Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Once Again I will Posit Adoption for Barack Obama.
Various | 3/1/2012 | DiogenesLamp

Posted on 03/01/2012 1:50:50 PM PST by DiogenesLamp

I just finished Watching Sheriff Arpaio's press conference. The Sheriff's posse has concluded that the document was created on a computer and is therefore a forgery.

I will once again point out that if Obama was adopted, he would get a replacement birth certificate that will be designed to look like an original 1961 birth certificate, but it will in fact have been created by the Department of Health in the State of Hawaii at the Direction of an Hawaiian State Judge.

"The Obama was Adopted" theory addresses the "forgery" issue head on, and precludes it from being a crime. In my opinion, this is the simplest explanation for the fact that Obama's document looks cobbled together, and that Hawaii is tacitly confirming it as legitimate.

I will further add, (for those who have not already been so informed) that *I* was adopted, and *I* have a birth certificate which was created six years after I was born, and is in fact a replacement birth certificate that lists my new last name, new parent's names, etc.

This theory ties up a lot of the loose ends neatly (not all of them) and it doesn't involve believing that the Hawaiian government is involved in a criminal "conspiracy." I urge people to consider this idea before jumping to the conclusion that everyone involved with producing this document has committed a criminal act.


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: arpaio; birftards; birthcertificate; certifigate; kerkorian; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-398 next last
To: UCANSEE2
That there must be a reason why the Chicago crew went to extensive lengths to hide Obama's true records .

I think there is something wrong with his original birth certificate. I also think he may very well have used his time in Indonesia as an excuse to claim scholarship money for foreign students.

There is no way to prove either thing at the moment, but those are two of my suspicions regarding why his records are so tightly covered up.

That as long as Obama hides the information, people will continue to suspect the worst.

Personally I suspect he was raised, by his grandparents and his mother's 'influence' to be a communist/socialist infiltrator, regardless to whom his biological parents were.

His higher education days were filled with Alinksy and Black Liberation.

He IS, what he LEARNED.

I don't disagree with any of this.

301 posted on 03/04/2012 10:31:44 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; LucyT

LucyT has control issues of long standing. I was threatened with being put in a “little black book” because I wasn’t towing the standard “COLB” line at the time, lol. That was in 2009.


302 posted on 03/04/2012 10:32:09 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Personally I suspect he was raised by his grandparents and his mother’s ‘influence’ to be a communist/socialist infiltrator regardless to whom his biological parents were.

I think anyone raised by leftwing minded people develop this way because they share the same false premises. It is the baser aspect of human nature.

303 posted on 03/04/2012 10:33:18 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry; Fred Nerks
LucyT has control issues of long standing. I was threatened with being put in a “little black book” because I wasn’t towing the standard “COLB” line at the time, lol. That was in 2009.

People need to grant others some consideration even when we don't agree. As far as I'm concerned, my allies don't have to believe exactly what I do when looking at a very complicated issue. I may know things they don't, they may know things I don't. We all make up our minds based on what *WE* know, not on what someone else knows. :)

Fred Nerks showed me some stuff I didn't know just today.

304 posted on 03/04/2012 10:38:40 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
We have yet to see real proof he was born *IN* Hawaii.

I completely agree!

305 posted on 03/04/2012 10:42:23 AM PST by ForAmerica (Conservative Christian Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Getting caught up in detail and minutiae is no doubt fascinating, I know I spent countless hours early on, perusing Justia and in fact any and all sources I could find pertaining to eligibility.

But, the fact remains that all the murk is clearly designed to conceal a problem in that regard for Obama. A negative cannot be proved, and that is what all this is an attempt to do.

Just ask the man, point blank, if he is a natural-born citizen of the United States under Article II, Section I. He’ll either perjure himself, admit ineligibility or go off on a very telling ramble. I’d bet on the very telling ramble, myself.

