(H/T) The Post & Email
So not only does Obama not have a valid social security number and valid application, but his mother’s appears to be fraudulent as well. We have no idea who these people are. His mother does not have a valid social security number. She obtained her social security number using falsified forms, as evidenced by the notation at the bottom of the page where it gives a revision date of 7/55.
What are the chances that Obama and his momma, Stanley Ann Dunham, would both have phony social security numbers? How ’bout slim, fat chance, and none, and yet they do!
Obama has MULTIPLE social security numbers. The one used most frequently belongs to a deceased man born in Connecticut…and yet no curiosity on the part of the cable networks (including FOX) or surprise (not!) the MSM!
Fraud runs rampant in the Obama family! Who has multiple social security numbers unless they are in witness protection or we have elements within our government designing the hidden identity and agenda of Barack Obama and his momma!
Let us not forget Obama’s father. He is just as suspect as his “son”. Harvard wanted him out, deported! Politico reported Obama Sr. was forced out of Harvard!
The following is from Anti-Mullah.
FORGERY NOW SHOWN IN OBAMA MAMA’S SOCIAL SECURITY APPLICATION
FRAUD AND FORGERY RUNS IN THE OBAMA FAMILY!
Irrefutable Proof Obama’s Mama’s Social Security Application Fraudulent: 1965 Application Form Signed In 1959. Got A Time Machine?!
One wonders why would Stanley Ann Dunham’s Social Security card be forged?
To place a verifiable signature of hers into the public record.
Then you see it would match the signature on the recently provided (forged) LFBC (Long Form Birth Certificate) by Obama and in the forged book copy in Hawaii Department of Health.
Since Stanley Anne Dunham can’t sign any documents created since she died they would have to recreate her signature and a document history to verify it.
That is: someone alive is signing for her and placing this document into the record would be the way to authenticate her signature as an ‘existing’ sample.
Now at the bottom of Dunham’s SS-5 form , it can clearly be seen that the form was Revised on 7/65 . That is quite a task as seeing that she signed the form in 1959. More on that below.
Comments added to the forms below are in bold red.
The forms look almost the same. There are just a few minor differences. They are noted in red on the forms.
Basically what they did was just switch the locations of those two areas on the forms. Unless you were looking very closely, those 2 forms would look identical. Someone not paying attention would think the 1965 form was the 1959 form.
Want More? This is from BirtherReport.com.
Where does that leave us ?
1). The SS-5 form used in 1959 is a form that was revised in 1946
2). The Dunham form ( supposedly signed in 1959 ) is different from that used in 1959. In fact, it has the statement Revised 7/65 on the form. Short of using a time machine, there is no way she could have signed that in 1959.
3). It is obvious that the Dunham SS-5 form is a fake. The forger used a form that looked just like the one used in 1959, but he did not look close enough. He missed the layout change in those two fields.
What is more disturbing though is THIS FAKE WAS POSSIBLY PLACED INTO HER RECORD IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATIONS FILES. WHO DID THIS ?
For additional details concerning the letter and graph Orly Taitz received from the Social Security Administration under the FOIA read here.