...

Oh, but Anonymous... facts don't matter to the regressives. The only thing that's important is to bash President Obama. Silly you!! You might want to think about dusting off your tin foil hat... you'll need it here.

Anonymous said...

Facts apparently do matter to this prominent former birther (who is likely to remain a two-fer):

Christinewjc said...

Anonymous -

If you took the time to read the comments and the blog author's reply, you will see that the BC is actually a side issue. Here is what he wrote:

ed. he didn’t present one because it served his purposes not to… not showing it distracted the nation from his genuine eligibility issue. The BC thing was a chess move… the guy and his team are way smarter than you seem to be capable of imagining. It’s really impressive if you see the big picture… from a purely tactical viewpoint it was executed with perfect acumen… a good strategy with excellent tactical support. That’s all it ever was. – Leo

The fact that Obama Sr. was never a U.S. citizen makes it IMPOSSIBLE for Obama Jr. to be a natural born citizen. See my sidebar about this.

Here's a copy. Go to sidebar to access the links within:

At Barack Obama’s web site, the following admission:

“ Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

Read that last line again.

“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”

That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. He has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.

And this leads to the relevant question:


A natural born citizen’s status should only be governed by the United States.

Hat Tip: Natural Born Citizen blog

Anonymous said...

The fact that Obama's father was not a US citizen was well known. Birthers and two-fers even had campaign to contact the members of the Electoral College to have them vote against Obama.

Guess what? Not one changed her or his vote. Birthers and two-fers even had a campaign to get the members of the US Congress to vote against Obama's election in the confirmation process. Guess what? Not one single member in the 535 changed her or his vote.

These events occurred because the hundreds of legislators and lawyers in these two bodies disagree with you as to the meaning of a Natural Born Citizen. There is nothing in the US Constitution or in any other article written by the founders that says that a Natural Born Citizen requires two US parents. There is also nothing that says "let us follow Vattel." In fact, Vattel is not mentioned even once in the Federalist Papers---while the common law is mentioned about twenty times.

So, what did the term Natural Born mean in the common law? It meant "born in the country." It did not refer to the parents.

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

Anonymous said...

Actually Anonymous much precedence has been set that disagree with your common law theory. Precedent trumps common law. Born in US to two US citizens=natural born. Good try though. This blog breaks it down pretty good:

Anonymous said...

Obama's vital records and DNA analysis will confirm he was at birth a natural born American citizen, as Dr. Fukino said in her press release of 27 July 2009. He was probably the son of Stanley Armour Dunham and an obliging native Hawai'ian wahine.
He voluntarily relinquished his American citizenship in 1981 on a trip to Indonesia by confirming as an adult his juvenile naturalization. He did this in part to evade criminal liability for failing to register with the American Selective Service System. He also got an Indonesian passport, and returned to the States on a student visa.
In shedding his American citizenship, he also shed his eligibility to the Office of President.
Obama is not now and never has been President - nor has he held any elective office for which American citizenship is prerequisite.

Christinewjc said...

Anonymous of June 28, 2012 -

That is an interesting story. If true, I wonder why more plaintiffs didn't challenge Obama in the courts because of his relinquishment of American citizenship when he lived in Indonesia? I think that the lawyers fighting Obama's eligibility might be missing the boat for not challenging him on the Indonesian citizenship issue.

There are so many theories out there in the blogosphere now that it is difficult to keep track of them all.

No matter what, however, there is no doubt in my mind that Obummer is the worst pResident in the White House ever in the history of our nation!

Anonymous said...

Anxious for the supreme court decision on Tuesday whether or not the court will hear the case against Obama.

Christinewjc said...

Anonymous @ February 18, 2013 at 7:59:00 PM PST

I read somewhere (will try to locate it) that the Supreme Court clerks did not "distribute" the case to the justices. I do not know the entire procedure of such activities, but if a clerk was either bought off (or threatened in some way) to not present the case, then I'm not sure what happens next.

This blog discusses the plethora of Obama's crimes:


This blog has a post about the conference:


Orly Taitz blog is claiming that a decision on whehter the case will be granted or denied hasn't been made yet:

SCOTUS 02.19.2013 order does not state yet whether the case was granted or denied, no decision yet

Posted on | February 19, 2013


Found the blog and link about the denial of the case, but I think it was a previous case regarding Taitz's filing attempt to stay the election:


So...maybe the current case (as Orly states on her site) hasn't been granted or denied yet.