Skip to comments.Once Again I will Posit Adoption for Barack Obama.
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.
Fred’s here watching you.
You are going to get yourself into an awful tangle assuming that your own circumstances/experience have anything to do with zero.
Boy did YOU get that wrong! Virtually the only thing I talk about is how he is NOT LEGITIMATE. Rather than defending him, I am leading the pack which has been attacking him.
You have read other people's entire threads in the past. Read mine.
You post on NO other threads, NONE!!! The ONLY thing you do on FR is defend Barry Soetoro and your past posting history is proof of that.
I post mostly on the eligibility threads. That is what I find to be the most interesting topic. I do occasionally post on other threads, but the eligibility topic is what I want to thrash out.
Again, my position is that Barack Obama is NOT ELIGIBLE, and is NOT a legitimate President. (At least he hasn't proven so.)
Therefore you are a troll and its sad the mods havent noticed what is as obvious as the nose on their face.
Here is your first page of past posts from 4/2011. Each one up until today looks the same. All defending the Kenyan usurper.
You should read some of those posts. They say what I have always said. The States didn't verify his credentials, and they shouldn't have let him on the ballot.
I still say that.
Vote away....still won’t mean you’re right. :) Hey, if you think DL is legit, that’s your choice. Have you read ALL past posts from day one? If not, please do so.
Oh, you must have been talking about him. (Candor7) I got confused because the message was addressed to me. :)
‘he’ talks about me without the courtesy of including my name ... so I can do the same. I doubt we are dealing with an obamabot, what we have here is someone who thinks they have it all worked out...and can’t take anything but their own theories into account.
It’s a pity...
I don’t think the grandparents would have adopted Barry Soetoro, but instead they simply got legal guardianship. The divorce records still suggested that Lolo Soeotoro was still legally Barry’s father.
I did. And now you have to read #82. And I’m outa here.
However, the legal parents (by birth or adoption) on a corrected/amended BC would still remain the same.
It is probable the grandparents became the official guardians of obama (as opposed to adoption). A legal formality rich with documentation, but the paperwork is out of our reach.
I will go back and read them again. I went back to the day you joined and read from there. I will admit I didn’t spend hours reading each post. I will read more when I have time and if I think I was wrong, I have no problem admitting I was wrong.
Because it would explain them in light of the other facts we have seen.
Fact. It's fake.
Fact. When he first produced it, Obama trumpeted it about as though it were real.
Fact. Hawaii is more or less backing it.
What ties this all together? How can it be both FAKE and backed up by the state of Hawaii?
Because it was created by a court order and is therefore legal. If Obama was legally adopted by his Grandparents in 1971, then he could subsequently have that adoption annulled, and go back to his original name. This will, however, not result in the release of his ORIGINAL (sealed by adoption) birth certificate. It will, however, allow him to get a court order to the Department of Health in Hawaii for the creation of a replacement one.
Being a legal forgery fits all three facts. It's real and fake at the same time. The salient point is that it isn't the ORIGINAL document.
If that doesn't make sense, i'm not sure I can explain it better.
Besides that, Who else would have access to the bits and pieces of a real 1961 birth certificate to make it look realistic? DOH HAWAII!!
I take back the part about you not wanting a link to the Auntie thread.
But if you have not immersed yourself in all the long useful threads on FR you are lacking a desire to learn the truth about Zero.
I wish there was a better way to search the threads on Free Republic. I DO talk about other issues. I have had discussions with people about Abortion, (I am against it. I compare it to Nazi Genocide.) I have discussed economics, (the Gold Standard versus Fiat currency) I had a long exchange with a bunch of people about how much I was mad at Newt Gingrich for all the stupid things he's done in the past, (on the couch with Nancy Pelosi.) and I just recently discussed Charlie Chaplain.
It is just that I am so pissed off about the way some of my conservative "allies" have dismissed the birth certificate/Eligibility issue that I want to prove them wrong and shove it in their face. You simply cannot discuss this issue on Ace of Spades HQ because Ace and the gang cannot tolerate it.
That leaves Where? Where do you discuss this topic? I've thrashed it in the comments at "Hot Air", but that places sucks for posting. (can't post pictures.)
Other stuff does interest me, but nothing interests me more than a good fight with Obots on the issue of eligibility.
No it is not, but it is my belief that most states follow similar rules regarding adoption. I have read through much of Hawaii's adoption rules, and the section on Privacy is exceptionally large.
Yes it does, and what it says is that I don't regard Barack Obama as having proven he is eligible to be President.
Do you think he is eligible?
Do your best. I am currently wearing my asbestos underwear. :)
Are you confessing or something? :)
Haste makes waste. I took some time, read more and will admit I jumped the gun. I saw several of your posts that seemed outlandish and looked like the typical concern troll, added that to the fact that you came to FR and immediately began to post on BC threads and nothing else, which MOST of the time, screams troll.
I will now say that I believe I was wrong. I won’t try to blame it on being tired, or anything else. Wrong is wrong and I believe I was and I admit it. I should have taken more time reading your past posts and not jumped on the band wagon with the others calling you out on this thread.
I just saw where you defended Bushpilot1 and that’s good enough for me.He should not have been zotted, he was set up by after-birthers and trolls. He was one of the good guys and he got zotted and the trolls are left standing. It sucks!
So, to set the record straight, I should have taken more time, ( I usually do) and I believe I was wrong and I apologize.
No, I don’t think he is eligible and I know he’s covering up things and lying. I came to FR in 2008 and have always believed he is lying about his BC and many other things.
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.