Obama's birth certificate: Final chapter. This time we mean it!

St. Petersburg Times ^ | 7/1/09 | Robert Fartley

[pissant]

Back on June 27, 2008, PolitiFact published a story we hoped would put the whole Obama birth certificate controversy to rest. It ran under the now-laughable headline, "Obama's birth certificate: Final chapter."

Oh, how naive we were.

More than a year later, the debate continues to rage on the Internet among the "Birthers" movement, people who doubt that President Barack Obama is a natural-born U.S. citizen and is therefore ineligible to serve as president. Or at least, they say, Obama has yet to sufficiently prove things one way or the other.

Today, we examine two claims:

• WorldNetDaily's owners took out an ad saying White House spokesman Robert Gibbs "lied" when he said President Obama's birth certificate is posted on the Internet. We ruled that statement False .

[pissant]

I think FactCheck still has it though

[Beckwith]

FactCheck still has their page up. I can’t see how they can take it down. They are too committed their story.

Obama’s people can always claim that the campaign is over.

But how did they scrub it from the Internet Archive? That’s what puzzles me.

[El Gato]

It seems to me what the US Code has done is to interpret itself into the Constitution, in essence, subverting it.

I would not disagree. However that's why definitions or criteria for "citizen" or "citizen at birth" that are contained in the US Code are essentially irrelevant to the Constitutional meaning of "Natural Born Citizen".

At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, there were two basic definitions of "natural born Subject/Citizen". One required birth to at least a citizen father, the other only birth on the territory of the nation. The British used both. The best place to look might be the laws and/or constitutions of the states which existed *before* the Constitution was ratified.

But it would be nice if a court of law would at least consider the matter on it's merits.

I do think that it is necessary, but perhaps not sufficient, that a person be a citizen at birth in order to be a "natural born citizen".

BTW, the Constitution itself defines Treason as follows:

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

I think only Jane Fonda fits the definition. (via the second criteria, observing that a country need not be at war, formally or not, to have enemies.)

[El Gato]

neither Barack Obama nor John McCain were eligible to be President under Section 1, Article 2, of the U. S. Constitution

Actually it's not yet clear about McCain. Persons born to two US Citizens, while the father (or now the mother) were acting as representatives of their country, or serving in it's armed forces, may be in considered to have been born "within the Nation" even if not on it's territory. Certainly their parents were Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, more than most folks in fact.

[STE=Q]

May God forbid that the future historian shall record of this day’s proceedings, that by reason of the failure of the legislative power of the people to triumph over the usurpations of an apostate President,

EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED!

... the fabric of American empire fell and perished from the earth!..."

GOD FORBID, INDEED!

Thank you for your excellent post!

STE=Q

[SatinDoll]

John Sydney McCain was born in a public hospital in the city of Colon, Republic of Panama (as per the birth certificate posted on his internet site during the campaign). He was born on foreign soil. Because his parents were both U.S. citizens he has always been considered a native born citizen. But he is ineligible to be President.

This lack of eligibility is why he was pushed by Democrat cross-over voters early in the primary, so the Republicans couldn’t challenge Obama later on the natural born citizen issue.

Diabolical, wasn’t it?

[Vendome]

What happened to WND? Birth Taking annoucement?

[Polarik]

In case you'd like to read what I wrote to Mr. Farley in my letter to him, here it is.

---

Dear Mr. Farley:

I’m glad you find document fraud to be so funny, because the American people who were deceived by these phony images are not at all amused:

They certainly are not happy about Politifact promulgating a forgery.

Exactly which part of Obama’s spending a million dollars of campaign contributions to keep his real birth certificate hidden, is “laughable?”

Obama has gone the entire year without ever showing a real, paper birth certificate to anyone in government, anyone in authority, even anyone not shilling for him. What has been shown, however, is a totally fabricated Certification of Live Birth (COLB) image.

Now, what is a really sick joke is claiming that this heavily-doctored "scan image" that’s posted on Obama's website, Daily Kos Website, Politifact's website, and Factcheck's website, was made from the same object shown in Factcheck's photos: the ones with the exaggerated Seal impressions and second fold lines.

Even a five year-old can see that there’s no way in Hades that a high-resolution "scan image," with no Seal or second fold line showing, could ever have been made from the document object shown in the Factcheck photos.

Do you really think the American public is as mindless as the people perpetrating this fraud?

I have to give you props, though.

I never thought that Politifact could be more wrong than the last time they tried to pass off this forgery as the real deal.

