Posted on 12/11/2009 1:04:21 AM PST by Electric Graffiti
STAR BULLETIN EDITION OF AUG. 14TH, ON FILE AT BERKLEY IDENTICAL TO PUBLISHED IMAGES by John Charlton
The Post & Email has just received PDF files from a highly credible source, establishing that the birth annoucement in the Star Bulletin Edition of Aug. 14, 1961, for Barack Hussein Obama, is authentic.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
I see by your forum postings you are here to make trouble. Don’t bother posting back on your mistaken posting.
“Not sure what it was, but it wasn’t the swearing in of Obama. That happened behind closed doors.”
What leads you to this conclusion?
Well, ALL ANYONE HAS REALLY SEEN WAS A FRAUD COLB. The smears site colb posting IS FRAUDULENT.
Any more reality you'd care to refute? I'm sure you don't mind, the mindless never do.
When do I get my check, here I thought I was just defending rational thinking and exposing acts harmful to conservationism and I could have been paid for the pleasure.
DailyKos is more suited to your way of thinking. No facts, just post to make others think you know what you are talking about. If you post it over and over you think others will believe you.
Yes,I do think you and your gang have nefarious reasons for spending so much time in here antagonizing, berating and insulting everyone who does not take what you say for the truth.
There is no reason for you to be here because no one is going to listen to someone who cannot discuss without insults and put downs.
You can continue posting your insults but I will not post to you again.
So, you think Obama at say age 19, could have walked into the British counsel in DC and walked out with a Commonwealth passport?
Complete nonsense there are only 2 classes of citizens, natural born and naturalized.
All caps, huh. Well then it must be true.
That would the fraud COLB that the state of Hawaii, the definitive authority on the subject, isn't disputing. You know, they legally can if someone is presenting a false state document.
“Yes,I do think you and your gang have nefarious reasons for spending so much time in here antagonizing, berating and insulting everyone who does not take what you say for the truth.”
Man. That’s sad, but thanks for the answer.
Well, in all honesty, it's kind of hard to be a natural born citizen of a country that didn't exist when you were born, regardless of who your parents were.
“What leads you to this conclusion?”
Because that’s what happened. Were you there?
“So, you think Obama at say age 19, could have walked into the British counsel in DC and walked out with a Commonwealth passport? “
I don’t care what he could do at say 19. He’s not a natural born citizen of the United States of America.
It will come out sooner or later.
“Complete nonsense there are only 2 classes of citizens, natural born and naturalized. “
Not nonsense at all. There’s native born and naturalized. Natural born citizens have citizen parents. That’s why the Founding Fathers grandfathered themselves eligibility. Otherwise there would have been no reason to do that.
They did it. You are completely wrong.
“Well, in all honesty, it’s kind of hard to be a natural born citizen of a country that didn’t exist when you were born, regardless of who your parents were.
“
You obviously haven’t read what they had written.
You didn’t have to be a NBC if you were covered under their words.
But, if you were born after the document was written, you had to be a NBC, meaning born on US soil to citizen parents.
I watched it on television like most everyone else.
Chief Justice Robert administered the Oath of Office to BHO, but unfortunately flubbed a line.
So just to keep everything in order, the oath was administered again by Judge Roberts a day or so later at the White House in front of numerous witnesses. And he apparently got it right that time.
You may have noticed that BHO has been living in the White House since then.
So, if you want to claim that something else happened it would be keen if you could justify that.
You are a real good Tap-Dancer like the ballet maestro Rahm Emanuel
Once the new rules go into effect Jan. 1, anyone who wants to update a driver’s license will need to bring four pieces of identification, such as Social Security cards, U.S. passports and certified birth certificates.,hmmmm!!!
Nope, you got it this time.
ST. PETERSBURG — Starting in January, getting a new driver’s license will become a lot more difficult.
Once the new rules go into effect Jan. 1, anyone who wants to update a driver’s license will need to bring four pieces of identification, such as Social Security cards, U.S. passports and certified birth certificates.
You didn’t have to be a NBC if you were covered under their words.
But, if you were born after the document was written, you had to be a NBC, meaning born on US soil to citizen parents.”
