Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.
The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.
The perceived unreliability of the image has provoked petitions and widespread demands for Obama to submit for objective inspection the paper versions of the "birth certificate" he claimed in his book Dreams from My Father was in his possession, as well as the paper version of the Certificate of Live Birth for which the image on the Daily Kos and the Obama "Fight the Smears" website was supposedly generated.
Without a valid birth certificate, Obama cannot prove he fulfills the "natural born citizen" requirement of the Constitution, throwing into doubt his eligibility to run for President.
McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.
(Excerpt) Read more at web.israelinsider.com ...
Oh Palmer has given me credit Lucy. He claims I made up the entire Kenyan trip on this thread :)
I’m amazing!
“”...So if you are going to post something, try to make it relevant.”
This is relevant as it speaks to intent to establish law to provide himself elligibility:
From Freeper David:
Another new fact has appeared. When the issue came up about McCain, a bill was drafted. It was intended to pass as an amendment to USCA Sec. 1401 and it provided among other things that a person born outside the US was automatically a citizen and also provided that such a person was eligible to act as President under Article II.
Clare McCaskil of Missouri introduced the bill however it has now become known that she did so as a favor to her friend, Barack Obama who wrote the bill.
-—>Why would Barack put a single parent savings clause in a bill designed to benefit his colleague John McCain who was born to two U S citizen parents? He knew; he has always known he is not a citizen nor eligible to be elected President.
345/6,272 posted on July 3, 2008 by David
I will enjoy learning from you my master of criticism.
And when threads get even longer than that with multi topics, we make a bump thread and link the topic. See thread by backhoe for examples.
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_9.jpg
Palmer was discussed in depth on another website yesterday. Folks over there have his number.
That's good. If you would be so kind, please alert them to this summary of my arguments so they don't have to dig through the threads and miss something.
My main critique of Polarik was that he reused his analysis of the Kos, Smears and politicheck images. Those were low res and could have rather easily been forged from low res scans of real COLB's and had the text (name, date, parents, etc) changed. That analysis does not apply to the factcheck photos.
Those were created by the following steps:
1. A computer generated text and border (the real Hawaii software or forger with photoshop)
2. A color printout of the computer generated text and border was made onto the crosshatched paper.
3. The paper was then embossed and stamped with the notary stamp and date stamped (all on or from the back)
4. The paper was then folded
5. The paper was then photographed by factcheck
The other critique I had of Calpernia and null and void is their theory that Ann and Obama Sr went to Kenya on a honeymoon. I have seen no evidence of that apart from the allegation by Berg that he has a recording of Obama's GM saying she was present at the birth. The problem with that is it a recording of someone's voice saying something and won't (and didn't) hold up in court.
In contrast we have statements (but not sworn testimony) in front of cameras by the Governor of Hawaii that she saw Obama's original birth certificate.
For evidence of forgery, it is clear that the seals used on DeCosta and Obama are different. But those were made in 2002 and 2007, so we would have to show that Hawaii didn't change their seal in that time period. There is no other evidence of forgery (re factcheck photos) that I am aware of.
I asked you once before to ping me to my posts where I’ve made statements like that. You gave me a random link to the center of this thread and told me to read for myself. I’ve read this whole thread. I don’t think you have though.
What was Obama doing in Pakistan?
From this site on citizenship...
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
The following would apply If one was a natural born citizen..just FYI..
Losing your citizenship
“For a natural-born citizen, losing your citizenship is actually quite difficult. The law prohibits the taking of your citizenship against your will, but there are certain actions a citizen can take which are assumed to be a free-will decision that constitutes a voluntary renunciation of the citizenship.
Moving to another country for an extended period of time does not constitute an act that presumes renunciation. Neither does taking a routine-level job with a foreign government. This stand is quite different from U.S. policy of the past, where even being naturalized in another nation could be seen as renunciation. The sections of the law that pertained to losing ones nationality for many of these cases was found at 8 USC 1482 and related sections.
The U.S. Code does, however, see some acts as creating the possibility of a loss of nationality. When you lose your U.S. nationality, you are no longer under the protection or jurisdiction of the United States. When the United States considers you to no longer be of U.S. nationality, it in effect considers you to no longer be a citizen. Note that these are things you can do that may force you to lose your citizenship. The law also says that these acts must be voluntary and with the intent of losing U.S. citizenship. The ways to lose citizenship are detailed in 8 USC 1481:
Becoming naturalized in another country
Swearing an oath of allegiance to another country
Serving in the armed forces of a nation at war with the U.S., or if you are an officer in that force
Working for the government of another nation if doing so requires that you become naturalized or that you swear an oath of allegiance
Formally renouncing citizenship at a U.S. consular office
Formally renouncing citizenship to the U.S. Attorney General
By being convicted of committing treason”
also, referring to USCA SEC. 1401
“
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: “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.” But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”
Anyone born inside the United States
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
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.
Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402), Alaska (8 USC 1404), Hawaii (8 USC 1405), the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406), and Guam (8 USC 1407). Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date, and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date. For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952). Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States. Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.
The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama. In 8 USC 1403, the law states that anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen, was “declared” to be a United States citizen. Note that the terms “natural-born” or “citizen at birth” are missing from this section.
In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that because McCain was born in the Canal Zone, he was not actually qualified to be president. However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply. McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c): “a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person.” Not eveyone agrees that this section includes McCain - but absent a court ruling either way, we must presume citizenship.”’
From this post:
..why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause?”
10/14/2008 8:13:02 PM PDT · by ransomnote · 16 replies · 1,280+ views
texasdarlin.wordpress.com ^ | By Judah Benjamin,
“2d Session S. RES. 511: Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.: In the Senate of the United States.” was Sponsored by Senator McCaskill and co-sponsored by Senators Leahy, Obama, Coburn, Clinton and Webb. Why? Why were Democratic Senators trying to pass a Resolution making Senator McCain undoubtedly Legally Eligible when this issue had already been cleared up in 2000 and again in 2004? And why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause? “Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to...
Correct. I got into the 2000's and by then you had posted the picture of Obama in Africa a half dozen times. So allow me to correct, it was null and void's theory that they went to Africa on a honeymoon and you just supplied the pictures, e.g. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2040486/posts?page=1467#1467
What's interesting to me is despite 4 months on this project you still had no idea which side of the COLB was stamped until today.
>>>What’s interesting to me is despite 4 months on this project you still had no idea which side of the COLB was stamped until today.
Actually, I’ve not made too many comments on the COLB until you started ‘supervising’ our posts. Polarik took on the COLB as his expertise. You, my dear, have no idea what I’ve been working on with this project because I’ve not posted it on this thread. We all have our strengths, graphics are not mine. I challenge you to find any comment of mine pertaining to where I’ve indicated that I’ve known or not known where the stamp was on this COLB.
Post 6245 where you quoted my text that it was stamped from the back and wrote "smirks". I took that to mean you knew otherwise.
I don’t either...however he must think so. By being adopted by Indonesian Soetero, he would have become a naturalized citizen of Indonesia so whether he was born in Kenya or later adopted by Soetero, he still would not be a “natural born citizen” of US. Indonesia at that time did not allow for Dual citizenship, if I am remember a post correctly.
Where are his adoption papers also!
My smirk was directed to you and absolutely nothing you post. Because I lend absolutely no credit to anything you post ;)
Locked up with his medical records, his college transcripts, his birth certificate, his library card, his baseball card collections, his book of the month club membership, his Illinios Senate records, his dental records, yada yada yada....
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.