Skip to comments.Obama's family fraudulent identity.
Posted on 06/11/2012 5:41:04 AM PDT by plenipotentiary
click here to read article
Clicking on it gives “does not exist on this server”.
Can anyone repost?
Can anyone repost?
Are you referring to the thread, or a specific link elsewhere? I'm having no trouble accessing the thread.
Document Not Found
Sorry, the requested document does not exist on this server.
The requested document does not exist on this server.
Thank you LucyT ;)
Not sure what the problem is.. but no matter HOW many times I click on it, all I get is 404... at least I know what the pic is now
Maybe the intentionally obscured birth certificate says
Stanley Armour Dunham Second
There is definitely another word after Dunham.
It boils down a matter of conflicting evidence. I've only examined two components of the theory you laid out. In both cases, I found critical, readily-available, well-documented conflicting evidence. What really shocked me, however, is how little research has been done into this conflicting evidence by the people most committed to the theory you detailed. How can you establish your conjectures as even somewhat likely to be true without thoroughly investigating evidence that challenges them?
What I'm asking is this. If your theory is true, or even somewhat likely to be true, then it must be able to rationally account for not just the facts that support it but the facts that undermine, or at the very least appear, to undermine it. I have been shocked beyond words at how little investigation has been done by the very people most vocal in promoting your version of Obama’s nativity into conflicting evidence. Worse, when someone else researches this evidence, an eruption of nasty irrationality occurs. Far from thanking a fellow birther for uncovering heretofore undiscussed evidence, your fellow SAD-is-not-the-mother adherents go on full scale a t t a c k against the messenger. There is zero calm, rational evaluation of the new evidence [which should by no means be new; it should be very old by now] and 100 percent a t t a c k mode against the party that uncovered the evidence and/or facts.
I cannot entertain any theory whose proponents operate this way. Just yesterday you explained that SAD probably left Mercer Island HS following her junior year. I went looking for evidence, and discovered none. I.e.: no evidence exists that anyone in SAD’s senior class remarked on her year-long absence. Why was this not investigated prior to my poking around in it? Why, furthermore, was I savaged for making this ‘discovery’ [which should not, at this point, have been a discovery at all; it should have been old, familiar ground to all adherents of your theory].
There are numerous similar issues. I cannot find a single proponent of the SAD-is-not-the-mother theory who has delved into conflicting evidence and offered any thoughtful, intelligent analysis. Rather, the near-psychotic reactions I observe when conflicting evidence is presented serves only to persuade me that the theory has no merit.
Granted, David, you are not in that category at all. I've never seen you meltdown and hurl invective. And again, I do very much appreciate your detailed, thoughtful response. Yet I cannot get beyond the fact that so little research has been expended on even the most basic conflicting evidence to your theory. [For example, one proponent didn't even know SAD had earned a PhD. What an indictment. Another suggested she never graduated from HS at all. Okay: where's the evidence that she earned a GED??? It goes on and on.]
I will give your theory a second look when, and only when, its proponents themselves start delving into conflicting evidence. So long as the MO is and remains a t t a c k, a t t a c k, a t t a c k anyone who dares to do the research, the theory is useless.
Class of 1960 means a 1960 GRADUATION year. Two years junior high and Four years of high school =
Two years junior high 1954-1955, 1955-1956
1956 -57 grade 9
1957 -58 grade 10
1958 -59 grade 11
1959 -60 grade 12
If I am mistaken please tell me, I’m not in the USA.
Class of 1960 means a 1960 GRADUATION year. Two years junior high and Four years of high school =
Two years junior high 1954-1955,1955-1956
1956 -57 grade 9 1957 -58 grade 10 1958 -59 grade 11 1959 -60 grade 12
That’s correct, its the way they did it back then.
The problem occurs when one looks at either a yearbook or a separate class picture for someone that would normally not be there.
If somebody graduated in 1960 then they would be in the loose 1960 group picture and in the 1960 yearbook.
They’d show up in previous years’ yearbooks and previous year’s group pictures.
Its time to start investigating when they AREN’T where they should be....
There are no BOOKS, just group images from classes junior high through to grade 10, the students appear to be shown in groups with names in the EARLY ALPHABET. All students have NOT been identified, it’s impossible after so many years.
Again, there are no books. Just individual class photographs. Researchers are still working on the ID of the students in the various class groups.