You’re all caught up in a very elaborate game of Where’s Waldo and I believe it’s by design to run out the clock. You’ve got numerous posters and occasional newbie signups who come teetering up in the clown car whenever the topic erupts again, who keep guiding it back to the birth certificate.

That much I have observed, since withdrawing from the matter for the most part, due to ridiculous in-fighting and silly cliques forming.

You’re playing his game to his advantage, imho. Just why he’s ineligible won’t come out until he’s finished his second term and precedent will have been set.


306 posted on 03/04/2012 10:48:41 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
You’re playing his game to his advantage, imho. Just why he’s ineligible won’t come out until he’s finished his second term and precedent will have been set.

Au contraire, mon frère! Most of my efforts have involved researching the meaning of "natural born citizen", Not the birth certificate issue. This thread is the first time i've addressed this issue in many months. The only reason I address it now is because I thought my insight as an adopted person would possibly be helpful to others who had never considered the idea.

Like I said, most of my efforts have been involving research as to the correct meaning of "natural born citizen." My understanding of it is that a person can only be a "natural citizen" if both their parents are citizens when they are born. A dual citizen cannot be a "natural citizen." They owe an unnatural allegiance to another country.

I found John Adams own personal book on English Law of the time, and it echos the Vattel definition.

I've found other stuff as well. Check out the research thread. (Link above.)

307 posted on 03/04/2012 11:36:47 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Goeldner said her sister-in-law actually raised Barrack Obama, or Barry as they called him, when he was young, after his mother died in 1970.

http://www.nlrtimes.com/articles/2008/11/14/maumelle_monitor/living/liv01.txt


308 posted on 03/04/2012 11:59:50 AM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

So, who’s the filipina with her arm around the kenyan? Why the numerous false lei, and have you any idea of the source of that image?
Where did it first appear...we would dearly like to know...are the captain and the sailor wearing US Navy uniform or are they Indonesian as they appear to be?


309 posted on 03/04/2012 12:17:16 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: bluecat6

The instructions on what is to be crossed out relate to a PERSON.


310 posted on 03/04/2012 12:26:10 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
Goeldner said her sister-in-law actually raised Barrack Obama, or Barry as they called him, when he was young, after his mother died in 1970.

http://www.nlrtimes.com/articles/2008/11/14/maumelle_monitor/living/liv01.txt

Yes. Newspaper reporters make mistakes. I wonder if Bill Lawson has any idea how much controversy he stirred up by getting that stuff wrong.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2754825/posts?page=266#266

Given that he made four other mistakes in that article, I wouldn't take anything he says very seriously.

311 posted on 03/04/2012 12:26:09 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: bluecat6

There may or may not be a place with that name, but on the document it clearly refers to a person. There is no field for whatever village the person happens to be in at the time. And it’s pretty well-established. Stanley and Barry were in Jakarta. Your question is rather bizarre.


312 posted on 03/04/2012 12:28:22 PM PST by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
I'd agree that it may not literally be a "conspiracy theory," but in everyday conversations, theories of a hidden or concealed truth generally get referred to as "conspiracy theories. If there was a second adoption and both adoptions were covered up, though, "conspiracy theory" may not be an inappropriate description of what you think happened.

I'm skeptical, because 1) those signs may point to a formal and official adoption or something much more informal and unofficial, and 2) it's not clear how Indonesian and US law interact, what kind of Indonesian legal proceedings would have changed Obama's status.

Maya's understanding of "adoption" and Indonesian adoption law is shaky, and can't be taken as hard evidence that there was a formal legal adoption. If you want to rely on her testimony, though, it sounds like she's saying there most likely wasn't a Hawaiian adoption of Barack by Lolo.

I'm also skeptical of the Soebarkah story. True, the name is there in black and white on the paperwork, but it's in parenthesis after Barack Hussein Obama. We're free to speculate about why it's there and why both names are crossed out, but we don't know with any certainty. It's an indication that something may have happened, but not proof.