It was back in June of last year. Amy Hollyfield was the reporter at the time, and in talking with Janice Okubo, she created a conundrum.

We all know Janice Okubo, don’t we? She’s that helpful Public Relations Officer (Communications Officer) at Hawaii's DOH, who’s not exactly Hawaii’s answer to Google when it comes to all things COLB.

When asked about Obama’s birth certificate, Okubo told Hollyfield that "a copy of the birth certificate was requested in June 2008," but she wouldn't specify by whom.

Even Amy pondered the implications of that statement as she was reviewing the many criticisms of the bogus "scan image":

• Isn’t the date stamp bleeding through the back of the document “June 2007?” (Odd since it was supposedly released in June 2008.)

"Odd, indeed!"

How can a 2007 Certification of Live Birth (COLB), date-stamped "June 6, 2007" have been requested in June 2008?

The answer, though, is quite simple, really:

Hawaii never produced a 2007 Certification of Live Birth for Obama with a date-stamp of June 6, 2008.

Last year, I spoke with the Hawaii State Registrar, himself, Dr. Alvin T. Onaka, who provided me with the following bit of information.

When I asked him if Janice Okubo had confirmed that his office produced a 2007 COLB, date-stamped June 6, 2007, with Obama's birth information on it. He said,

"Absolutely not. No one in our office confirmed it.”

That’s right, Mr.Farley. Obama's 2007 COLB is a nonexistent document, and what’s shown in the "scan image" alleged to be real a real copy of Obama’s birth certificate is nothing but that same, original fabricated forgery that first appeared on June 12 of last year.

What does that "scan image" prove?

Document fraud. Internet fraud. Voter fraud. A forged Certification of Live Birth, designed and proffered with one purpose in mind: to deceive the American public into believing that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is qualified to be President.

A secondary purpose of this document fraud was to prevent citizens and lawmakers from ever seeing his real, original "vault birth certificate.

So, it comes down to this:

Anyone who says that Hawaii issued a 2007 COLB for Obama, and that a true copy of it is posted online, is either (a) misinformed, (b) misleading others, or (c) lying through their teeth.

Regarding Politifact's ridiculous “Truth-o-Meter,”

Did Press Secretary Robert Gibbs lie when he said that the Obama Administration posted a copy of his birth certificate online?

Did Clinton have sex with Monica Lewinsky?

Of course Gibbs lied. Obama’s Campaign lied. Factcheck lied. Daily Kos lied. Snopes lied. Politifact lied. The Star Bulletin lied. The Honolulu Advertiser lied. All the media who are in-the-tank with Obama lied. All of his liberal Leftist supporters lied.

But, the facts don’t lie. There is no 2007 COLB for Obama.

Last year, in addition to getting the word from Onaka, I conducted five months of empirical research that proved, conclusively and irrefutably, that the "scan image" alleged to be Obama's COLB is a fabricated image, and no amount of bitching by the opposition is going to change that fact.

I can't really blame them for thinking they see a real COLB instead of a phony one. After all, there are a lot of people who claim to see religious characters in Cheetos, corn flakes, or fried eggs.

It's all in their heads.

All of the statements claiming that the "scan image" posted online looks "identical" to an actual 2007 COLB, is pure nonsense.

None of the real scan images of a real 2007 COLB, as well as the photos taken of a real 2007 COLB, look anything like what Politifact and Factcheck claim.

The Seal shown in Factcheck’s photos looks nothing like the real Seal shown in real 2007 COLBs.

If you go to my website, The Greater Evil, and read my research, you’ll find at least twenty reasons why the image posted online is totally bogus.

I’ve got another twenty more that show how this one, bogus scan image has engendered the biggest cover-up in political history. All of the efforts made by Factcheck, Politifact, Snopes, and other, assorted Obama flunkies, have been either to promulgate the forgery as a real document or to cover up the fact that document fraud has taken place.

It goes like this: the Obama Campaign claims that they posted a genuine copy of Obama’s real, original birth certificate and then points to Factcheck when anyone asks for proof. Factcheck then refers them to their August 21 article, “Born in the USA,” and points the finger back at the Obama Campaign as the source of the real, original birth certificate.

And, so it goes. What a nice, neat little circle of deceit going on here.

One hand washes the other.

In case you forgot or never knew, Factcheck is funded by the Annenberg Foundation – the same foundation that gave a $30 million grant to William “The Unrepentant Pentagon Bomber” Ayers, to start the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and then hire an inexperienced community organizer in one Barack Obama, to be the Chairman of the Board working alongside him.

