Skip to comments.'I created Obama's certification of birth'
Posted on 08/09/2011 6:10:13 PM PDT by rxsidEdited on 08/09/2011 6:11:45 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
When the White House posted online an image of President Obama's purported long-form birth certificate, it also linked to the previously circulated "Certification of Live Birth," the short-form version that had been presented as the only birth documentation available.
However, the short-form certificate to which the White House linked April 27 was a forgery, claims computer expert Ron Polland, Ph.D., who says he made the image himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
“No such claim has been made that I’ve ever seen. However both parents must be Citizens at the time of the birth for their child to be a NBC. The method of Citizenship of the parents isn’t an issue.”
Well, I saw the claim quite often, and yes, I do know that both parents must be citizens.
Did this not come up recently concerning Trump’s parents?
One was not born in the USA, but may have been naturalized?
As I said, it is all probably moot now, and no one will ever question the messiah again.
I take back part of my statement.
I do recall a poster maybe a year ago trying to confuse the parents citizenship issue by, (I believe deliberately,) falsely claiming that one of the "nasty birthers" said both parents must be Natural Born Citizens. The "nasty birther" had in fact stated both parents must be Citizens at the time of birth.
“I take back part of my statement.”
Thanks for your reply.
Before other FReepers castigate me and treat me like a troll, I should point out that I lurk quite often on the inane Topix forums, and some of the obfuscation comes from that site.
I have been a loyal and active FReeper longer then most on here.
The point I have been trying to clarify is the status of the PARENTS, naturalized, or citizens at birth.
There were a number of conflicting claims on various internet sites.
I am not clear on the status of Obama’s father.
I understand that he is NOT a “natural born” citizen, and maybe not even naturalized.
Of course I know that the CANDIDATE must be a citizen at birth.
I do not need fellow FReepers jumping all over me for a simple clarification.
Some of the replies had nothing to do with my question.
Keep in mind, I live on the other side of the world, and many post go by while I sleep.
I can not go back and read all of a day’s postings.
I made it this far. I was on that original thread with Danae, where it was memorable that she needed to be told that posting to all was not posting to All. I would have declared Danaes authentic COLB a forgery, too, because it contained information only available after 2007 that she claimed she had in 2000.
Stop it. THAT was not the reason polarik declared Danae’s COLB a FORGERY. It was NOT A FORGERY! He used his *expertise* to graphically illustrate that it was a forgery. AND IT WASN’T. PERIOD. And THAT is the point.
HER mistake was honest and innocent. His was fabricated, fallacious and utterly vicious and malevolent.
HE LIED. And he planned to spring on her like a damn predator. Danae is/was a Freeper in good standing. She has an excellent reputation on FR. What he did to her was UNCONSCIONABLE.
To add insult to injury, he posted her personal information all over the web where others grabbed it and reposted it. He tried to do the same to me. He had us all at each other’s throats.
I am a birther. Proud of it. I do not believe the man is an American either by birth or by loyalty. I want him gone yesterday. And what polarik did was make it almost impossible for any of us to be taken seriously.
I was on the thread, several in fact, where we picked obama’s NEW offering apart piece by piece and step by step. WE showed it actually WAS a forgery and have since been upheld on that conclusion by REAL experts. But why do you think NO ONE paid any attention to it? OR to the experts who proved it? You can thank polarik. Defend him if you want to, but he conned everyone and now NO ONE has any credibility because of it.
Had he actually gone to court, he would be in jail now. And for MY money, that is where he belongs.
And I am done with this.
Anyone who calls me an obot knows better. I have been a straight shooter from the first minute I ever posted my first word on FR. And I will not sell my soul to defend a greedy, criminally motivated, pathological conman to bolster my belief that obama is not an NBC because everything he said and did was a lie, a scam, and a fraud...and he did it to YOU.
Brown Deer, I love you and Fred Nerks, I love you too. You don’t see polarik for what he is and I don’t know why. The image you see of him is not real. Nothing about him is real. It’s very sad. And I am so sorry because I WISH with all my heart it had been true. I wanted it to be true. It wasn’t.
It proves that the natural-born thing is not quite so black and white as some here would like to believe. Joseph Story too somehow leaves out parentage when discussing this:
§ 1473. It is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for fourteen years before his election. This permission of a naturalized citizen to become president is an exception from the great fundamental policy of all governments, to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties. It was doubtless introduced (for it has now become by lapse of time merely nominal, and will soon become wholly extinct) out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honours in their adopted country. A positive exclusion of them from the office would have been unjust to their merits, and painful to their sensibilities. But the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome, are sad, but instructive examples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source. A residence of fourteen years in the United States is also made an indispensable requisite for every candidate; ...ML/NJ
These things are easy enough to find before you go insulting other FReepers.