The deportation (which I didn't know about before) and divorce papers are more substantial. The response, though, would be that when you live a double life, with some things official and legal and others informal and unbinding, you can get confused about what the actual legal status of your affairs is. If you're fighting deportation, you're going to use whatever arguments are available, regardless of whether they are true or reflect the real legal state of things.

And I'd need more information before I could safely say that what the mention of Barack Obama as an adult child "still dependent on the parties for education." I'd want to know what the common practice in cases like this was, and what reasons there might have been for listing or not listing a stepchild.

Like I said, your theory is interesting. It's more plausible than most of the others I've come across. It could very well be true. But I'm going to wait for more evidence.

You may be convinced of the truth of your version of things, but "a good circumstantial case" doesn't mean that the burden of proof switches to the other side. You could show motive, means, and opportunity, but you still haven't proven your case beyond a reasonable doubt.

313 posted on 03/04/2012 12:36:56 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Why pretend you don’t know? I made it quite clear up-thread that the name Soebarkah was both an Indonesian name and a place.
And just as Stanley Ann Dunham wrote her married name as SUTORO at times, SUKARNO was SOEKARNO, SUHARTO was SOEHARTO, SOETORO became SUTORO - when SUHARTO took over.

THUS, you see SOEKBARKAH became SUBARKAH:

Suharto’s body was taken from Jakarta to the Giri Bangun mausoleum complex near the Central Java city of Solo. He was buried alongside his late wife in a state military funeral with full honours, with the Kopassus elite forces and KOSTRAD commandos as the honour guard and pallbearers and Commander of Group II Kopassus Surakarta Lt.Colonel Asep Subarkah.[90


314 posted on 03/04/2012 12:48:44 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; LucyT

I’m used that type of response by now, everything that doesn’t suit a particular theory must be some journalists mistake...like the one the kenyan made when he told the Hawaiian interviewer in 1962 that he had not been back to Kenya for 7 years.
Or the journalist who interviewed the kenyan’s teacher at the school in Maseno, who pulled out the numbered and named attendance cards from the fifties and said that the kenyan left to go to the US as soon as he finished his term at the school, in 1954...and that his older brother left the school before he did; an older brother who was TWO years older, born in 1934 - probably with the same birthdate as the kenyan used on his scholarship application.

you’ve got nothing but theories, Lucy is right, no one cares what you THINK.

Because it’s evident to me that if there is information out there that places any doubt on your THINKING you immediately resort to the ‘the journalist made a mistake’ position.


315 posted on 03/04/2012 1:26:08 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; mojitojoe; little jeremiah; LucyT; Candor7; Fantasywriter; Fred Nerks
So where am I lying? Or even mistaken?

Thank you. That's exactly the reply that I was waiting for!

Your original comment:

and I can only assume it continued during the time Madelyn Dunham was growing up. Apart from that, the Family lived in Oklahoma and Texas before moving to Washington.

So how old was Madelyn Payne Dunham when her daughter Stanley was in school? It was actually Stanley Ann who was growing up there, not Madelyn! That seems to contradict your implied predjudice.

So like we said, "Why don't you stop posting your BS lies here!"
316 posted on 03/04/2012 1:55:51 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper; Hotlanta Mike; Silentgypsy; repubmom; HANG THE EXPENSE; Nepeta; Bikkuri; Plummz; ...


"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person, who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society." ~~ Barack 0bama, March 2008

"Grandma Is Typical White Person"
317 posted on 03/04/2012 2:21:17 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; mojitojoe; little jeremiah; LucyT; Candor7; Fantasywriter; Fred Nerks
As I mentioned, according to Frank Marshall Davis’s book, “living the blues” they were very prejudiced in Kansas during the 1920s-1930s. He was there, and that is what *HE* said.

So the writings of a Communist pedophile is your authority?
318 posted on 03/04/2012 2:51:56 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

http://keywiki.org/index.php/Frank_Marshall_Davis

Meet the real Frank Marshall Davis.


