Zack de la Rocha Network Forum _ .:: Politick ::. _ Can Obama Be President?

: Fremen Bryan Jul 1 2008, 07:58 AM

Can Obama be President?

I found this to be very interesting information. ...I;m sure you will too,, CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT? It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for the following reason: Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24,1952 to November 13, 1986? Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal . US Law very clearly stipulates: ".If only one parent was a U.S. citizen atthe time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten (10) years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizenfor 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence,she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most , there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office. *** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. *** Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S.citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia. Now you can see why Obama's aides stopped his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence. Stay tuned to your TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through over the next several days. Thomas Sowell Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow The Hoover Institution Stanford University Stanford, California 94305

: Stormwarden Jul 1 2008, 11:09 AM

You should be in the fertilizer business, Fremen. You spew enough bullshit to fertilize a few dozen farms.

Hate to burst that bubble, but the change in laws means that Obama CAN run, since IIRC, those laws were made retroactive, rendering the whole post you just made irrelevant. Don't forget that McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone IIRC.

Get back under the bridge with the rest of the trolls, Fremen.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 07:51 AM

QUOTE (Stormwarden @ Jul 1 2008, 11:09 AM) *
You should be in the fertilizer business, Fremen. You spew enough bullshit to fertilize a few dozen farms.

Hate to burst that bubble, but the change in laws means that Obama CAN run, since IIRC, those laws were made retroactive, rendering the whole post you just made irrelevant. Don't forget that McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone IIRC.

Get back under the bridge with the rest of the trolls, Fremen.

You wish to cite the law that makes the former retroactive, please?

Also the title of the thread is not "OBAMA CANNOT BE PRESIDENT' it is 'CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT?' since there is alot of talk surrounding this right now - including talk of how Obama is yet to issue his actual legal Birth Certificate complete with signatures and notorized as of yet.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 08:05 AM

Here is the 'law'.

The thing is the 'Proof' that Obama was in fact born in the United States, the 'Certificate of Live Birth', has been questioned as authentic.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 08:08 AM

Unstamped certificate suggests Obama may not be "natural born" US citizen By Reuven Koret June 24, 2008

Embossed seal of the State of Hawaii absent from the purported "birth certificate" of Barack Obama The "birth certificate" claimed by the Barack Obama campaign is not certified as authentic and appears to be a photoshopped fake.

The image, purporting to come from the Hawaii Department of Health, has been the subject of intense skepticism in the blogosphere in the past two weeks. But now the senior spokesman of that Department has confirmed to Israel Insider what are the required features of a certified birth document -- features that Obama's purported "birth certificate" clearly lack.

The image became increasingly suspect with Israel Insider's revelation that variations of the certificate image were -- including one listing the location of Obama's birth as Antarctica, one with the certificate supposedly issued by the government of North Korea, and another including a purported photo of baby Barack -- just two minutes before the article and accompanying image was on the left-wing Daily Kos blog.

That strongly suggests that Daily Kos obtained the image from Photobucket, not the State of Hawaii, the Obama family, or the Obama campaign. Photobucket is not generally known as a credible supplier of official vital records for any of the fifty states, and the liberties that other Photoshoppers took with the certificates confirms this.

Some of these oddities surfaced in, but new comparative documentary evidence presented below, and official verification obtained by Israel Insider from a senior Hawaiian official, provides the strongest confirmation yet.

An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.

Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."

Compare the top image presented by his campaign as evidence of Obama's 1961 birth and the other certifying the birth of one Patricia Decosta.

So if he were registered as being born in Hawaii, Barack Obama -- because only he or another member of his immediate family could by law request a "Certification of Live Birth" -- must have a certified paper copy, with embossed stamp and seal, or he could request one. But what his campaign has put forward as genuine, according to the senior spokesman in the relevant department of the State of Hawaii, is not in fact a certified copy. It is not valid.

Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date "filed by registrar", the certified DeCosta document provides the date "accepted by the registrar." The difference between filing an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.

The Obama campaign, however, -- notably in very low resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth." Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal and signature.

The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.

Until now, it has been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document as being certified?

There is one possibility, however, which alone might justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive. Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should they be lacking.

Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.

But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to "tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof. He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one will go away, too.

Because the consequences were he to admit, or should it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.

But now the State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth certificate image lack.

The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the consequences of waiting.

There is one simple way for the candidate to clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license. Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest office in the land.

The issue is not whether Obama is black or white, Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.

If proof of citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.

Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.

UPDATE 6/26:
Janice Okubo, in response to an Israeli Insider question on Tuesday, would not confirm nor deny whether she had told a St. Petersburg Times reporter whether she had said the birth certificate was "real", citing the statutory stipulation that "Hawaii state law (HRS §338-18) prevents disclosure of information contained in vital statistics records except to those people who have a direct and tangible interest in the record as defined by statute." This would, however, seem to negate the propriety of any disclosure by her of confidential information.

Jim Geraghty of The National Review Online, following up on this Israel Insider report, he had contacted Okubo:

"I spoke to Ms. Okubo late Wednesday afternoon, and she said she had seen the version of Obama's certificate of live birth posted on the sites. While her office cannot verify the information on a form without the permission of the certificate holder (Obama), she said "the form is exactly the same" and it has 'all the components of a birth certificate' record issued by the state. In other words, she sees no reason to think the version posted on Obama's web site and Daily Kos is not genuine."

"The 'embossed seal' in question is, she said, probably on the back of the document provided to Daily Kos, but not visible (as in another certificate posted on Israel Insider for contrast). She thinks the difference in visibility can be attributed to the pressure used when applying the seal."

Geraghty's interpretation of Okubo's comments is inexact and tendentious. First, her observation that "the form is the same" is not contested, here or elsewhere. No one is doubting that the form that appears on the various websites (including this one) is a replica of that used for valid certificates. Therefore Geraght's interpretation that follows "In other words" is clearly his own conclusion, not hers.

Indeed, Okubo confirms to Geraghty that the image is lacking the "embossed seal" (and the official signature) that are required for the certificate to be valid. While "she thinks" that the difference in visibility might be attributed to varying "pressure," she admits that she does not know and has not seen the original.

Contrasting the purported Obama image with the DeCosta sample, it is hard to imagine the embossed seal and signature being of such light pressure that they would become completely invisible. An inked date of June 6, 2007, in reverse, does come through. But in any event, Okubo's confirmation that the premsumptive birth certificate is lacking the required stamps makes it all the more imperative for Obama to release the original paper certification, the only valid kind, and not an easy-to-photoshop electronic facsimile thereof. It should not be hard to produce, since Hawaii provides for family members to request them.