I remember that pretty well... I believe it was the same one I had stayed awake almost 3 days straight trying to pick through all of the new info (pictures) coming in..
Also.. wasn’t he banned from FR over that?
A quick session in photoshop invalidates this story completely. The BW image used by the WH matches the current posted image at Snopes - NOT the manufactured file at photobucket claimed to the source.
It is easy to see that. I am not sure why this story came out.
That said - it is very, very odd that the WH would use a BW image that is clearly just an Explorer browser screen print (the headers and footers formats are default Explorer settings) instead of fresh new scan and photos of the actual COLB. Unless the COLB in the 2008 images has been destroyed since then. Very odd.
If Comrade Obama’s father was indeed Barak Hussein Obama (SR) as he claims his father was never a US Citizen.
He was here on a Nonresident Student Visa and never intended to become even a Resident Alien.
If I remember correctly, he *voluntarily* absconded with the caveat that he would never post ... as polarik ... again. He abused Free Republic like noone else I have seen since I have been here. He actually posted on his damn blogs and youtube channels, (of which there were many,) that if anyone had a beef with him, they could *reach* him at Free Republic...trying to send the dregs of the loony left hit squads over here to disrupt FR with glee...and a lot of them tried. Great mods we have here and the Freeper sixth sense caught most of them in the bud.
The prestige of Free Republic gave him a legitimacy he NEVER deserved and for awhile, he was king. NO ONE could utter even the slighest criticism of him without getting hit with verbal body blows, no matter how slight the criticism was.
Being fairly new at the time, I was actually afraid that everyone on FR would hate my guts or even that I might be banned if I said anything.
Finally, I told Jim Robinson I couldn’t stand by anymore, told him that I was going to expose polarik, and that if he saw fit to ban me for it, then so be it.
After receiving no response, I did it beause it was the right thing to do. The more I exposed, the more he exposed himself.
And that is why I cannot understand why some Freepers still honor a man who has not one honorable bone in his entire body.
I read this at another site and don’t know whether it’s true or not: Snopes had the Polarik fake and then it was replaced at some point. It was on a Citizen Wells thread quoting from WTPOTUS, IIRC, from a commenter named Miri.
Miri may have been just taking Polarik’s word on that. I’ll have to try to find the thread to see whether she herself saw the change at Snopes.
That may be the case. But the image the WH posted does match the image that Snopes currently post at their web site.
But is not strange we are talking about the Executive Branch of the Federal Government resorting to using a rumor debunking website as its actual source for a supposed critical document that they are supposed to have in their possession?
The fake COLB must have been destroyed after the images and photos were taken 2008 - possibly to create fake documentation for passport records. That is almost the only explanation.
August 7, 2011 1:38 comment
It seems as if she just took his word. She talks about Snopes being excluded from the Wayback Machine. I don’t know enough about that topic to believe anything suspicious.
That is a very good point. Why is Snopes the source? Is that a fact that no one can dispute?
They probably just took the first result from a Google image search.
One thing I know for sure is that Polarik is lying when he says the black and white image posted at the same time as the long form is a copy of the image hosted on his Photobucket account. The line at the bottom, "This copy serves as..." is clearly aligned differently, even to the naked eye.
Maybe Snopes did link to his copy for a short time back in 2008, but Polarik hasn't proven that it was linked to this year when the White House allegedly copied it. I've linked to the image on Snopes many times, and it's always been the current link, not one with the name of a man I would instantly recognize.
"It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.
What? You found the only tool in your bag is a hammer and all your problems must therefore be nails? Your argument as been refuted, yet here you are persistent in it. Were Madison's comment the law of the land it would have made citizens of Slaves and Indians, yet we know for a fact they were not until they were manumitted and/or naturalized.
You simply don't seem to comprehend that the facts contradict the only quote (and that offhand) you have in support of your position. The seating of Mr. Smith to the US congress not only did not repeal article II, it did not even address it.
So you ask for my evidence, I provide it (PhD in instructional systems, not in computer, not in document forensics) and now I’m a troll because you “know his expertise”? Why don’t YOU provide evidence of his expertise in document forensics? Or is your will to believe all the proof you ever need?
He said place was the most important criteria of allegiance, and what applies in the United States. Self evident.
Sheesh. Go read it carefully. It addresses criteria for allegiance, and unequivocally states place is the most important and what applies in the United States.
You want to argue “Ok, he says place is the most important and what applies in the United States, but he really meant that only for Congress, not for any other office?”
So glad you can read his mind in retrospect, and know that he didn’t really mean what he so clearly declared.