319 posted on 03/04/2012 3:15:03 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

“Have you ever seen any photos of her pregnant?”

No, we never did, did we ?


320 posted on 03/04/2012 3:37:55 PM PST by Absolutely Nobama (NO COMPROMISE! NO RETREAT! NO SURRENDER! I AM A CONSERVATIVE! CASE CLOSED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

This “typical white person” certinly remembers that little tidbit.


321 posted on 03/04/2012 3:42:15 PM PST by Absolutely Nobama (NO COMPROMISE! NO RETREAT! NO SURRENDER! I AM A CONSERVATIVE! CASE CLOSED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
just for the record:

The marriage date on this document of March 5, 1964 PREDATES THE DIVORCE which was granted MARCH 20.

322 posted on 03/04/2012 4:33:39 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Plummz
Understand that State Department documents say you’re wrong.

Understand that State Department "documents" of that period which claim otherwise...are mistaken.

Once again: a minor child cannot renounce his right to birthright U.S. citizenship. State Department "documents" not withstanding.

Don't bother. I'm done with the discussion.

323 posted on 03/04/2012 4:42:38 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

Another flashback, from one of his books (written by someone else of course) said something like “just smile at the white folks and speak politely so you don’t scare them.”


324 posted on 03/04/2012 6:37:28 PM PST by TheConservativeParty (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Once again: You're wrong.

Don't bother. You're wrong.

325 posted on 03/04/2012 7:20:18 PM PST by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: x
We're free to speculate about why it's there and why both names are crossed out, but we don't know with any certainty

The only reason to be uncertain is if you are an illiterate. The State Department documents clearly state why you would write someone's name there and cross through it. It is because that person has forsworn his American nationality and naturalized as a foreigner.

326 posted on 03/04/2012 7:24:12 PM PST by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks; Brown Deer; LucyT

interesting..

http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/02/vital-records-indicate-obama-not-born_29.html


327 posted on 03/04/2012 8:31:39 PM PST by bitt (Ayn Rand “Honest people are never touchy about the matter of being trusted.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks; LucyT
In early 1948 Frank Marshall Davis served on the publicity committee of the Citizens' Committee to Aid Packing-House Workers with Vernon Jarrett.

On April 12, 1948, Vernon Jarrett was listed as a member of the Communist Party USA dominated Citizens' Committee to Aid Packing-House Workers which was based in Chicago, Illinois.

Vernon Jarrett was later to become the father-in-law to Valerie Jarrett, now a senior advisor to U.S. President Barack Obama.

328 posted on 03/04/2012 8:43:10 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: bitt
Thanks, bitt.

From the article:

"Hawaii registered births as occurring in Hawaii which did not actually occur in Hawaii and then reported them as native birth statistics to the federal government in order to inflate its statistics triggering federal funding for public services."

329 posted on 03/04/2012 8:44:35 PM PST by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: bitt; Berlin_Freeper; Hotlanta Mike; Silentgypsy; repubmom; HANG THE EXPENSE; Nepeta; Bikkuri; ...

VITAL RECORDS INDICATE OBAMA NOT BORN IN HAWAII HOSPITAL

Part 1 of 3
Part 2 of 3

and learn more about Valerie Jarrett's Communist connections to Frank Marshall Davis here.
330 posted on 03/04/2012 8:51:58 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer; All

Hawaii official now swears:

No Obama birth certificate

Signs affidavit declaring long-form, hospital-generated document absent

Published: 01/24/2011 at 8:48 PM - ( Note Date )

by Jerome R. Corsi

Former Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams has now signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities.

[snip]

“During the course of my employment,” Adams swears in the affidavit (viewable in full as part 1 and part 2), “I became aware that many requests were being made to the City and County of Honolulu Elections Division, the Hawaii Office of Elections, and the Hawaii Department of Health from around the country to obtain a copy of then-Senator Barack Obama’s long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate.”

As he inquired about the birth certificate, he says, his supervisors told him that the records were not on file at the Hawaii Department of Health.

