The Privacy of a Public Figure

IBANEZ placed the following excellent letter on the web blog of David Crockett, his blog link is on the sidebar. It certainly deserves a place on the front page of all blogs. Dr. Orl Taitz's blog can be found here

To David CROCKETT
To DR Orly TAITZ

Today, the facts are that he is holding the Office of President and Commander in Chief.

The US Constitution’s requirement for holding the Office is not a Privacy Act record but a public and business record.

The US Archivist and the NARA possesses the public records concerning every President of the USA.

The US Archivist and the NARA possesses also the record of the US Constitution with the legal writting of the Nat Born Citizenship clause.

The US Archivist and the NARA possess also the record of the US Senate Resolution N° 511 -110th CONGRESS, defining what is legally a Nat Born Citizen of the USA.

The NARA cannot refuse to provide to the public the NARA’s records that proves that the President
(dual or trial national UK/KENYAN/INDONESIAN/US citizen) is or isn’t a Nat Born Citizen of the USA.

What kind of Certification of Natural Birth Citizenship of the USA or US Senate or Congress Resolutions the US Archivist and the NARA can provide to the public under the last name of Soetoro or the factual one?

Also, if the FEC has recorded that the Democrat Candidate became President, then the FEC must possesses the public Nat Born Citizenship’s record in the FEC electoral dossier for B.O.

What kind of Certification of Natural Birth Citizenship the FEC can provide to the public and Plaintiffs?

The US Archivist, NARA and at registered the “business records”, they are responsible for providing the loyal information of Nat Born Citizenship and respond specially to the Members of the Armed Forces that are concerned about it, because receiving orders of the Commander in Chief through the Commanding Chain.
They dont need any Private Act record, but all the not-Private Act records, and the “business records” registered by the FEC and the US Archivist concerning the US President (usurper).

Is a Public or Business record the UK/Kenyan citizenship or it is a Privacy Act record?

Is the Indonesian Citizenship of his mother and his own Indonesian Naturalization and re-Naturalization a Public record or a Private record?

Is his mother minority and prohibition to confer her US citizenship, at birth in 1961 a public record or a private record?

As you know from the beginning the Certification of Live Birth of the Internet only states:
-father: AFRICAN
-mother : CAUCASIAN
NOWHERE HIS COLB SHOWS THAT HIS PARENTS ARE US CITIZENS.

Under the US Constitution the parents and the US jurisdiction at birth make the Nat Born Citizenship.

Also the Certification states:
PLACE OF BIRTH: HAWAII
The Hawaiian place of birth does not make the Natural Born Citizenship of the USA;
The Hawaiian soil confers the Hawaiian state citizenship, and the State of Hawaii confers to him the US Citizenship…………..but only the parents, if US cititens can confer to a Hawaiian Native the Nat Nirth Citizenship. And that is and will be never possible
because of the age of the US mother and because is father was an Alien.

About the “Native” concept,
Remind that the Hawaiian SOIL can give natural birth to a tree, a flower, an orchidee etc……. but only a mother and a father can give Natural Birth to a person…

To confer the sole Natural Birth Citizenship, both parents must have a sole citizenship.

If the parents have different citizenship at birth of the child, the child inherits their Two Citizenships and become a Natural Born Dual Citizen of the Countries of his parents.

The US Const prohibits to a person that is a Natural Born Dual Citizen to be President.

Who could phone or write to each member of the Armed Forces, to educate about the fact of Nat Born Dual Citizenship and the violation of the US Const requirement?

It is a matter of National Security that the supreme orders come from a lawful and eligible person to hold the Office of Commander in Chief.

It is a matter of National Security that the members of the Armed Forces be loyally informed about the legitimacy of the person that give them orders?

Its irrational and of vital danger to be receiving orders from a source that is not authorized by the US Constitution to do it.

That is why the members of the Armed Forces need transparency, investigation and the truth.

The problem is that transparency is still dennied.