I fell for that claim until someone pointed out the evidence that it was false. McCain was indeed born outside the United States proper, but he was not born outside of a United States Military Hospital as has been alleged all over the internet. There is a fake birth certificate floating around on the net showing him as being born in a Panamanian Hospital, but this document was fabricated. His real birth certificate is not available online because he has not released it. He has shown it to a few people, but that is all.
It is indeed a pathetic type of person who continuously tries to sell an unsellable theory.
By your logic, the fact that women were not made citizens invalidates “chosen every second Year by the People of the several States,” since women were part of the people and yet could not vote.
You have also set up a strawman - I never claimed “law of the land” as there was no clear law on the books at that time on “natural born” - rather it was a continuation of English Common Law, on which much US law is based. Posters were discussing insight into the Founders’ idea of Natural Born. I provided James Madison’s clearly stated opinions on Jus Soli and Jus Sanguinus.
You don’t want to accept it? Fine, you can believe that a preexisting book by the Swiss De Vattel is more important than clear statements by the Father of the US Constitution.
At this point Obama can be defeated only by his own policies - and he does everything in his power to defeat himself. He might be a "disposable President" who is installed for one term to do a specific task, no holds barred, and then he is set aside. Obama doesn't really like governing anyway.
This is the most reasonable argument I have heard as to why the birth certificate/eligibility issue might be not worth pursuing. If others had the intellectual perspicacity and civil grace to make such an argument, they would not be mistaken for Obama sympathizers or Obot Trolls.
I respect this argument, but I do not completely agree with it. I regard it as our job and duty to educated the ignorant public, and to spread the meme of Obama's illegitimacy. If the Nation crashes as I am horrified that it might, it is important for people to view Obama as a negative example of violating the Article II requirements. At least he would then serve some useful purpose.
Sometimes selling failures works well. Obama for example.
Extremely Extreme Extremist was going around claiming that both parents must be Natural Born Citizens back in 2009.
He accepted correction then that this was a ludicrous criteria that would render just about every American ineligible.
I have had it pointed out to me that the "Colon" birth story is a hoax, and that the McCain birth certificate floating around the net is a fabrication. I was pointed to a link from a well known newspaper (Washington times or post I think) that shows McCain has never released his birth certificate for public viewing. At the moment I don't have the link, but if you search my posts for the word "Colon" I bet you can find the link I saw. (I'm not exactly sure how to do that myself or I would do it for you.)
In any case, I urge you to consider the allegation that McCain was born outside of a Military hospital as suspect unless you come up with some information which demonstrates it to be true.
Yes, James Madison's offhand comment trumps all the delegates and Legislatures of the 13 states combined. He was dictator you know.
Slaves and Indians put the lie to your theory.
Not at all. McCain's ONLY claim to citizenship is through his parents. That this meets the "natural born citizen" standard is what the constitution has meant all along. (As further stipulated in the "Naturalization act of 1790." That a Unanimous Senate would confirm this simply reinforces the point that this is the central requirement of the condition.
Lame Cherry had an interesting piece today,
*Into the bowels of Obama*
You have one comment that seemingly supports your point, and we have dozens that refute it. And you still have not addressed the fact that were Madison's offhand comment true, Slaves and Indians would have been citizens. They meet his criteria, but lo and behold they were not citizens! Your argument is rebuked by fact.
The alinskyesque tactics of this breed of axelsleazy insulters gives them away. They donn their obamanoid kneepads and gleefully march off to the Internet to defend their bastard pResident. At FR, we’ve addressed this same misdirection garbage so many times, it is not worth wasting time with these obaaaaamanoids. The owner of FR has stated unexquivocally that there are no Obama supporters at FR. Let them sleaze along until someone notices how obviously twisted they are.
Why would he set himself up for any questions if he was born on the base as you say?
We are not ignorant enough to fall for your fallacy of substitution. The topic being discussed by Madison was that of "CITIZEN", not "Natural born citizen." As the founders themselves demonstrated by making an exception for themselves, NONE of them were "NATURAL BORN CITIZENS" and that included Congressman Smith, whom Madison was defending.
I mean, what background could James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, have for really understanding what the phrase "natural born citizen" means?
You are again substituting the term of art "Natural born citizen" for that of "Citizen." The distinction between which is manifested by the fact that Article II uses both terms rather than one. James Madison was not arguing "natural born citizen", he was arguing just basic citizenship. (No one older than 14 years of age was a "natural born citizen" at this time.) Even then, his next statement is an appeal to Jus Sanguinus.
"Mr. Smith founds his claim upon his birthright; his ancestors were among the first settlers of that colony."
Were his argument of "place" enough, there would be no need for an appeal to the man's right by blood. (ancestors) Madison asserts "Jus Soli" yet immediately invokes "Jus Sanguinus."