“Senior officers in the City and County of Honolulu Elections Division told me on multiple occasions that no Hawaii long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Senator Obama in the Hawaii Department of Health,” Adams’ affidavit reads, “and there was no record that any such document had ever been on file in the Hawaii Department of Health or any other branch or department of the Hawaii government.”

In a recorded telephone interview, Adams told WND that it was common knowledge among election officials where he worked that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate could be found at the Hawaii Department of Health.

http://www.wnd.com/2011/01/254401/


331 posted on 03/04/2012 9:09:39 PM PST by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; Fred Nerks
Isn't it interesting how the embossed stamps show so clearly?


332 posted on 03/04/2012 9:18:25 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

WHO IS 0BAMA?

—NO CLASSMATES KNOW HIM:

Not one person has stepped up and said, “He was soooo shy,” or “What a great dancer!” No classmates, not even the recorder for the Columbia class notes ever heard of him.

—NO GRADUATION PICTURES: Where is the footage of the graduation ceremony?

—NO TEACHERS KNEW HIM? Has anyone talked to the professors? Isn’t it odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him?

—NOTHING ABOUT HIS PAST: Wonder why no one ever came forward from 0bama’s past, saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc.? Not one person has ever come forward from his college past.

—NOT EVEN GEORGE KNOWS: George Stephanopoulos, ABC News, in 2008 campaign questioned why no one has acknowledged that the president was in their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus. George graduated Columbia-class of 1984. He says he never had a single class with him. Since he is such a great orator, why doesn’t anyone in 0bama’s college class remember him?

—NO COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY RECORDS? Why won’t he allow Columbia to release his records? Grades? Did he take classes? What club was he in?

—NOBODY REMEMBERS 0BAMA AT COLUMBIA: Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when 0bama claims to have been there, but not one remembers him. For example, Wayne Allyn Root was (like 0bama) a political science major at Columbia, who graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of 0bama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a single classmate who ever knew Barack 0bama at Columbia ... EVER!”

—NOBODY KNOWS AT CLASS REUNION: Wayne Root remembers at their 20th class reunion five years ago, he was asked to be the speaker of the class—NOT 0bama. No one ever heard of Barack.

—NO 0BAMA PHOTOS / RECORDS IN COLUMBIA YEARBOOKS: 0bama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook. 0BAMA consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.


333 posted on 03/04/2012 9:26:19 PM PST by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Truth is stranger than fiction:

the pupil of W.E.B. Du Bois, Paul Robeson,

whom Frank Marshall Davis credited with persuading him to go to Hawaii,

starred in a film named 'Sanders of the River' with Jomo Kenyatta

Jomo Kenyatta[pron.] (1889 – 22 August 1978) served as the first Prime Minister (1963–1964) and President (1964–1978) of Kenya. He is considered the founding father of the Kenyan nation.

334 posted on 03/04/2012 9:38:57 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

AND THE GROUP IMAGES OF HARVARD LAW STUDENTS FOR 1988, 1989, 1999, 2000, 2001,2002 ARE MISSING.

http://via.lib.harvard.edu/via/deliver/fullRecordDisplay?_collection=via&inoID=708385&recordNumber=5&fullgridwidth=5&method=view&recordViewFormat=grid

first noticed THEY ARE MISSING IN 2008

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2118690/posts

OBAMA: Harvard Law Class Photos Missing
Harvard University Library ^ | 29 Oct. 2008 | self

Posted on Thursday, 30 October 2008 4:31:36 AM by Fort McCain

A search of the Harvard University Library digital image collection appears to reveal that group pictures of graduate students from 1988 through 2003 are missing from the collection. Obama was in the graduating class of 1991.


But you can see him in the centre of the image of the HARVARD LAW REVIEW at the FR link above.


335 posted on 03/04/2012 9:53:14 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

My gripe is that there have been hundreds of threads with thousands of posts of incredible research on FR since the summer (at least) of 2008 about Zero’s background, lies, and so on. If you wanted to know the facts, you would have read them all, just as many of us have.

