Replies

It's days like this, and stuff like this in WND, that make me want to pull out my hair and scream. Somebody needs to get in touch with John D. Hemenway, stat, and introduce him to the work I've done.

In today's WND, Les Kinsolving had a scathing commentary on FOXNEW's anchor, Shepard Smith, for his "Diatribe against (alleged) 'crazies'" Les wrote that attorney John D Hemenway sent a second letter to Press Secretary Gibbs after his first one went unanswered.

In this second letter, John made two statements that are not just incorrect, but are embarrassingly false:

The Certification of Live Birth Obama had put on the Internet was put on a laser printer before laser printers were available. It has been denounced as a forgery by competent authorities from Hawaii's Department of Home Lands.

First of all, John is confusing the short-form COLB with the long-form birth "Certificate of Live Birth," a detailed certificate used in 1961 that was filled-out by the hospital and attending physician, either by hand and/or typewritten.

The short-form COLB is a computer-generated, laser-printed certificate that Hawaii's DOH began using in November 2001 as a replacement for making photocopies of the long-form birth certificate. The COLB is a transcript of a person's birth record and, as such, contains only a minimum amount of birth information.

Additionally confusing is linking the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to any graphical analysis of Obama's COLB image.

Moreover, it was sometime last year when I discovered that the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands will not accept the short-form COLB; that they would only accept a copy of the long-form birth certificate. As far as I can tell, I was the first person to do so.

However, if you have been following WND's continuing stories about Obama's Birth Certificate, especially the commentaries by the egocentric Editor-in-Chief, Joseph Farah, you would get the impression that Farah was first and foremost in this eligibility brouhaha, to the exclusion of all others.

Today's issue had, not one, but two self-ingratiating self-love fests in which Farah couldn't stop giving himself props for producing every "Expose" and "Exclusive" that just happens to have the keywords, Obama and birth certificate. If Joe gets any fuller of himself, he'll explode like the Hindenburg.

I don't have as much problem with his new-found narcissism (that must be rubbing off of Obama) as I do with the outright plagiarism of my work as well as the lifting of Beckwith's work without attribution. I believe that credit should be given where credit is due. Sometimes, however, others need to be reminded of this maxim.

The most egregious of thought thiefs is reporter, Chelsea Schilling, because her articles were written as if she, alone, made these discoveries exclsively for WND. As a result, Farah takes credit for things that are not his to claim.

Secondly, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands had nothing, whatsoever, to do with any analysis of Obama's COLB, and we've known who was responsible for more than a year now.

Is it that hard to get the story straight?

On one side, Obama's COLB will be referenced as if it was an existing birth document produced by Hawaii, but one that lacks sufficient birth information to prove a person's natural-born citizen status.

On the opposite side (the correct one), Obama's COLB will be debunked as a fabricated forgery proving that Obama committed document fraud with Factcheck as an accomplice and coconspirator.

While everyone else has been running around, focusing only on the eligibility issue via the court system, and demanding that Obama release his original, "vault," long-form birth certificate, I have been "quietly" (**cough-cough**) pursuing the document fraud angle as the best chance of getting ZERO fired and Walpin reinstated.

Let's face it: SCOTUS is not likely to rule Obama ineligible, now that he's President. It would take an order of impeachment to do that. Congress could simplify life if it asked Obama to do what John McCain did to prove his eligibility, and Obama would politely reply, "I won, STFU!"

Congress could play the end game, and impeach Obama for a whole litany of criminal acts, beginning with felony document fraud.

The role of SCOTUS is to be an interested spectator on the sidelines.

The forgery issue is one that WND CANNOT claim as their own, as Farah still does not buy into it.