Posted on 04/26/2010 10:21:49 AM PDT by rxsid
http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/07/26/obamas-british-at-birth-uk-baby-photo/
Now, why after a year has a so called picture of Obama as an infant been published in public and why in the UK? Why not the US? Just publishing and saying so is not proof this is a photo of Obama, since his half-brother,Mark Ndesandjo, is a close likeness to Obama, right down to the lighter shade of his skin.
Mark Ndesandjo is the son of Barack Obama’s late father and his third wife, an American woman named Ruth Nidesand who runs the up-market Maduri kindergarten in Nairobi.
Also, Mark Ndesandjo has done several in-depth interviews with the media in the UK and China, but why none with US media? This also comes on the brink of in-depth discussions with China over America’s unsettling debt that is owed to them. Especially in the light of the London Times article in which this half-brother was urging that there needed to be more import of Chinese goods by Americans.
(photos & additional links at the link above as I am techno challenged)
Most of us are way behind your level, Fred. The majority of what I know, I read here - btw, the black barmaid was documented by someone on a thread but not of course whether she was anything to Stanley Dunham just speculation. I have done a number of searches while involved in reading a thread and I spent the better part of a week back in 2009 jumping from place to place reading and reading, bookmarking, saving pages and photos. I am in awe of your research skills and know it is the result of a lot of time spent on it. For every valuable item found, one has to sift through a lot of useless stuff.
If you ever want some help in doing searches on a particular subject, you are welcome to ping or freep mail me and make an assignment. I work much of the day on my computer unless I have an appointment elsewhere but don’t spend much time posting usually until late (have to work and FR is a terrible distraction sometimes) in the evening or night. I do check messages and pings every day, sometimes multiple times. So if you think I can help and you want help, ask. You never know - everybody uses different sources so it might be worthwhile.
Your offer is very much appreciated, thanks. I’ll Freepmail you.
Thanks, agreed, take nothing, certainly not images, at face value. And believe almost nothing printed in the Press. Particularly articles that try to persuade you that Mark Ndesando looks anything like zero.
As for Joseph, he was married in the US recently, you can catch a glimpse of his mother and father on the video:
http://www.videowavedigital.com/blog/?p=13
This one is for real!
This poor woman had her babies taken from her because she failed a DNA test, but they tested the wrong part of her body and she would produce two different DNA results depending on which area was tested.
There is also the possibility that the judge would take a look at that BC, and some of the early (from the early days of the Republic) and say. "Oh Dude, you aren't Natural Born" and tell the Court that the order was indeed not lawful. The Court would then find him not guilty and then All Hell Will Break Loose.
I'll have to lay in a good supply of popcorn, just in case. Or of ammunition. Just in case...Oh wait,already did that.
There's nothing preventing anyone from doing that now. There's a lot that can be found on anyone using public records. If certain records are private, demand that the candidate release them. If the candidate refuses to release them, then build a case to the voters that the candidate is being evasive and put the candidate in the uncomfortable position of defending his evasiveness. If enough voters demand to see a candidates private records, he'll release them. If his records are too embarrassing to release, then he's probably not going to have a very successful run for office.
that part of your reply naturally jumped out at me, in recent times I have looked at that image again...wondering when it might have been taken...and why the fact that the person whom we take to be Obama Senior, obviously had his arm around Stanley Armour Dunham. You can see where his sleeve/coat used to be, before the arm holding the briefcase was added.
And who is that young woman standing very close to Obama Senior; were the leis added to hide the fact that she also had her arm around him? She isn't Stanley Ann Dunham, could she be ANN OBAMA?
Well...so MANY internet photos of the President’s childhood, upbringing and family have obviously been photoshopped..that again, the “objective” data are probably anything but...rendering the circumstantial more reliable.
Remember the press club roast ...where Obama himself states his real name is “Steve Dunham” .....well just maybe ..maybe its “Stanley”..
http://24ahead.com/barack-obamas-real-name-steve-dunham-lets-figure-out
No, it's a Court Martial, that is a military court. The "crimes" charged would not even be crimes, if Lakins was a civilian doctor, even if he worked for the military as a civil servant or contractor. At most they would get him put on the street. So naturally the trial will be a military one. The Court will be composed of a panel of officers, probably drawn from his command, meaning either Walter Reed, or perhaps Army Medical Command. While the Judge will tell the Court what the legality of the orders were. The Court will still apply not just what is presented, but also notions of what is good for the service, and by extension the nation. They can be lenient, they can vote not guilty if they choose, and don't have to justify why they did so. Or they could find him guilty and in essence give him a slap on the wrist, say forfeiture of a months pay. Or they could go hard on him. But that itself would have implications for Good Order, most especially morale, and maybe retention. That part is up to them.
But we shall see.
If it was an "alphabet agency the letters were probably К Г Б
...
...
...
...
K G B
huh?
"Even so, you have shown there is at least on prior serving president who without dispute had one parent who was not a US citizen."
Oh, well then, since 1 guy usurpered the office when nobody at the time knew about it...why then, it should be allowed again.
And since somebody, a very long time ago got away with bank robbery, we should actively promote more of it because it was done before and the perp didn't pay a price.
Stunning. Although, not.
Possibly..... But IMHO, the book company payoff.... Is as much to his father as to him ... And is pure CIA
Remember that photo of Putin winking at 0bama - you can see the back of 0’s head, I think.
Putin (as always) looks evil, but that wink just curdled my blood.