But you haven’t read them all, or absorbed much of what you have read. Instead, you have your own “ideas” that ignore the research already done. Not “ideas” but actual research.


336 posted on 03/04/2012 9:59:59 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
"Isn't it interesting how the embossed stamps show so clearly?"

(Hope you don't mind I re-used your previously posted Hmmmm image)

337 posted on 03/04/2012 10:28:48 PM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; thecodont; LucyT

much more interesting stuff going on:

The Harvard Law Group images are missing from 1988 through to 2002, and freeper thecodont writes:

“...The blackout of HL alumni reunion dates covers about the same date range, 1988-2003.”

...and yesterday we discovered thanks to the sheriff, that the INS overseas arrivals records for the first week of August 1961 are missing...

Lucy, I hope there’s more room on your list.


338 posted on 03/04/2012 10:29:52 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Isn't it interesting how the embossed stamps show so clearly?

And we don't need factcheck tricks to show us where it is.

339 posted on 03/04/2012 10:52:30 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
"...and yesterday we discovered thanks to the sheriff, that the INS overseas arrivals records for the first week of August 1961 are missing..."

Fred, would you happen to have a citation for that bit? I've searched for it, and all I've found so far is some bs at some site called nativeborncitizen.wordpress etc and at Fogbow.

Heck, if you've got linkage for all three points, that'd be even better, putting it out there again for FR toddlers like myself to peruse. The missing week's worth of INS arrival records however is what interests me in the main, at current. I would like to compare who is saying what with those of others regarding this nugget of info.

I watched the entire 80 minutes-plus of the Arpaio press conference and am trying to remember at what minute mark mention would have been made on this item, rather than having to watch the entire video again to find it.

340 posted on 03/05/2012 12:35:44 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome; Fred Nerks
Wait. Found some info at American Thinker that merits perusing before going further, at least for my part in the previous request for citation/leads.
341 posted on 03/05/2012 12:56:01 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome

See 2nd item page 2:

http://www.mcso.org/MultiMedia/PressRelease/Sheriffreleasesobamafindings.pdf


342 posted on 03/05/2012 2:53:36 AM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: x
I'd agree that it may not literally be a "conspiracy theory," but in everyday conversations, theories of a hidden or concealed truth generally get referred to as "conspiracy theories. If there was a second adoption and both adoptions were covered up, though, "conspiracy theory" may not be an inappropriate description of what you think happened.

I disdain the use of the word "conspiracy" because it has been an accusation from the beginning that those of us who feel we are being kept in the dark about his actual documents are kooks and nuts just waiting for black helicopters to fly over our houses where we crouch in the basement hiding while wearing aluminum-foil hats.

People imply that a coverup must somehow involve a massive conspiracy utilizing all the resources of the "New World Order", the Bilbibergers, the Tri-Lateral Commission, and all that crap. I have said all along, it's just Barack Obama lying to protect his own A$$. (And possibly his grandmother protecting her grandchild.)

I'm skeptical, because 1) those signs may point to a formal and official adoption or something much more informal and unofficial, and 2) it's not clear how Indonesian and US law interact, what kind of Indonesian legal proceedings would have changed Obama's status.

And this is the most salient point of the idea. *I* am convinced he was adopted by Indonesian standards under Indonesian law, but whether or not that has any effect on his American Status is in my mind vague and indeterminate. At this point I drag out one of my old rules.

People do things based on what they *THINK*, not necessarily what *IS*. All it takes for Grandma Dunham to take action is a BELIEF that it will have an effect. It is entirely reasonable to believe Grandma Dunham could be motivated to act on uncertainty in order to guarantee certainty regarding the status of her Grandson. (Who by this time she cared about.)