Besides lying about Obama’s birth certificate and doing all it can to cover up the fraud, it was Factcheck who claimed that Obama never interacted with William Ayers as an adult -- let alone directly worked with him on the Annenberg Challenge. The lies that Factcheck has told run long and deep.

Nice sister site you got there, Robert.

Think about that the next time you want to write a screed about Obama's bogus birth certificate.

Regards,

Dr. Ron Polarik

[Polarik]

Yeah, I looked at it this morning, and I thought, “That’s the big news somebody was talking about?”

Now, it’s gone.

[null and void]

What is Barry keeping secret?

He's a hermaphrodite.

[MHGinTN]

Great letter, Dr. POlarik. I sure hope you send it.

[El Gato]

Diabolical, wasn’t it?

What was diabolical was that the two "Birth Certificates" posted are most likely fakes. BTW, he did not post them on his campaign website. The "short form" was provided by the other party in the lawsuit "Hollander vs McCain", it's pretty questionable, because of three different type fonts in the filled in fields, among other things. The "long form" is so obviously a fake, no one would rely on it. A judge would laugh it out of court. One example is that the child's name, at first glance appears to be typed over a line, but the line does not show under/between the letters, as it would if it had been typed onto the form in 1936. It's not even signed in the appropriate places.

[BIGLOOK]

What is Barry keeping secret?

His name.

Even if documents at DOH have been amended noting a legal change of name, other records in other departments and bureaus on file remain. Certainly his grandmother's tax records claiming him as a dependent for all the years she cared for him and bore the expense of sending him to Punahou.

[Vendome]

Does that mean he can F himself?

[null and void]

As far as I’m concerned, he can...

[azishot]

Teriffic letter. Sooner or later the lies have to catch up to him.

Let us know what Farley’s answer is.

[Redwood Bob]

“I know several people that were born overseas, in Japan and the Philippines who are citizens with Hawaii COLBs. After statehood and during the plantation days, workers sent for family members to join them and if there was an infant accompanying the spouse, it was taken to a clinic which issued a CoLB from the State of Hawaii.......”

“Their CoLBs list Honolulu or other small cities in Hawaii as their place of birth. No reference is made to their actual place of birth.”

Well, there you go! Get on the phone to Joe Farah stat, and give him the names of these people! I’m sure he’d love to interview them! Better yet, advise Farah that his $100K billboard money is better spent as a reward for others to come forward! And be sure to get in touch with all the lawsuit lawyers! Once these folks testify, and even better, provide documentary evidence, you’ve impeached Obama’s COLB, essentially by impeaching them all! Why didn’t you mention this before?

[pissant]

Well done!!

[BIGLOOK]

Why didn’t you mention this before?

Actually, I did.

These are just people who have jobs and live normal lives......and most likely vote Democrat automatically, thanks to the Burn's Machine that pushed for their inclusion in the first place. I doubt they'd testify and put themselves in jeopardy.

(BTW, none know Obama or have ever heard of him before.)

[Fred Nerks]

POLITIFACT SAYS:

We have one more thing. We talked to reporter Will Hoover, who wrote a well-researched story for the Honolulu Advertiser on Nov. 9, 2008, about Obama's childhood years in the the Aloha State. It ran under the headline "Obama Slept Here."

Will Hoover's little story was entitled "HAWAII BOYHOOD HOMES DRAWING GAWKERS

In researching the story, he went to the microfilm archives and found the birth announcement for Obama. Actually, he found two of them, one in his Honululu Advertiser on Aug. 13 , 1961, and in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin the next day . They both said the same thing: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, son, Aug. 4."

THAT'S NOT WHAT HOOVER WROTE:

...a tiny, one-line birth notice in the Sunday, Aug. 13, 1961, edition of The Honolulu Advertiser:

"Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, son, Aug. 4."

The exact same notice appeared the following day in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. The numerous birth announcements above and below the Obama listing also were identical in both papers, which were unaffiliated, competing publications.

Advertiser columnist and former Star-Bulletin managing editor Dave Shapiro was not at either paper in 1961, but he remembers how the birth notices process worked years later when both papers were jointly operated by the Hawaii Newspaper Agency — which no longer exists.

THERE'S NO MENTION OF LIBRARY OR MICROFILM IN THAT ARTICLE. BUT HOOVER INCLUDES A COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPIED 'BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT' SENT TO TEXASDARLIN WEBSITE BY LORI STARFELT. (WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE WEBSITE)

SUPERIMPOSED OVER THE TOP OF A PAGE