Maybe it would have been better if I hadn’t mentioned it. Let’s wait and see what the final analysis is.
Year eight should not be in with class of 1960.
Same for years nine and ten.
I have three group images of the class of 1960,years eight of high school through to year 10 in which Maxine and a couple of other classmates are shown,but there is no Stanley Ann Dunham in all three of them. She should be there. The groups are A.B.C.D. of the alphabet. WHERE IS STANLEY ANN DUNHAM?
It looks like Maxine knew her until some time in 1958. After that,theres no sign of her.
TO DATE THERES BEEN NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF SAD AT MERCER ISLAND HIGH SCHOOL. GET BACK TO ME IF YOU FIND IT.”
87 posted on 06/14/2012 6:19:02 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies | R
This post #87 wasn’t clear about what year went with what picture, but you have cleared it up in your latest one.
Many many thanks, and do keep on it :) I am glad that you did bring it up.
Your two strongest points are the weak points in the argument on the other side. In the case of the High School issue, it probably doesn't make a difference; in the case of Stanley the mother, I know facts I can't put on the record that I think are convincing to the point that someone else is the mother and she fits perfectly with Malcolm the father. That part of the record will come out in due course.
Just yesterday you explained that SAD probably left Mercer Island HS following her junior year. I went looking for evidence, and discovered none. I.e.: no evidence exists that anyone in SADs senior class remarked on her year-long absence. Why was this not investigated prior to my poking around in it? Why, furthermore, was I savaged for making this discovery [which should not, at this point, have been a discovery at all; it should have been old, familiar ground to all adherents of your theory].
I hope I didn't say she probably left following her junior year.
What I said is that there is a fair amount of evidence that she attended Mercer Island High School at some earlier point. There is no evidence she graduated from Mercer Island and I don't even think you find Box or Close telling you she did. The three of them put her "in their class" but the point at which she actually concluded her Mercer Island period is an open question.
The fact that there is no real conclusive evidence coupled with the fact that there are a number of pictures putting her together with members of the class in purported Senior activities which pictures are clearly photoshop fakes makes you skeptical that she was really there in 1960. The position that she was would have been better served if there were no pictures.
She clearly wasn't a prominent person in the class. So the fact that fifty years later, the fact that most of the surviving members of the class don't remember her much less whether she was there or not in her senior year doesn't surprise you, one way or the other.
The people who claim to remember her at the end are committed Liberals who are part of the story themselves so I tend to discount their testimony. I think it is going to turn out that as to at least two of the prominent ones, they in fact participated in the events of Barry's first appearance.
But at the end of the day, the earliest date I think reasonable for Barry's birth is July of 1960--plenty of time for her to have graduated from Mercer Island in June and become a participant in the perceived events of his arrival. And my own view about the course of events at present, subject to further discovery, is that what really happened is that she got the Au Pair job with his parents sometime in the spring of 1961 when she was working in Chicago.
Either way, whether or not she finished Mercer Island in 1960 is irrelevant.
The Stanley the mother issue is sort of in the same category. If Malcolm the father were his primary political exposure, it really wouldn't make any difference that Barry was conceived in a one night stand with Stanley. We ignore that question now because we have access that identifies another person as the mother who fits with the Malcolm the father story.
And there is some evidence on the Stanley the mother question also. For one thing, Rick Anderson, married to one of Barry's Cousins and in possession of direct evidence writes in the Seattle Weekly: "Meanwhile, Obama's mother, whose parents Madelyn and Stanley Dunham had moved here from Kansas a decade earlier, left Mercer Island in 1960. But she returned to live in Seattle around 1962, after Barack was born in August 1961, leaving her husband, Kenya-born Barack Sr., and his newborn namesake in Hawaii."
This is an October 22, 2008 story, published long before the Charlette story and the fake exchange with "Lief". Anderson's story was the first effort to convert Anna Toutonghi Obama in Seattle to Stanley Ann Dunham in Seattle as a student with Barry.
Anderson, his wife, both families knew perfectly well that Anna Toutonghi had dumped Obama Senior and BHO 2 when she left them in Hawaii--everyone knew and understood that the baby had been left in Honolulu and was never taken to Seattle.
At that time, the Charlette events were concocted because it was recognized that a story that had Stanley delivering Barry on August 4, 1961 and dumping him to start school in Seattle in September was not a credible story. Jerry Corsi figured out the holes in that story at a very early stage.