That's what I said. The requirement to be a natural born citizen effectively eliminates everyone who was born before the country to which they would become citizens was created. It would have ruled out the first nine Presidents. That's the common sense issue the Founders were addressing with the grandfather clause, not concerns over which among them had what parents.
You are a real good Tap-Dancer like the ballet maestro Rahm Emanuel
What I am after in the Obama eligibility issue is an end to frivolous civil law suits that thus far have been dismissed, denied a hearing or defeated 60 times and won no times and instead I want ANY prosecuting attorney (a state Attorney General or a local or county District Attorney) in the US to seek a subpoena for Obama’s vault copy, long form Certificate of Live Birth. Subpoenas of confidential vital records are allowed under Hawaii law but it is likely that seeking a subpoena would need to be tied to a Grand Jury investigation to determine whether the short form COLB posted on the internet by Obama was fraudulent or forged.
Prosecuting attorneys use Grand Jury investigations all the time to go on legal “fishing expeditions.” If everything is on the up and up with Obama’s short and long form birth records, then “ho harm, no foul.” If the short form is fraudulent or forged, Obama’s impeachment trial can proceeded faster than you can say “Rod Blagojevich.”
“You obviously haven’t read what they had written.
You didn’t have to be a NBC if you were covered under their words.
But, if you were born after the document was written, you had to be a NBC, meaning born on US soil to citizen parents.”
That’s what I said. The requirement to be a natural born citizen effectively eliminates everyone who was born before the country to which they would become citizens was created. It would have ruled out the first nine Presidents. That’s the common sense issue the Founders were addressing with the grandfather clause, not concerns over which among them had what parents.
No, but I have friends who have. It you are a US citizen, you get treated quite well at US consolates. That was true then as it is true now.
She could have, but it would have been totally unnecessary under immigration law at the time. Since his mother was a US citizen, her grandson was eligible to receive US citizenship any time before his 18th birthday.
Now why would grandma commit purjury and risk jail time to obtain something that could be easily obtained legally?
I got the two confused. My mistake, but the same argument still applies.
Does anybody really doubt that his mother's parents or his maternal grandmother's parents were US citizens? What's the alternative? Were they Germans or Russians who secretly entered the country to spy and sabotage? Japanese maybe?
And do you really doubt that his mother or his mother's mother were born here? Was his grandmother going to take a trip to Vancouver or Tijuana or Nairobi to have a baby? Remember this was wartime -- 1942, when everyone was asking "Is this trip necessary?" in order to save gasoline? Use your head if you have one.
I see by your forum postings you are here to make trouble.
I could say the same thing about you? Are we here to come up with cockamamie speculations? Is questioning moronic scenarios making trouble?
Don’t bother posting back on your mistaken posting.
Too late, but I could say the same thing to you.
Hey oldie, tell us how you were able to get into President Reagan's head, huh???
WOW, I also have friends who have friends, etc. In opposite to YOU, I have dealt with U.S. consulates and Immigration Offices my entire working career and can tell you you don't know what you are talking about, regardless of what your friend told you!!!
I have personally dealt with consulates recently, and as a US citizen I was treated with the utmost respect and with excellent customer service. Being only in my third decade of life, however, I am not old enough to have dealt with consulates in the 1960's. My knowledge of consulates during that era is through friends. I have dealt with U.S. consulates and Immigration Offices my entire working career
I don't believe you. I doubt you are old enough to have had much of a career, much less have dealt with consulates in the 1960's. Your posts reveal the maturity level of a teenager.
I don't believe you. I doubt you are old enough to have had much of a career, much less have dealt with consulates in the 1960's. Your posts reveal the maturity level of a teenager.
Thank you for your "youthful" insight, and your age should tell that you just have come out of the teen-age state, but your mindset shows something different, that you never came out and you still is a schooled brainwash "student" knowing zilch about world history!
As born in 1931 and lived in an occupied COPENHAGEN, - not by crazy environmental hoaxer now, - but by nasty oppressive NAZIS when we had to scramble every day to FIND food, and then having a 30+ years career as an Officer in the Merchant Marine!
I dealt daily with many nations consulates all over the world, including USSR, and especially the U.S. consulates and the INS, during the time from 1951 to 1983!!
If you think that consulate businesses was done the same during that period as they are today, you certainly need to go and have your "ear dried behind them." And I couldn't care less if you believe me or not!!!