Even though Geraghy notes that Obama "initially refused to provide his birth certificate," he has suggested that it is "rather unlikely" that Obama was born in Kenya, since it would require that the candidate and his family do a lot of lying. In fact, there were reports of Kenyati relatives claiming he was born there, and there is the mysterious disappearance of his grandmother, who may indeed know something about this subject.

After all, being born in Hawaii is part of the "family legend" and it would be unreasonable to expect this to vary from interview to interview, especially when a non-Hawaiian birth would invalidate Obama's run for the presidency.

It is indeed hard to believe that Obama could have gone through his life without having to prove that he was an American citizen. But the credulity with which the mainstream media has automatically accepted as valid the image that appears on the radical left Daily Kos blog and on the Obama campaign's polemical "Fight the Smears" website makes it clear that many have been unwilling, now and in the past, to demand proof of an authentic document. They prefer to accept on faith that the candidate or his campaign would not lie about such a thing, assuming he has nothing to hide and no motive to lie.

But until the certified paper birth document is produced -- either by media pressure or a legal challenge in any state -- the fact remains that Obama has not proven that he is a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President according to the Constitution.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 08:12 AM

Obama campaign claims suspect "birth certificate" as genuine item By Reuven Koret June 21, 2008

The full certificate. Click here for In response to mounting media questions about the failure of the Barack Obama presidential campaign to produce the presumptive Democratic nominee's birth certificate, an official spokesman of the campaign has endorsed as genuine the image of a document purporting to be his "birth certificate." But some who have examined that image in high resolution claim inconsistencies and irregularities which suggest that the purported document is a forgery. Its high profile use by the campaign, they claim, suggests an attempt to conceal the truth of Obama's birth circumstances and citizenship qualifications from the American people.

The campaign has only a low-resolution image of that document, which it claims is his "birth certificate," on its "Fight the Smears" website, along with purported proof of why the claim that Obama may not qualify as a "natural born citizen" is false:

Obama Is Not a Natural Born Citizen

Senator Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, after it became a state on August 21st, 1959. Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside...."

Contrary to the campaign's claims, the issue of when Hawaii became a state and the wording of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, are not at issue.

Rather it is Article Two, Section One of the Constitution which requires that the President be a "natural born citizen" and not simply a naturalized citizen. The issue is whether there is proof that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, the legal status of his mother at the time, and what exactly is written on the original birth certificate -- if it in fact such a certificate exists.

Some bloggers have claimed that the purported official State of Hawaii document, originally published by the radical left, is a fake, and a poorly executed one at that.

Examination of the higher resolution of the image indicates irregularities which suggest to some that the purported "certificate" may be a forgery produced or modified by Photoshop or another image-editing software, and not a genuine item.

"I can confirm that that is Sen. Obama's birth certificate."
Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesman, to the Los Angeles Times.
The evidence, presented in greatest detail by the, includes:

1. Use of a second generation reproduction of the seal of the State of Hawaii at the top
2. Blacking out of the Certificate number in an attempt to prevent it from being traced
3. Absence of any official signature or seal which typically appear on such documents
4. Crudely arranged borders inconsistent with a professionally produced official document
5. Crude overlay of the textual items on top of the patterned background, indicating that the background was produced first and then the textual images laid on top of it by a graphical program rather than being scanned from the original.
6. Failure to use the double-S symbol before the listing the relevant statute (HRS 338-13b) as appears in official uses of the State of Hawaii.
7. The appearance of the backward facing text "Jun 6, 2007" that appears to come from a stamp in the lower right hand portion of the document.
8. The description of his father's race as African, when the term Negro was reportedly used at the time of birth.
9. The use of an identical typeface for all text items on the page.

Even if one or two of the above irregularities may have an explanation, they claim, the aggregate points to an amateurish attempt to manufacture an official-looking document that may not exist in the official records of the state of Hawaii.

On its face, this document does not even presume to be a copy of the original birth certificate -- contrary to the claims of the Obama campaign -- but rather a secondary Certification of Live Birth, which may be used when the original birth certificate can't be located, and can be produced after the fact with just the affadavits of a family member, or even the child himself.

The Obama campaign, however, has not even produced a paper version of this document, and indeed it does not even publish the high resolution version that appeared on the Daily Kos. It has not fulfilled the media's persistent requests to produce the original Birth Certificate, or to respond to media questions about the birth certificate controversy.

What could be the Obama campaign's motive for withholding the original birth certificate and passing off instead a crudely forged facsimile of a "Certification of Live Birth"?

Speculation in the blogosphere and mainstream media is rampant that the concealment is for one or more of the following reasons:

1. There is no proof that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.
2. The father listed on the birth certificate is not Barack Hussein Obama.
3. The father's race is listed as something other than African, perhaps Muslim or Arab.
4. The mother was no longer at that time an American citizen.
5. The child's name is not listed as Barack Hussein Obama II.

Jim Geraghty, reporting on the Campaign Spot blog of the National Review and one of the, cited the "rumor" that Obama was born not within the United States, but elsewhere, possibly Kenya.

Geraghty stated that "If Obama were born outside the United States, one could argue that he would not meet the legal definition of natural-born citizen -- because U.S. law at the time of his birth required his natural-born parent (his mother) to have resided in the United States for '10 years, at least [f]ive of which had to be after the age of 16.'"

He then points out that Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, was 18 when Obama was born "so she wouldn't have met the requirement of five years after the age of 16."

According to, cited by Geraghty, the requirements that were in force from Dec. 24, 1952 to Nov. 13, 1986, encompassing the time of Obama's birth, state, "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least 10 years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16."

Geraghty said the Obama campaign could "debunk" the rumors about his birth simply by releasing a copy of his birth certificate, but the campaign has so far chosen not to do that.

The seriousness of this latest controversy cannot be underestimated. Unlike the scandals related to Obama's various associations with unsavory characters, or claims about his Muslim upbringing, the issue here relates to his citizenship and legal qualification to run for President of the United States.

One would have thought that the most basic documentary proof of the location and date of his birth should be a basic and non-controversial requirement for any presidential candidate, and part of the public record, much more so than one's tax return or annual checkup. It is almost incomprehensible that they would withhold this information -- unless there is something to hide.

Ironically, a similar controversy surrounded Obama's likely opponent in the Presidential race, John McCain. McCain was born to two American parents, one of whom was serving in a US military hospital in the Panama Canal Zone.

This Washington Post column on examines the issue:

"McCain was indeed born in the Canal Zone, and Article II of the Constitution plainly states that 'no person except a natural born Citizen... shall be eligible to the Office of President.'

"Some might define the term 'natural-born citizen' as one who was born on United States soil. But the First Congress, on March 26, 1790, approved an act that declared, 'The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural-born citizens of the United States.' That would seem to include McCain, whose parents were both citizens and whose father was a Navy officer stationed at the U.S. naval base in Panama at the time of John's birth in 1936."

But the issue is not legally closed, and therefore this year, as reported in a non-binding resolution was introduced and passed affirming that McCain qualifies as a "natural born Citizen," as specified in the Constitution and is therefore eligible for the highest office in the land. Ironically, the resolution was co-sponsored by Barack Obama.

About McCain, of course, there is no question about the facts surrounding his birth, but over their legal significance. He is not denying that he was born in Panama, or posting certificates that claim he was born in Florida. Obama's campaign, on the other hand, seems intent on evading the need to produce and submit to public scrutiny the official document that could prove that his qualification to run for President according to the Constitution.

The cloud of controversy, of course, could be dispelled with ease, of course, if Obama would release the real documentation of his birth, or even the original printed version of the online document the campaign claims as genuine. And yet the campaign is sticking by its guns, despite the evidence from the blogosphere pointing to the forgery and inadequacy of the proffered image of the non-birth certificate. Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesman, told the "I can confirm that that is Sen. Obama's birth certificate."

Validation for the authenticity of the image is provided by a reporter for the, who reportedly emailed the image and got a confirmation from an official in the Hawaiian Department of Health. "It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo is quoted as telling the reporter.

Israel Insider is checking into this report and will report back on its findings.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 08:13 AM

A fragment of the purported "birth certificate"

Upper-left corner of frame shows uneven "paste" of vertical rectangle, unaligned with horizontal border (Photicon blog)

Seal of the state of Hawaii appears in a low-resolution, second-generation black and white image inconsistent with the rest of the document (Photicon blog)

June 6, 2007 appears at the bottom of the image, just right of center, as a backward facing stamp. Where does this come from, and what does it mean? And where is the official seal and signatures that one would expect on an official document of this kind?

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 09:08 AM

38 Of Obama's 'Not
Exactly' Statements

Douglas C. Branham, C.L.S., C.M.R.P.

Site Manager

ArcelorMittal Project

P2S Caribbean


Obama's "Not Exactly's": This person is more dangerous than any candidate in recent years....

1.) Selma Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe

enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as

Selma was in 1965. (Google'Obama Selma' for his full March 4,

2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.)

2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a

privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan


3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he

was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has

ever had.

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT

EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting

to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first

widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American

but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your

half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your

New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out

the following link for verification of that....and for more.

Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and

tried to get Sharia muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the

elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned

men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took

shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here

started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to


the truth.

5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT

EXACTLY, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own

interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been

one of 14 wives to 1 man.

6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is

Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means

'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he

would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black

President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side

and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While

Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya, his father's family

was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African

Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states

he's Arab, not African Negro). From....and for more....go to.....


7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it

daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that

faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run

for office. 4-3-08 Article "Obama was 'quite religious in


8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you

were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic

Studies for making faces (check your own book).

February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a

year ago: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to

prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed

delightfully uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks),

Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as "one of the prettiest

sounds on Earth at sunset." This is just one example of what Pamela

is talking about when she says "Obama's narrative is being altered,

enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts."

9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one

teacher says you could speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign

Experience - NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and

couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the

Koran and watch cartoons.

11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except

for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have

never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience

with our closest allies.

12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT

EXACTLY, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no

mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your

classmates said you were just fine.

13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT

EXACTLY, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It

doesn't, and never did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life -

NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your

book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.

15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT

EXACTLY, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not

have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.

16.) Voting "Present" is Common In Illinois

Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU, but not many others have


17.) Oops, I Misvoted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by

church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY, you were a

senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were

a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT

EXACTLY, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it

took just 14 days from start to finish.

22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill

was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all

regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which

David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, as of

March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be

released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT

EXACTLY, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld

Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.

25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY,

your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which

lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY,

even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY,

they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their

creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher


28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA -

NOT EXACTLY, the Canadian Government issued the names and a memo of the

conversation your campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - NOT EXACTLY, you missed the

Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali

Abunimah supports the destruction of Israel.

30.) I Want All Votes To Count - NOT EXACTLY, you said let

the delegates decide.

31.) I Want Americans To Decide - NOT EXACTLY, you prefer

caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote,

and only operate during small windows of time.

32.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - NOT EXACTLY,

you passed 26, most of which you didn't write yourself.

33.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - NOT EXACTLY, you

used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

34.) I Don't Take PAC Money - NOT EXACTLY, you take

loads of it.

35.) I don't Have Lobbyists - NOT EXACTLY, you have

over 47 lobbyists, and counting.

36.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - NOT

EXACTLY, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one


37.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - NOT EXACTLY, you

weren't in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it

every single time.

38.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - NOT

EXACTLY, your plan leaves us all to pay for the 15,000,000 who don't

have to buy it

"Qui non intelligit aut discat aut taceat"

Who does not understand should either learn, or be silent.

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 12:05 PM

Is Obama Eligible Or Not? It’s My Country And I Need To Know!
June 14, 2008 by

In the article posted at TMQ2 “Is Obama a Natural Born Citizen” it says, “According to, which is cited by Geraghty, the requirements that were in force from Dec. 24, 1952 to Nov. 13, 1986, encompassing the time of Obama’s birth, state, ‘If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least 10 years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.’”

In context, the point was that since Obama’s father wasn’t a U.S. citizen when Obama was born, and since his mother was 18-years-old when Obama was born, the only conclusion left is Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

Because no one in the national media has picked up on this and run with it, I wish someone more inclined than I would pull the actual verbiage out of the law again and rewrite and repackage and retitle the entire story in a manner than makes it easier to understand so maybe this time someone in the mainstream media will understand the implications and get a general concensus going on what we must make of this story.

* * * * * * *

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 12:39 PM

Obama’s BIG Birth Certificate PROBLEM

By TexasDarlingravatarcloseAuthor: TexasDarlin Name: Texas Darlin
About: See Authors Posts (42) on June 20, 2008 at 7:00 PM in Bamboozling, Barack Obama, Qualifications

I have acquired additional information related to my earlier posts today (at my blog) on the subject of Barack Obama’s ‘Certification of Live Birth.’

My first post on this subject, Obama Birth Certificate, Fake?, included an analysis that I came across by a blogger named Polarik, who concluded based on “20 years of experience in computers, printers, and typewriters” that the document provided by the Obama campaign (and published by Daily Kos) was manufactured.

In a subsequent post, Certification of Birth from Hawaii: Where’s the Seal?, I showed a ‘Certification of Live Birth’ from Honolulu County for Patricia Decosta, which I found posted at Free Republic (thanks to reader shainzona). (And yes, I know it’s a “right wing” publication but that does not make the information false).

Here is the document posted by the Obama campaign on its Fight the Smears website as evidence of Obama’s birth in Hawaii in 1961:

And here is Ms. Decosta’s certification:

Now, compare the two documents. Polarik’s technical analysis notwithstanding, my lay person’s eye noticed three differences right away:

1. Ms. Decosta’s certification displays fold marks, which you might expect to see on a document sent through the mail.

2. The certificate number on Obama’s document is blacked out; Ms. Decosta’s is not.


3. An embossed seal is visible on Ms. Decosta’s certification; there is no embossed seal on Obama’s. (You can see the embossed seal very clearly on the larger image at FR here.)

The Vital Records office in Hawaii has confirmed the following with respect to requests for certified copies of birth certificates:

1. Certifications of live birth are always mailed from the VR office, and never transmitted electronically.

2. Certificate numbers are never blacked out.


3. Certifications will always have an embossed seal.
NOTE: Larry Johnson also wrote about this subject recently here: What Does an Authentic Hawaiian Birth Certificate Look Like?

Cross posted at TexasDarlin

: Fremen Bryan Jul 2 2008, 12:44 PM

Obama’s Birth Certificate BAMBOOZLE, Cont.

By TexasDarlingravatarcloseAuthor: TexasDarlin Name: Texas Darlin
About: See Authors Posts (42) on June 21, 2008 at 3:00 PM in Bamboozling, Barack Obama, Qualifications

Friday we started a series on Obama’s birth certificate. The most recent post, Obama’s BIG Birth Certificate PROBLEM, featured two supposed “Certificates of Live Birth” from Honolulu, Hawaii: one presented as evidence of Obama’s 1961 birth; and the other certifying the birth of Patricia Decosta.

Here again is the document proffered by the Obama Campaign as evidence of his birth:

And here is Ms. Decosta’s certification:

We received confirmation from the Hawaii State Department of Health (HSDH) that:

1. Certified copies of birth certificates are NEVER sent electronically. Copies can be requested by qualified individuals in person, by mail, or on line; and the Vital Records (VR) office will MAIL the Certification of Live Birth within 4 to 6 weeks.

2. Certifications of Live Birth will ALWAYS include an embossed seal.

3. The Vital Records office will NEVER black out the certification number.

Thanks to our sharp readers, I’ve come up with a pretty interesting list of observations and questions so far. So, let’s review.


1. Both documents reference the same form, indicated in the lower left corner: “OHSM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) LASER,” likely meaning that this form was revised in Nov. 2001 for use with laser printers, AND therefore that both of these certifications theoretically would have been produced by the VR office in Nov. 2001 or later.

2. In the lower left section, Decosta’s document says “Date Accepted By State Registrar” and Obama’s says “Date Filed By Registrar.” If they were both produced on the same form, why is the language different?

3. Decosta’s “Certificate No.” in the upper right region is shown; Obama’s is blacked out with a clean-edged block. When was this done, by whom, and why would a birth certificate number be a secret? Again, this is never done by the HSDH.

4. Decosta’s shows an embossed seal in the lower center region; Obama’s has no embossed seal. Again, HSDH says certifications never leave the office without one.

5. Decosta’s shows a stamp with signature in the lower left region; Obama’s does not. Again, standard procedure?

6. Obama’s “father’s race” is shown as “African,” which many readers find odd given that it’s not descriptive for race. What was the term used on birth certificates in Hawaii in 1961 for an African American?

7. Both documents appear to show in the lower center region a faint date, such as the kind produced by a standard ink-pad stamp purchased in any office supply store. I cannot make out the dates. Maybe this is supposed to be the date that the certification was approved, or mailed? When does Obama claim that he “received” this document?”

8. The font on Decosta’s is much bolder than that on Obama’s.

9. Decosta’s reveals fold marks, which you’d expect from a mailed document; Obama’s shows no signs of being handled at all, as if it was never printed (and if that’s the case, how was the certificate number blacked out?).

In addition, Polarik finds all kinds of problems in the microscopic details, as have other readers with expertise in the fields of printing, graphics, etc.

Other questions based on reader comments and Google searches:

1. Obama obviously cannot claim that this document is his original birth certificate, so why doesn’t he comment on the whereabouts of the original?

2. Wikipedia says that “Obama was born on August 4, 1961, at the Kapiolani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.” Are there records of his birth at that hospital? I have seen references that there are not, but have not researched further.

3. The HSDH provides for “late registration” of a birth, and some have suggested that Obama may have actually been born in Kenya and registered for birth in Hawaii later. Has anyone researched this?

And finally, a possibly related question is whether Obama registered for the Selective Service when he turned 18, as he was required to do by law. Did the SS registration require a birth certificate?

Any other comments, observations, or information?

: Fremen Bryan Jul 21 2008, 05:32 PM

FORENSIC EXPERT: "the [birth] certificate is still a horrible forgery"
Atlas Shrugs Blog ^ | 7/11/08 | Techdude

Posted on 07/11/2008 8:39:42 PM PDT by freespirited

Techdude embellishes upon his previous expert analysis on Obama's birth certificate and gives us his impeccable credentials and they are freakin scary. No, no seriously. I am honored to be the recipient of this most excellent and enormously entertaining and informative exegesis. Not only is techdude brilliant and unequivocally expert in the field of forensic digital forgery examination but his wildly funny. How great is that? There is nothing Atlas finds sexier than witty and wise. I am running his remarks completely unedited.

Adam's Apple (the fruit of knowledge) fasten your seat belts [emphasis mine]

I would like to address a few questions and concerns which have been raised around the collective blogosphere since I first posted my original comments explaining some of the conclusions I reached in my forensic investigation of the KOS certificate controversy.

Think of it [as] my own “Fight the Smears” campaign and before you have to even ask – yes, the certificate is still a horrible forgery. Please keep in mind that I am writing this at 3 AM after having spent the last 18 hours working on imaging and examining a 2 TB RAID array so I may ramble on a bit and I may miss some the questions people wanted answered.

Q. Why should we trust the findings of some anonymous blog poster?

A. These days that is one of the most insightful questions people should be asking about anything they read or see on the Internet and in even mass media. I applaud you for questioning my credentials which I will get to momentarily. Today we are so inundated with misinformation and rumors posed as facts that if you fail to question everything and if you do not do your own research about all you are force fed - you are doomed to be some one else’s sock puppet.

I feel that the same question demands to be asked about the claims made by the Daily KOS blog since they posted Senator Obama’s “Certificate of Live Birth” which they received from an anonymous source who they claim works for the Obama Campaign. If Senator Obama had personally provided the document to the folks at KOS I never would have given the issue a passing thought even if my friend had asked me to look into it – not that I would take any politician on their word but it would have been a verified source f or the information which, for me at least, would have removed some of the red flags.

I am sure we all remember last year’s problems that Reuters was having with their digitally manipulated “news” images – so to accept a digital image at face value without any substantiating corroboration is just plain silly whether you support the candidate or not.

Next allow me to explain why the original story was posted with the username “techdude” and not my real name – when you register to post a comment it asks for a screen name a/k/a handle or nickname. I have used techdude as my screen names since the early 90’s. It was not done as a way to create some odd air of mystery and people actually call me “techdude” as a nickname in the real world too. As for me, my given name is Adam, and no you can not currently have my last name – too many nut cases in the world, but if you want a copy of my full CV contact Ms. Geller at Atlas Shrugs and, if you ask her very nicely, perhaps she will forward your emails to me and if I am in a giving mood I may send you a reply.

I also strongly suggest donating some money to her blog to help keep her independent and insightful thoughts alive and well online – but if you want to have some fun trying and you have some free time you should also able to locate me all by yourself. I am the owner and primary forensic examiner of a computer forensic science laboratory – [the name of which I will also not give out at this time – still too many nut cases and I will not endanger people around the lab.

But again if you feel like donating some money to Atlas Shrugs perhaps Ms. Geller will forward your emails to me.] I am an active member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, American College of Forensic Examiners, The International Society of Forensic Computer Examiners, International Information Systems Forensics Association - the list could go on. I am also a board certified as a forensic computer examiner, a certificated legal investigator, and a licensed private investigator. I have been performing computer based forensic investigations since 1993 (although back then it did not even have a formal name yet) and I have performed countless investigations since then. I also volunteer my services for free to those who can not afford the $250 an hour it takes to secure the services of their own private computer forensic expert. I did not go into this field for the money. Just call me an idealist.

I prefer to call him a Randian or in Geller terms, the ideal man.

Now to quickly clear up some of the strangest speculations I have read about my supposed background - all in one or two rather convoluted run-on sentences…yes, I have a government issued security clearance (sensitive but unclassified information – sorry but I have no access to space aliens) and NO I am NOT an agent of the federal government.

Yes, I have received training from the Treasury Department, Department of Homeland Security and FEMA, and yes I am involved with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s InfraGard program but again that does NOT make me a federal agent. They do not get paid enough to put up with the massive amount of crap they have to deal with. All will be revealed eventually – I am just wary of finding my brake lines cut and my bunny boiled in a pot of water as this issue has raised more ire than the time I found inculpatory evidence against some local law enforcement officers. At least all they did in retaliation was to randomly pull me over for a couple of weeks where as here I only gave a sound opinion based on established facts in the comment section of a blog and I am already hearing about physical threats from whack-jobs.

Q. Why would you waste your time with something so trivial?

A. Some people collect stamps, others prefer to garden. I enjoy forensic challenges such as the Department of Defense’s DC3 Forensic Challenge which this year (and last) just so happen to include the issues raised by the KOS certificate controversy.

Is it a real image or has it been created on a computer…or is it a mix of both? I have simply been using this exercise as a way to verify and validate both proven and theorized methodologies for detecting digital tampering. That is after all what good science is all about. What may appear as a trivial waste of time on the surface to the casual observer is actually part of a deeper rooted issue facing computer forensic investigations.

Since the US Supreme Court ruled in their Ashcroft decision that possessing digitally created and modified images of children engaging in sexual conduct is legal the computer forensics community has had to meet this challenge to prove to a court of law that images were either real or they were created or modified on a computer. Not too surprisingly, since that decision was handed down, almost every one arrested for possessing child pornography has tried to use “it is not a real image” as a defense. It now beats the “a virus downloaded those 5,000 images” defense as the biggest waste of our time.

So before you say looking at the KOS COLB is a waste of time try looking at the much larger picture and forget about your politics. Besides, “forensics” is the process of using science to establish facts suitable for the courtroom and also to inspire public debate. I believe this issue accomplishes both.

Q. Are you politically biased? Do you hate Obama? What are you REALLY working towards?

A. I am a political agnostic – While I know there is a Congress I do not worship at the altar of any political ideology because it is a worthless endeavor. I am a proud American and nothing more. Besides today’s politicians all demand to be treated like spoiled rock stars and I have never really been fan of any of their music. Sure there may be that one-hit wonder or a chart topper or two but generally their entire collection of records suck and can all be bought for a few dollars at WalMart. If you have enough money they will even perform at your son’s wedding. I vote only for the person or issue NOT for the party and NO I am not a Republican operative, a Right Wing nutcase, an angry Hillary supporter, a NeoCon Zionist, or an Israeli Mossad agent (it sounds like a fun job though).

In this election cycle I am still one of those G-d forsaken undecided voters who do not belong to any political party. I mean can you really blame me? Generally I am just your average every day middle of the road kind of guy with the occasional very strong opinion. In the interest of full disclosure I was rooting for Rudy, and out of all the candidates running for President I would only want to go out for drinks with Hillary as she would easily be the most entertaining. Oh, and for the stories and gossip I am sure she could tell.

Obama appears to be a somewhat nice person but I would not be interested in attending a Mets game with the guy. I just do not get a good vibe from him. There are too many real issues that he has not addressed plus the ones that he has flipped on and I believe he is just another typical politician in a long line of typical politicians offering more of the same BS in a shiny new package.

Now before you run off screaming that I am biased against Obama I also feel the same way about McCain – minus the shiny and new part. Some people also took my “Obamanationalists loosing their minds” comment completely out of context assuming that I could not possibly be even remotely unbiased in my findings that the KOS certificate is a really bad fake because I would dare to make a disparaging comment. Well, you can fix dumb but you can not fix stupid so I will not even bother to address that one and if you were offended by the remark – grow a damn pair. If it makes you feel any better I also call McCain’s brain dead legion of followers “McMorons” and the occasional “CaptMcNutterButters”. Hey, I may not be Mother Teresa but I am always honest.

In this race I am not betting on any horse and I really do not care about the outcome so you can check that off your bizarre conspiracy theory list. Just call me disenfranchised. Everyone is free to just assume I dislike all stupid people if that will make you feel better. Plus as I stated in the previous section this was never about a campaign issue for me – it is about improving forensic methodologies and scientific techniques to spot digital image manipulations and for prosecuting pedophiles. Granted at this point in time my curiosity is peaked and I would really like to see what his real COLB looks like just to see how bad of a forgery the KOS version really is.

Q. Are you the same techdude who posts comments full of conspiracy theories on all the blogs?

A. Uhmmm… First time I ever felt compelled to leave a comment on a blog was the one that caused me to have to write this mess of an answer. (Or is this part of some vast conspiracy? (j/k) Apparently “techdude” has just become a rather popular handle.

Q. Are you the same techdude who posts all those articles on StormFront?

A. Uhmmm…..hell no.

Q. Wasn’t the KOS COLB already declared real and this issue laid to rest? Haven’t you read the blogs? You cannot both be right.

A. If you are talking about the findings of a certain 2 initialed blogger [The Obama “Forged Birth Certificate” Myth Is Busted -ed] whose dubious findings are based on obviously false conclusions and a complete lack of basic information that was compiled in under an hour and was then picked up across the blogosphere and taken as the word of G-d even though it has absolutely no basis in fact then yes I have read that. That will be addressed once I compile all of my findings (there are many that I just did not bother to post at the time as I had wrongfully assumed that every already knew it was a fake) and the results of several experiments which may explain more than anyone ever wanted to know about that KOS COLB image and exactly how the forgery was created. I will also touch a little bit on the OpenDNA COLB versions but that really is a dead horse at this point as everything he has already admitted can be corroborated by looking at the images which are based on the pre-existing KOS COLB.

But for the fun of it I will beat that horse a bit longer just to prove a point and show how wrong some people can be when they begin to develop implausible theories that have no basis in fact – and how they loose all credibility when they start to make up their own facts or purposely misquote other people’s conclusions. It will be both entertaining and informative. And before we all go off in a huff let us not forget that there are more than one known official Hawaiian COLB's to work with. Now of course if you have two very differing opinions – one saying it is authentic and the other saying it is a forgery – only one can be correct. It is almost impossible to prove a negative such as trying to prove G-d does not exist but I assure you it is pretty easy to prove a document is a forgery by comparison.

That is why all of my findings are being made public (the good and the bad, the parts I can explain, and the unanswered questions that need further study or examination) – it is called peer review. For the ill-informed and the amature analysts that may have seen one too many episodes of CSI that means a point by point rebuttal showing how certain findings are factually incorrect or inaccurately interpreted or simply the admission and acceptance that the findings are correct. Calling me a doody-head and making even more implausible theories having no basis in fact is not generally considered a proper peer response but I will accept those if that is the best that you can offer.

Q. When will you post your final summary with all the goodies?

A. If I am able to conclude some interpolation of various bits of missing data before this weekend (7/12/2008) and I do not get any emergency calls that will take me away from the lab and if I do not keep finding more corroborating evidence for the summary – it should be completed and emailed to Pamela with all of the associated screenshots sometime next week.

Sorry but Atlas Shrugs gets the Exclusive – no soup for anyone else.
[- ed]

Now go donate some damned money to support this blog or she may just decide to NOT publish the data! (How is that for the hard sell?) And do not worry about understanding the summary – I will de-geek it the best that I can while also including footnotes and references for those of you who are trying to follow along or teach yourself as you go.

In fact I may try to write it up as a step by step guide so you can follow along and recreate everything yourself in the comfort of your living rooms using freely available software if at all possible.

Learn to do it “on the cheap” as my grandmother used to say. The world needs more forensics geeks. And to the previously aforementioned 2 initialed blogger I just read your latest reply to my conclusions on your blog – and once I stop laughing, take a nap, and get this paid case done I will have to write up a very subjective reply but until then please stop typing you are really beginning to embarrass yourself. I mean seriously just stop it man. Oh gosh...I just read your replies to the comments left under your masterpiece of deductive reasoning and I just spit my coffee all over my laptop. Oh hey, I see here you are a “computer expert, which covers all aspects of computers and how they manipulate data” with an obvious grasp on your special version of do I get this crap out of the nooks and crannies of my keyboard since it is obvious you know all about crap?

Just one more question – since you claim you are “also a NASA engineer who focuses on and reviews computer and communications systems flight and ground. Documents are a simple niche in my world.” What computers does NASA use that run on paper? Or did you mean you read magazine articles about hardware reviews? Just asking. And as a busy NASA Engineer you are obviously busy engineering NASA or something to be able to spend more than a few minutes posting logical replies. [cat fight cat fight!] Now go send some money to support Ms. Geller's blog or it will be no more soup for you!

: insurrection Oct 9 2008, 09:05 PM

I think that Obama has a good chance of winning. However if he does win he will probably be assassinated by racist terrorists in the US (KKK or neo-Nazis). He is as they say the "next JFK." I don't like this, but I'm just telling it how I see it. And when that happens black people in America are going to be pissed off. Race relations are going to get ugly in put it lightly.

: Casbah Oct 10 2008, 08:04 AM

Dude, c'mon that's not gonna happen.

: Bombtastic Oct 10 2008, 01:12 PM

If he is assassinated, it will be because he chose to go against the will of the "powers at be". Not because some KKK dumbass wanted to shoot him. Security with the president is tight as fuck ya know.

: regilas Oct 10 2008, 01:39 PM

Of course, I think the guy's full of shit, but it's pretty funny to see him lose it.

I think Obama's clearly the best man for the job. He may very well be one of the best presidents in US history. Even if I thought John McCain was the better man, I'd not vote for him because he's old and Sarah Palin is his running mate. But yes, I think he can be president. He's far more qualified than John McCain, John Kerry, George Bush (Jr. or Sr.), Bill Clinton, Hilary Clinton, Al Gore, Bob Dole, or Ronald Reagan, in my opinion. And McCain has no hope at this point. I'd fear assassination of the president no matter who won, as this is a vital election. But for one, should that tragic event occur, I'd rather Joe Biden take charge than Sarah Palin.

But it's not going to happen. I am very confident Obama's gonna win. And I'm pretty sure we're gonna see some massive change, what with a large part of congress given to the democrats and Obama as president. Of course, I'm presuming a bit too much.

: Bombtastic Oct 11 2008, 08:37 PM

QUOTE (regilas @ Oct 10 2008, 01:39 PM) *

Wow that guys brainwashed. i bet he wants to join the KKK laughing.gif

: regilas Oct 16 2008, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (Bombtastic @ Oct 11 2008, 11:37 PM) *
QUOTE (regilas @ Oct 10 2008, 01:39 PM) *

Wow that guys brainwashed. i bet he wants to join the KKK laughing.gif

Aye. For you Office fans and Spirit of Truth fans, he reminds me of Spirit of Truth and Stanley.

I think the scary thing is that this hype is being made. Do people not know that assassination is a higher possibility when you tell people to have fear.

Speaking of which, Bob Scheiffer asked a good question about that.

: Sarielite Oct 17 2008, 10:18 AM

"I would rather go through the Great Depression ten times over than let Barack Hussein Obama be president."

He's too young to have experience of the Great Depression. It's unfortunate that he feels the need to spread his ignorance around.

: Salva Veritate Oct 18 2008, 08:17 PM

A "Great Depression ten times over" would destroy the country. Someone tell him that and ask him why he hates America so much. laughing.gif

: Fremen Bryan Aug 3 2009, 11:41 AM

Motion for rogatory discovery to authenticate Kenyan Birth Certificate of Barack Hussein Obama

: Fremen Bryan Aug 3 2009, 12:04 PM

Paul Joseph Watson
Sunday, August 2, 2009

California attorney Orly Taitz has released a copy of a birth certificate that purports to show Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya, which if authenticated would plunge the United States into a constitutional crisis and potentially herald a catastrophic loss of confidence in the legitimacy of the government.

The Obama birth certificate issue has been rumbling on for over a year, with researchers demanding to see a complete birth certificate proving that President Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims, yet none has been forthcoming.

Mainstream media attention on the issue has intensified over the past few weeks, even forcing the White House itself to publicly dismiss the controversy.

However, Taitz' bombshell discovery blows the whole story wide open and its ramifications could be monumental., Taitz has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court seeking authentication for the document.

View the document below. Click for enlargements.

"The document lists Obama's parents as Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Obama, formerly Stanley Ann Dunham, the birth date as Aug. 4, 1961, and the hospital of birth as Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya," reports World Net Daily.

"No doctor is listed. But the alleged certificate bears the signature of the deputy registrar of Coast Province, Joshua Simon Oduya. It was allegedly issued as a certified copy of the original in February 1964.

"WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical."

Despite the fact that a hoax document similar in nature circulated the Internet last week, World Net Daily reports that the new document "bears none of the obvious traits of a hoax".

The birth certificate was released by an anonymous source who did not want to be named because he fears for his life.

"I filed the motion with the court asking for expedited discovery, which would allow me to start subpoenas and depositions even before Obama and the government responds," Taitz told WND. "I am asking the judge to give me the power to subpoena the documents from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate [the birth certificate]."

If proven genuine, the document could herald a constitutional crisis in the United States and lead to Barack Obama being kicked out of office before he's even able to complete his first year in the White House.

Obviously the more likely scenario will be that the court will be strong armed into dismissing the document as a counterfeit by the powers that be.

However, the overt preparations for martial law which have intensified since Obama took office have doubtless taken into account the fact that a complete loss of confidence in the legitimacy of the government could foster civil unrest and make a police state crackdown necessary from the perspective of the authorities.

: Fremen Bryan Aug 4 2009, 11:16 AM

I am not an expert in authenticating documents so I have no idea if this Kenyan B.C. is real or not, but what I do know is that just about always when the entire main-stream media is attacking somebody in concert, it usually means they are onto something, and the main-stream media is full on attacking this womans credibility and good name like a swarm of angry wasps, and if she posed no threat to the spiritually wicked powers that be they would just be ignoring her.

: Sarielite Aug 4 2009, 01:28 PM

You don't need to grease too many palms to get fake documents made in Kenya.

: ONE EYED MAN Aug 4 2009, 05:38 PM

as some of you may remember this is much of the same info i dug up way back when he was just a candidate. my research showed that he was not even born in hawaii, but rather in kenya. while living in indonesia, during war time, his STEP father had to either formally adopt him or else he and his mother would have to leave the country. so at that point he was formally made a citizen of indonesia, at around age 10. also i posted several statues of hawaiian state law that state a person who has claimed a hawaiian address for longer than one year can claim citizenship. at this time said person can get an "official" certificate of birth (not the same as an actual birth certificate by the way, which is a document signed off by medical personnel confirming live birth at a given place and time) for themselves AND all immediate children. these certificates of birth are for legal purposes such as enrolling kids in school or showing documentation for employment, and can contain ANY information the person puts on the form. kind of how like back in the day people used check cashing cards to buy liquor, because they could put whatever birth date they wanted on the application, no proof was required.

: Fremen Bryan Aug 5 2009, 11:30 AM

QUOTE (Sarielite @ Aug 4 2009, 01:28 PM) *
You don't need to grease too many palms to get fake documents made in Kenya.

Yes but Obamas paternal grandmother in Kenya said she was in the delivery room when he was born, and 'although politicians are known to lie, grandmothers are not'. Also, as Casbah pointed out, elderly people do sometimes die, however what are the odds a woman who said she witnessed the Kenyan birth happens to die the night before elections?/! :-

What is more the Kenyan Ambassador admitted 'it is a well known fact Obama was born in Kenya' and that it is up to the Kenyan government if they want to build a memorial there or not:-

The entire phone call can be heard here:

QUOTE (ONE EYED MAN @ Aug 4 2009, 05:38 PM) *
as some of you may remember this is much of the same info i dug up way back when he was just a candidate. my research showed that he was not even born in hawaii, but rather in kenya. while living in indonesia, during war time, his STEP father had to either formally adopt him or else he and his mother would have to leave the country. so at that point he was formally made a citizen of indonesia, at around age 10. also i posted several statues of hawaiian state law that state a person who has claimed a hawaiian address for longer than one year can claim citizenship. at this time said person can get an "official" certificate of birth (not the same as an actual birth certificate by the way, which is a document signed off by medical personnel confirming live birth at a given place and time) for themselves AND all immediate children. these certificates of birth are for legal purposes such as enrolling kids in school or showing documentation for employment, and can contain ANY information the person puts on the form. kind of how like back in the day people used check cashing cards to buy liquor, because they could put whatever birth date they wanted on the application, no proof was required.

Barak who was registered as Barry Soetoro couldn't have attended a Muslim school in Indonesia unless he was a Muslim and a citizen of Indonesia - that was the law of that land at the time Barry was 10. Not to mention he slipped up on camera and said "my Muslim faith" and then quickly changed it to Christian (and I am not saying there is anything wrong with reading the Koran or Prophet Muhammed {PBUH} but lying about it to millions of people to gain votes is very wrong and against both Faiths). Not only that since his mother was not living in the U.S. for at least 5 years over the age of 14, and his other parent is not a U.S. citizen, this bars Obama from being a U.S. citizen as per the law of America at that time. Unfortunately the very first day in office Barak signed an Executive Order sealing all of his records from the public, save the ones he chooses to release, so anybody that says he has nothing to hide, please explain the meaining of this?/!

Executive Order 13489

: Fremen Bryan Dec 1 2009, 01:59 PM

Formal treason charges filed against Barrack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, reach Monroe County Tennessee Grand Jury - Tuesday December 1, 2009
Obama Treason Charges Advance In Tennessee Grand Jury

By JB Williams Saturday, November 28, 2009

On June 10, 2009 I wrote about formal treason charges filed against Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, in - Is Obama Guilty of Treason? I followed that column up with - Why Commander Fitzpatrick Is NOT Guilty of Mutiny! on June 13. Since then, numerous others have filed similar treason charges against Obama/Soetoro with little or no fanfare…

If Obama is indeed guilty of treason - then we have a growing list of folks who are also committing treason. Namely, every member of law enforcement and the justice system who have taken an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic - along with every individual in Washington DC and beyond who has chosen to look the other way while denying American citizens their day in court - claiming that no citizen has the "legal standing" to ask who in the hell Barack Hussein Obama really is…

After visits from the Secret Service and months of rejection by the courts, Commander Walter Fitzpatrick may get his day in court.

On Tuesday December 1st 2009, Retired Navy Commander Walter Fitzpatrick III will present the evidence behind his treason complaint against Obama/Soetoro to all thirteen members of a Tennessee Grand Jury in Monroe County Tennessee.

The road to justice has been bumpy, to say the least. Commander Fitzpatrick has been ridiculed, blocked in court house halls, threatened, accused of mutiny and labeled a "crackpot" by Obama supporters who see no need for a standard background check for the most powerful office in the world.

Fitzpatrick had to go so far as to file criminal obstruction charges against Grand Jury Foreman Pettway before he would gain access to the court.  Despite it all, Commander Fitzpatrick forged ahead and on December 1st, his complaint will be heard by his local Monroe County Tennessee Grand Jury.

Now, this places the Tennessee Grand Jury squarely in the middle of the biggest Constitutional Crisis in U.S. history. Fitzpatrick will be under oath before the Grand Jury on Tuesday. If the Grand Jury has any doubts about Fitzpatrick's testimony, they must arrest him for perjury on the spot. If they don't arrest him for perjury, they are accepting his testimony as true and accurate…

If Article II—Section I—Clause V of the U.S. Constitution means nothing—then no part of the Constitution means anything today. On the other hand, if the Monroe County Tennessee Grand Jury follows its oath to uphold, protect and preserve the Constitution and apply the law equally to all, then the charge of treason must be allowed its day in court.

The Monroe County Grand Jury appears ready to act on its oath and authority. But if they don't, they could become thirteen new members of a long list of folks equally guilty of treason, for turning their heads the other way and denying the American people access to the courts in what might be the greatest case in U.S. political history.

Thirteen members of the Monroe County Grand Jury hold the future of Constitutional Law in their hands. Come Tuesday, they will have an opportunity to keep their oath to the American people - the citizens of Monroe County and state of Tennessee. Of course, they will also have an opportunity to do what several civil and criminal court judges have already done on the matter. They can turn their heads and deny citizens their right to be heard…

But with each passing day, the stakes get higher and higher in the case over who Obama/Soetoro really is and whom he really serves. Atop the growing list of unconstitutional acts by the Obama administration is the Samson Alabama story in which—"
An Army investigation has found that the use of armed military policemen from Fort Rucker in response to mass murders in Samson violated federal law." —reports the Associated Press.

"The Army earlier confirmed that 22 military police and an officer were sent to Samson after the mass slaying of 10 people on March 10. - The Department of Army Inspector General found a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which restrains the use of the military for civilian law enforcement purposes."

Yet ten months after inauguration, Obama's entire past remains a mystery under lock and key. Obama has spent almost $2 million in legal fees to keep his life Top Secret, not counting millions in tax-payer funded road blocks thrown up by Obama's Justice Department, which has sent numerous federal attorneys into court after court to file dismissal requests on the basis of "standing" - with great success. They don't want the courts to ever decide Obama's Constitutional eligibility on "merit," because if discovery ever goes forward and Obama's files are opened up, Obama is finished and so is his Marxist Global Agenda!

Make no mistake… The courts have clearly ruled that NO AMERICAN CITIZEN has the "proper standing" to ask even the most fundamental questions about Barack Hussein Obama (aka Barry Soetoro). The American press has not only ignored these facts, but mocked anyone willing to ask the right questions - of the right people - in the right way.

Tuesday, the Monroe County Grand Jury will get an opportunity to make history and reverse the modern trend of denying citizens their day in court. The people have a right to know who and what Obama really is. Let's see if the Monroe County Grand Jury has the backbone to force Obama to answer that question.

When an unconstitutional resident of the White House rushes a laundry list of unconstitutional policies through, including the use of the Military against U.S. citizens—against the demands of the American citizens, it's time to ask some very serious questions and the American people deserve no less than honest answers.

The Monroe County Grand Jury will hear these and other charges Tuesday December 1st. God help this nation if they lack the courage to take a stand with the citizenry of this great nation.  The future of American justice hangs in the balance! The people deserve much more than a simple birth certificate. They deserve a legitimate government - limited to its constitutional authority - and they deserve a justice system willing to uphold those foundational principles and values.

All eyes across this nation will be on Monroe County Tennessee this week!

Invision Power Board (
© Invision Power Services (