Neither is Stanley a credible mother in the story Barry tells in the Time Magazine article in which he goes to Indonesia at age two and a half in 1963, leaving Stanley attending school in Honolulu for three years from 1963 to 1966.
The absence of any acquaintance with the putative father is also a problem for the Stanley the mother fairy tale. The only Anna with Obama Senior in Hawaii was Anna Toutonghi Obama (Anne USA at the Nachmanoff's). The story about Stanley in the Russian class is a pure fake--there is no evidence anywhere of any nature that Stanley ever met Senior before Christmas 1970.
One of the reasons I tend to be skeptical of the birth in New York record is that if that is where it happened, they could have converted the mother to Stanley much more readily than for the Hawaii birth story; at that point they say, "ok Malcolm was his father; so what?"
Stanley's PhD is also irrelevant. The circumstances behind her thesis are a little sketch but I don't think that argument is material or relevant to the central issues here. She got the PhD; the fact she got it is irrelevant whatever she did to get it.
Finally, your argument about investigation is also a little silly. Barry's forces have spent somewhere in the ten to twelve million dollar range hiding the facts; resisting disclosure; creating fraudulent documents; and otherwise seeking to keep anyone from finding out what the true story is behind his origin.
So the idea that a bunch of amateur volunteers are going to get through to the facts is not realistic.
Fortuitous events have apparently produced the identity of the true mother and there is now widespread knowledge out there of who she is and what the circumstances were.
Mr. Trump may be bringing some real resources to discovery of the rest of the story.
But the people pushing the particular conspiracy noted in this thread say otherwise. They claim SAD disappeared off the face of the earth, and not one single solitary soul on Mercer Island thought to comment on that fact.
Even more incredibly, they see nothing unusual in people who know SAD never graduated [according to the theory] pretending that she did. I.e.: in subsequent years Mercer Island and the entire state of Washington have fetishized SAD’s graduation from Mercer Island HS. A scholarship has been established in SAD’s name, AS A Graduate of that school. She is cited in the official encyclopedia of WA State history AS a grad of Mercer High—and no one is on record disputing that fact. I.e.: no one has stepped forward and said, ‘It's nice to deify SAD this way, but here's the catch. She was absent for her entire senior yr, and she didn't graduate w the rest of her class in the official ceremony.’
It is nothing short of psychotic, to believe an entire state would celebrate the graduation of a person who never graduated. ***Somebody*** on that island and/or in that graduating class would have pointed out the obvious yrs ago—and almost certainly not just one somebody either. Dozens of them.
For instance, I know of a girl who was absent for most of her senior yr. She did, however, show up for graduation...w a small baby in tow. You think we didn't notice? [Well, I only heard about it up to the night of graduation, having taken early admission into college. But the point is, I heard plenty, and yes, I *did* notice when she suddenly reappeared for the cap and gown ceremony, baby in arms.]
Then there is the BA SAD earned from the U of HI. Those aren't awarded to HS dropouts, not sans a GED, anyway. Where is the evidence SAD earned a GED? It's nonexistent. But we're just supposed to believe it happened.
The entire thing is absurd. If SAD had missed a whole yr of HS, someone would have noticed. If she were celebrated statewide as a grad of a schl she never graduated from, someone would comment on the disconnect.
And the biggest kicker of all: the this theory were true, its proponents wouldn't have to a t t a c k and demonize anyone who points out the obvious. They would have cogent, plausible explanations for the issues raised above.
But they don't.
Your post failed to respond to the core issue I raised, but thanks again for maintaining a measured tone. That’s so much more than others who subscribe to your theory have done.
The State of Hawaii is complicit with forgery and manipulation of all kinds of documentation, on a grand scale. All kinds of lies and liars working together - the newspapers, the DoH, their representatives, and so on. The WA state did she graduate or not is small scale compared to what’s gone on in HI.
You are preaching to the choir when it comes to HI corruption and complicity. I have been making that case for going on two yrs now.
I do not understand what you are saying.
Class of 1960 graduated at GRADE 12.
I am referring to group images of GRADES seven, eight nine and ten, which I take it includes two years of junior high for the Class of 1960.
I do not have GRADES 11 OR 12. So I do not have groups for the years 1958-1959 or 1959-1960.
Let’s drop it. I’ll post the results when they are to hand.
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.