Mojitojoe, O Keeper of the Photos, do you have that picture of Putin winking at 0?
Saw the show on cable, don't remember which network, but I saw it more than once.
Color me confused as it is late and I have been fighting a sewing machine with a personality of its own today & I have 4 racing jackets to get done by next weekend.
I often get to these threads after they have been attacked by trolls. The troll’s patterns are more clear when one looks at a thread after they have descended. Fred Nerks was probably the lead in the attack on this thread. One doesn't know if he is multiply registered and having conversations with him or herself. But the silly assertions have a pattern which suggests they may be advised about effective disruption of public discussions. Their assertions have the flavor of cheap novels: mysterious hidden twin brothers, scars, promiscuous mothers or grandmothers. Nothing they suggest can be dismissed or proved, while the original focus, the concrete violation of the intention and words of the Constitution is never mentioned by the trolls. They defocus the point of the article, possibly leaving the less informed with the impression that eligibility issues are a morass of impenetrability.
Usually, nothing trolls say can be confirmed and naive readers will leave with the impression that unless they are willing to undertake lengthy research, the issues are hopelessly complex and unresolvable - like the list of presidents with foreign-born parents, which has been used for at least eighteen months. It was worth your taking the time to explain once more. Anyone who bothers to read the Constitution will not forget the grandfather clause, and the not so obvious fact that there were no U.S. citizens before 1776.
It is possible that anyone who engages with the lead troll, Fred Nerks in this case, is probably also a troll. Their role, like ringers in auctions, is to legitimize the misdirection of the discussion and dilute the content. But if none of the serious discussants participate, they talk with each other. That leaves page after page of tabloid conjecture, weakening the intended message.
The patience of those who have taken the time to read is working. More and more are understanding the not-so-simple, but politically fascinating reasoning of our framers. More and more on FR are discovering supporting documents among our nation's archives.
If a troll comes up with any fact germane to the issue, it might make sense to engage with him/her. Trolls, of course, won't be convinced. Some are purportedly paid for their disrupting activities. It would be useful to create a thread containing just the nonsense used to disrupt civil discussion. We have seen the arguments again and again. Administrators have been liberal with trolls here, but not let them run wild as they have on one of the few blogs I've looked at beyond Apuzzo, Donofrio, American Thinker, and Free Republic, Greta van Sustern’s. It was so dominated by one or two trolls that the troll would have discussions with him or herself. The one troll largly invalidated her site, a potentially important one since she has a large TV audience.
Conservative pundits have not touched the issue probably for the same reasons you or I would back off if we were public figures - they have careers and families to feed. The Obama regime is vicious and powerful. They conjured ethics charges within a few weeks against Georgia Congressman Nathan Deal when he asked for some assurance of Obama’s eligibility. It would not surprise to find that public figures could be subject to incitement charges because they are public figures. All Obama needs to do is have the New Black Panthers beat up the parents of a soldier attending a Tea Party meeting and blame Rush (as Clinton did after Oaklahoma City) or Coulter, leading potentially to federal charges and jail. These are dirty people who are professional dirty politicians. It is probably up to us. We just need to figure out how.
One way is to support the most courageous among us. Dr. Lakin, Cmdr Kerchner and Mario Apuzzo, and yes, Orly Taitz, who has fought with all the tools she has - she is a shining success as an immigrant and has sacrificed income to protect the rights she left her communist country of birth gain for her family. She knows communism like only those who have lived under it can, and antisemitism like those who have experienced pogroms. People can criticize her legal discipline, but should not question her motives. More credit to her for banging her head against the wall of political interests, not to be discouraged by a weak former Marine who promised discovery, and for deciding to campaign for the position of Sec of State of California, the authority who should have validated the eligibility of candidates on California's ballot. She is acting. We need to act, or support those who are.
We for whom the questions of eligibility are no longer questions must stay out of the schoolyard bickering initiated by trolls and plan how best to remove the regime. We also bear the burdon of having to be well-informed. Some of the discussions about Obama's history are dominated by wild guessing, and, while they may be sincere, can be fairly criticized for the very reason they are tantalizing, there is no evidence and little liklihood that any will appear outside of court. The facts are more than sufficient, and we must stick to them.
One action we can and should take is to guard the ballots. Every candidate must be asked about the meaning of our Constitution. "The term is not defined by the Constitution" is a clear statement that a candidate is not qualified, or cannot be trusted.
Orly Taitz has exposed an Obama operative running for Sec of State in Calif, who hurriedly changed his registration to Republican. The corrupt legal system will protect him if they can. A Democrat announced as a “Tea Party Candidate” in Nevada or Arizona, but was exposed as a Democrat operative.
Too bad World Net Daily solicited so much money to put signs all over with a distracting message. Their message should have been “Born on our soil of two citizen parents?” All the good information being disseminated here will reach others because Free Republic members are involved, whether as patriots or trolls. The truth is much easier to explain. We can cite Jay, Marshall, Jefferson, Munroe, Story, Bingham, Charles Evans Hughes, and even Patrick Leahy and Clair McCaskill, who have juicy quotes from Michael Chertoff explaining that a natural born citizen is born of two citizen parents. The regime can only respond with lies, ridicule, and by calling people who question Obama's Constitutional eligibility racists.
This might be - no, yes it certainly is - it is the funniest thing I have ever read in my ENTIRE life. You sir, are a comedic genius. Why you're posting on chat boards, and not making millions on the Vegas strip, is a mystery.
Do humanity a favor, and take your act on the road. America could use some humor today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.