Maya's understanding of "adoption" and Indonesian adoption law is shaky, and can't be taken as hard evidence that there was a formal legal adoption. If you want to rely on her testimony, though, it sounds like she's saying there most likely wasn't a Hawaiian adoption of Barack by Lolo.

I'm not suggesting any of it is "hard" evidence, it's all circumstantial, but it is nonetheless persuasive circumstantial evidence due to the number of pieces of it, and the subsequent behavior of those involved.

I'm also skeptical of the Soebarkah story. True, the name is there in black and white on the paperwork, but it's in parenthesis after Barack Hussein Obama. We're free to speculate about why it's there and why both names are crossed out, but we don't know with any certainty. It's an indication that something may have happened, but not proof.

Again, I put it in the category of indicative, not conclusive.

The deportation (which I didn't know about before) and divorce papers are more substantial. The response, though, would be that when you live a double life, with some things official and legal and others informal and unbinding, you can get confused about what the actual legal status of your affairs is. If you're fighting deportation, you're going to use whatever arguments are available, regardless of whether they are true or reflect the real legal state of things.

No doubt. Barack Obama sr. tried to use Barry in the same way. To fight deportation. (Barack sr. was only in the country because he lied on his Visa application. US Law at the time barred entry to anyone who associated with Communists or Polygamists.)

And I'd need more information before I could safely say that what the mention of Barack Obama as an adult child "still dependent on the parties for education." I'd want to know what the common practice in cases like this was, and what reasons there might have been for listing or not listing a stepchild.

Like I said, your theory is interesting. It's more plausible than most of the others I've come across. It could very well be true. But I'm going to wait for more evidence.

Nothing wrong with that. That is actually how I prefer to do things. My efforts are not intended to convince anyone that things actually happened this way. My efforts are to show people that they MIGHT have happened this way, and to keep this theory in mind when evaluating the possibilities. When a piece of evidence pops up to either reinforce or impugn the theory, we will be better able to see what is the actual truth. I just want people to consider the idea as a possibility, not the ONLY possibility.

You may be convinced of the truth of your version of things, but "a good circumstantial case" doesn't mean that the burden of proof switches to the other side. You could show motive, means, and opportunity, but you still haven't proven your case beyond a reasonable doubt.

No, i'm not convinced of the truth of this theory either. There are bits and pieces that make me wonder if it is correct. (The pencil marks on his long form birth certificate. The Daily Pen has a very good explanation for them, but it requires the document to be real and authentic, if I understand the article correctly.)

Again, I just want it (the theory) on the table among the other selections.

343 posted on 03/05/2012 6:22:17 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
Why pretend you don’t know? I made it quite clear up-thread that the name Soebarkah was both an Indonesian name and a place. And just as Stanley Ann Dunham wrote her married name as SUTORO at times, SUKARNO was SOEKARNO, SUHARTO was SOEHARTO, SOETORO became SUTORO - when SUHARTO took over.

THUS, you see SOEKBARKAH became SUBARKAH:

Suharto’s body was taken from Jakarta to the Giri Bangun mausoleum complex near the Central Java city of Solo. He was buried alongside his late wife in a state military funeral with full honours, with the Kopassus elite forces and KOSTRAD commandos as the honour guard and pallbearers and Commander of Group II Kopassus Surakarta Lt.Colonel Asep Subarkah.[90

And this is why I said you know more about this aspect than do I. I didn't know any of this till you explained it.

344 posted on 03/05/2012 6:25:45 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
Because it’s evident to me that if there is information out there that places any doubt on your THINKING you immediately resort to the ‘the journalist made a mistake’ position.

The fact that he wrote two different articles, one with five mistakes in it and one without any mistakes, makes it easy to see that they are mistakes. Were they not, they would be in both articles.

Apart from that, the kooky stuff he said conflicts very seriously with OTHER evidence. It is far simpler to count it as a reporters mistake than to explain it any other way.

I don't know about you, but i've been interviewed by reporters (Both Newspaper and Television reporters) dozens of times. The one thing I can guarantee is that they NEVER get it right. The best you can hope for is that they don't make TOO MANY mistakes.