You assume grandma might have had sufficient legal knowledge of immigration law to make it seem unnecessary to her to make any false report of a foreign birth as an HI home birth. People panic!
There was one report (from my questionable memory) I think from a friend of Stanley Ann's (before the friend clammed up) that Madelyn was scared to death of the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya and wanted to protect little Barry.
If there were to be custody issues resulting from a fall-out between Stanley Ann and BHO Sr, especially if there was a Kenya birth, BHO Sr might have had a stronger claim for Kenya jurisdiction of custody if Barry was not a US citizen. We know there was a big fall-out in the marriage because one month after the birth SADO was living in Seattle! Madelyn might have filed US birth papers for Barry and sent SADO to Seattle for protection from BHO Sr who was reportedly a beast.
The point might have been not to just confirm citizenship for Barry after a Kenya birth, but to actually _negate_ the Kenya birth to disarm Kenya claims on Barry.
While I appreciated your thoughtful reply, none of your arguments address the fact that the “proof” he’s submitted (COLB) has been analyzed and proven to be a forgery:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2136816/posts
Ping
What I'm saying is actually very simple. If Obama produced a fake document that doesn't conform to the records that Hawaii has, an unbelievably risky thing to do, there is no legal privacy protection for that. The state of Hawaii can legally say that the information on that document does not conform to its records. Indeed, it is more or less compelled to do so if it is aware of a misrepresentation of official state records in a matter of legal consequence. That it has not done so, that it has indeed pretty much confirmed the information, is far more significant and telling than some guy's “analysis” of an image on the Internet.
Either the information on that certificate is false and Hawaii would so state, or it's not. If the latter, why would Obama bother to fake something that looks exactly like what he would get from the state if he asked? The link has been posted that COLBs are the standard document Hawaii issues upon request.
That's all very simple logic. Indeed, it's common sense.
Actually, I would contest as a matter of fact, your statement that an image on the internet cannot be used as proof of fraud. I felt Polarik’s breakdown quite compelling, especially the last portion of his analysis, in which Factcheck’s photographs clearly show the text of the “COLB” not following the same angles as they should be. Also, pixelation issues/distortions, detailed color analysis... None of these discrepancies are explainable, thus far, except for an electronic manipulation of the data.
I agree with you on one point, however - Document fraud is a risky move to take.
I recommend reading this freeper post, for an answer to the “why would he do this question:”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2303258/posts
Long story short- the docs he likely posesses, shows his COLB was applied for in a manner that doesn’t prove birthplace.
Common sense gave up the ghost long ago, in terms of Barry’s refusal to release his Birth Certifcate.
And again, here is what most people see as common sense.
(1) When you request a standard birth certificate request, Hawaii issues a COLB.
(2) The COLB is an electronic printout of database information populated by the original source documentation.
(3) The data on a COLB printed out says whatever it says because that's what the original documentation said.
(4) The certificate Obama produced looks like what Hawaii issues.
(5) Hawaii isn't disputing it.
So from a common sense perspective, Obama produced a legal record of birth. A small segment of the population has gone over the top theorizing every answer but the obvious one staring them in the face, most likely because they emotionally will not accept the proposition that Obama can be President. So why should he waste any time on that? Nothing he produces will ever satisfy the people who want to see his baptism records.
I prefer my version:
So from a common sense perspective, Obama has suspiciously withheld his original vital records of birth inviting speculation that he has something to hide, most likely a clue to something that would disqualify him from being President such a foreign birth. A huge segment of the MSM and political elite has gone over the top theorizing every answer but the obvious one staring them in the face, most likely because they emotionally will not accept the proposition that Obama might be ineligible to be President.
I’d appreciate it if you could provide a link which explains away the “perspective problems” (re: the Factcheck photo session with the COLB), which Polarik detailed. I found that particular segment to be the most damning, because no type of doctorate’s degree is necessary in order to believe a legal document’s text should follow roughly the same trajectory.
As a close follower of this mystery, I am quite familiar with what Hawaii issues to requestors of BC information (your bullet point #1).
#2: Yes, this isn’t disputed.
#3: This is being disputed, quite specifically, in detail.
#4: “looks like,” doesn’t cut it.
#5: There “legaleze” response hedges their words quite carefully. Makes one wonder why they do so.
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.