What's his credentials and claim for knowledge to try to usurp what thousands of birthers and Corsi and WND readers all KNOW as fact?
Firstly, you are intentionally misleading people about what it is he is claiming, and secondly you are overlooking the fact that subsequent generations have the advantage of Hindsight and access to knowledge he didn't posses. Thirdly you are overlooking the fact that his argument appealed not to the soil, but to his rights by descent.(blood) You are in fact, trying to twist Madison's argument from it's purpose in a futile and pathetic attempt to serve your own.
I look forward to your reply because I enjoy beating on the stupid and ignorant who are none the less smug and arrogant in their false certainty.
It was the Washington Post reporter he supposedly showed it to.
“Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904
(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States”
That law only grants citizenship, not NBC. So, playing along with whichever story of McCain being born somewhere in Panama and his father being stationed there, he’d be a US citizen but still not eligible for POTUS.
Let the freepers decide for themselves. Danae posted a 2007 document claiming it to be a 2000 document. She apologized to Polarik but didn’t post it to Polarik because she didn’t know that pinging All isn’t pinging to all. Polarik “quit” FR soon after. She acted like a third grader on his opus thread.
You pointed me to a thread which was supposed to be the end-all proving your point, but instead it negates your point. You neglect to recall that I was on that original thread where Danae posted her nonsense, and she focused some of her invective towards me as well. So, yeah I don’t feel like reading through another CoLB thread to find out where the discussion ended up, because I was there when it started.
Kevmo, I wouldn’t care if she thought it was a 2025 document. She could have said it was a 3009 document. IT DOESN’T MATTER! The FACT remains. It was NOT a forgery. It just wasn’t. And there was no way polarik could have claimed it was. BECAUSE IT WASN’T! But he SAID it was and used his *expertise* to PROVE it was. Now how in G-d’s name is that even possible?
Are you deliberately being obtuse? Indians were considered members of "sovereign" Indian nations (classified as "domestic dependent nations") so their citizenship was with their Indian "nation," which is also why the Constitution excluded them from taxes. It's also why if you visit the Navajo reservation in the Southwest, you will see you are visiting the "Navajo Nation." Note that current US Title 8 gives citizenship to "Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe [emphasis added.]
Slaves, since they were property, did not have citizenship rights. (Do you know of any country where slaves were citizens with citizenship rights while still slaves?)
I again point out that by your logic, "chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, would be invalid since women could not vote and yet are of the people.
And I'm so glad you were physically present when James Madison gave his speech so you could attest that his "comment" was "offhand" instead of part of his prepared speech.
Idiot point. How could you think James Madison was arguing "Natural born citizen" for William Loughton Smith when Smith was born in 1758, and therefore was a British Subject at birth as were all the Founders old enough to be members of Congress in 1789?
Madison was arguing that Smith was naturalized at the same time as all the other citizens of South Carolina when the Declaration of Independence was written, and that Under the British laws then in effect (jus soli) He was legally a citizen of South Carolina prior to independence, and therefore was a Legal American citizen after independence, as were ALL citizens of South Carolina.
None of this proves that he is rebuking the standard used in Article II.
Good try, but no. That part of the Naturalization act dealt with those born outside of the US. You have now decided that agreeing that McCain met conditions for “natural born” when born OUTSIDE the US, now means all those conditions apply to those born inside.
Again, if you are taking the resolution as binding on conditions for natural born, it now means that only those born on a military base qualify. Logical fallacies abound.
I did not know that. Do you have a link regarding the Salvation army home in Vancouver?
We tolerate you. How bad could Polarik be?
Kevmo, she SCANNED an original document. Don’t you understand? It was a genuine Hawaiian COLB. She had the receopts to prove it, which she ALSO scanned. It wasn’t a forgery. That is the whole point and nothing else that is even remotely connected to it is relevant. It was NOT a forgery as polarik claimed. And yet you all believed him. And Danae was angry. Put yourself in her place. She was doing nothing but trying to help him. Do you realize he PLANNED what he did to her? He PLANNED it and hyped his *army* through Freepmails to be ready to attack her unmercifully on HIS command. He effing KNEW he was lying through his teeth.
How could anyone with a conscience, or any sense of fairplay, be part of that? It’s sickening. It made me sick to my stomach. I get angry all over again every time I think of it. It’s twisted.
And you still defend him? What if it had been you?
This is the ONLY point where I would like clarification.
The birthplace of the parents are completely irrelevant if they are or have become American citizens before the child is born. All of the founders were British citizens prior to July 4, 1776. Only Children born after July 4, 1776 were "natural born citizens."
You aren't getting near my wallet.
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.