But this is really simple. If you want, *I* will attempt to Contact Bill Lawson and ASK him if these were mistakes.

345 posted on 03/05/2012 6:39:36 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Thank you. That's exactly the reply that I was waiting for!

Your original comment:

and I can only assume it continued during the time Madelyn Dunham was growing up. Apart from that, the Family lived in Oklahoma and Texas before moving to Washington.

Truncating a quote is something only a little child does. Here is the quote in it's entirety.

No, because I think Madelyn Dunham was utterly ashamed of the fact that she had a Black Grandchild. Madelyn Dunham was from Kansas, and from my Reading of Frank Marshall Davis' book "livin' the blues" they were pretty prejudice in Kansas during the 1920s, and I can only assume it continued during the time Madelyn Dunham was growing up.

Truncating a quote is an attempt to change it's meaning by omission, and is a form of lying. Why are you attempting to deceive?

You make a comment that i'm lying without any quotes for me to figure out which of my statements you are objecting to, then when I pick the one which I THOUGHT you must have been referring to, you say , "no, it's the OTHER one." (And then you cut out the part of THAT quote which renders it in context.

So how old was Madelyn Payne Dunham when her daughter Stanley was in school? It was actually Stanley Ann who was growing up there, not Madelyn! That seems to contradict your implied predjudice.

Nobody said Madelyn grew up in Oklahoma or Texas. Madelyn Dunham was from Kansas, which according to Frank Davis was just as Prejudiced.

How about this? As far as you are concerned, i'm lying. Please ignore me henceforth as unworthy of your attention. I hope to treat you the same way. (Though I shall be surprised if you won't insist on demanding my attention.)

346 posted on 03/05/2012 6:59:30 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
So the writings of a Communist pedophile is your authority?

Whether Frank Davis was a communist Pedophile is immaterial to the fact that he experienced life in Kansas during the 1920s, and wrote about it. One is not automatically wrong about everything just because they are wrong about one thing. Look at you for example.

Are your feelings so hurt that this is the best you can do? How about just apologizing? Do the Christian thing. You wrongly called me a liar, and now you are attempting to obfuscate the fact that I was correct, and you were wrong for calling me a liar.

347 posted on 03/05/2012 7:07:04 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
My gripe is that there have been hundreds of threads with thousands of posts of incredible research on FR since the summer (at least) of 2008 about Zero’s background, lies, and so on. If you wanted to know the facts, you would have read them all, just as many of us have.

I disagree. You obviously haven't read the threads i've been involved in or you wouldn't have presumed I was an Obama supporter. You are guilty of the very thing which you have accused me of. (Not reading all the threads.)

What was it Christ said about worrying about the mote in your brothers eye?

But you haven’t read them all, or absorbed much of what you have read. Instead, you have your own “ideas” that ignore the research already done. Not “ideas” but actual research.

I have read quite a lot of the threads. I believe I have a far better grasp of the details of this issue than most people on Free Republic. I think you underestimate what I have read and how I have analyzed it.

You say you and others have read ALL the threads, yet I have written quite extensively on this issue, and still a lot of you thought I was somehow supporting Obama.

We can disagree, but we ought not be disagreeable. If you see I am lacking in some piece of knowledge, Educate me. Don't disparage me till after you've tried to enlighten me.

348 posted on 03/05/2012 7:14:26 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

I have just sent an email to Bill Lawson at the Maumelle Monitor asking him to clarify his article of November 13, 2008. I specifically asked him about Barry’s mother having died in 1970.

If he responds, I will let you know what he said.


349 posted on 03/05/2012 7:26:50 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
regardless to whom his biological parents were.

This is my take I'm dying to see some DNA so we can tell just who this imposter really is.

350 posted on 03/05/2012 8:56:21 AM PST by rodguy911 (FreeRepublic:Land of the Free because of the Brave--Sarah Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-398 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson