A question for birthers: why Mombassa?

Vanity | Me

[Brown Deer]

So folks blindly accept the plausibility of Ann Dunham making an undocumented 20,000 mile round-trip to a country on the opposite side of the planet that she never visited at any other time in her life...but get all skeptical about a posited 2,600 mile flight a month later to her old hometown in the US?

I'm not skeptical at all. You're just too ignorant to figure it out.

It was you after-birthers that were making the big deal about her not being able to travel.

[Kevmo]

Yup.

FR has been inundated with RINOs. Here’s one of my former taglines:

SURFRINAGWIASS: Shut Up RINOs. Free Republic is not a GOP Website. It’s a SOCON Site.

[little jeremiah]

Quite a few are getting outed regarding their posts on leftist websites. Not even RINOS but just regular leftists. LorenC is one of them and I don’t give courtesy pings to leftists.

MilSpecRob is no longer with us. :-)

[sometime lurker]

I have a simple question for you, has the State of Hawaii ever recognized Sun Yat Sen's Hawaiian birth certificate was fraudulent?

According to this, Sun Yat Sen eventually renounced it himself. Whether the state of Hawaii ever recognized the renunciation is a good question. I wonder how mad the people he convinced to (fraudulently) swear to his birth were when he renounced and showed them as liars?

[Natural Born 54]

A postscript if you don’t mind to your excellent summary of why an “anti-birther” is not a conservative.

Two insidious arguments that surface against the merit of SUCCEEDING on the ineligibility & birther issues go like this:

1. “OK so we get rid of Obama, then we get Biden or perhaps Pelosi?”
2. “We can get rid of BO’s executive orders but then there are all the laws that will have to be repealed, some of which will be almost impossible to repeal.”

I disagree with these objections:

1. If Obama is acknowledged as ineligible for office and it is proved that he has acted fraudulently, then everyone who knowingly aided and abetted him could be removed from office or appointed position. It could even be argued that ANYONE in office who has sworn to uphold the Constitution could be removed from that office (it has always been clear that he is not an NBC) for allowing him to be a candidate, a president-elect, the POTUS and then acknowledging him as a legal president from the moment he usurped the office. One could even argue that it was the duty of all of those who are sworn to uphold the Constitution to do what Lt. Col. Lakin did, the difference being that Lakin is far down the chain of command relative to a Congress member and has infinitely less power to affect a change.

2. If Obama were removed from office because he was never eligible to be there, then every law passed by the Congress would be null and void, particularly if a law does not meet Constitutional scrutiny. Every one. The POTUS has veto power over every law enacted by Congress. This is one of those checks and balances built into the Constitution. It could be successfully argued, imo, that a legal president performing his job to uphold the constitution would have vetoed every law that involved the Federal government overstepping its Constitutional limitations. In addition, every treaty, foreign agreement and commitment sanctioned by this president or one of his appointees would also be null and void.

The above explanations show why the very least reaction to the eligibility struggle from a true conservative should be applause from the sidelines. They also demonstrate why every thread on the topic is descended upon by a pack of obfuscating, ridiculing Obots masquerading as conservatives. They know it is the one thing they have to stop. To fail to do so is to lose their grip on the country. America’s headlong plunge into facism, marxism and eventual disappearance into a one world “utopia” would be stopped dead in its tracks. In reaction, the country would do a fierce 180 degree turn back to its conservative, Constitutional roots and repudiate all forms of liberalism in its quest to re-establish a Free Republic.

So the bottom line is this - if a ‘non-believer’ shows up on a birther/eligibility thread to criticize or ridicule, that person is not only not a conservative, that person is an enemy. No exceptions.

[sometime lurker]

Ok, the 10,000 plus thread had a link to BOAC schedules found by buccaneer81, and an embedded plane schedule found by null and void. They show no direct flights to Mombasa, only local ones. The Kenyan hub was Nairobi.

[rolling_stone]

Don’t forget unscheduled and charter airlines. They were commonly used during the day...the first Kenya airlift was a charter that cost 81 passengers about $330 each it went to New York.

I would not put it past someone going to Hawaii to go by a southern air route bypassing the mainland USA, east from Kenya to Hawaii. Also for one going to Hawaii, ship transport is also likely in 1959. If one had the time it could be done on the cheap via cargo ship or working their way across for free.

[null and void]

Thus explaining why a very very very pregnant Stanley Ann was not in Mobassa, she was trying to catch a flight back to the US to have her baby at home, something she couldn’t do from Mombasa.

Assuming that she actually did have the baby in Nairobi, as witnessed and reported by the relatives, of course.

[sometime lurker]

As to ship travel, I think that was discussed on the same thread. It would have been a several months long trip, if I recall correctly.

[zzeeman]

Thanks CG. I've thought about and have mulled over all of the "excuses" and "motives" and the simple fact is that none of it ever adds up. A reasonable person looks at all of this (the relentlessness, the amount of time needed to research, etc., the ginned up backgrounds, etc.) in light of what even a modest level of success for what they argue against would mean, and it just "does not compute!"

It boils down to this, at a slight level of abstraction, the "anti-birther" composite:

• willing to fight tooth and nail (Aggressive, Combative types),
• tirelessly look up (and sometimes translate) historical documents (Scholarly, Lawyerly types),
• shade and spin court documents, opinions, and background notes (Underhanded, Sneaky types),
• ridicule and show general disdain toward my "Conservative" brethren (Rude, Nasty types),
• speculate on numerous reasons why no court will ever make a ruling, etc. (Seer, Fortune-teller types)
• spit out SRM "talking points," e.g., "Hawaii has confirmed..." (Dolt, Troglodyte types)

-- all to argue against an outcome (even taken in small increments) that would be of monumental importance in thwarting the progress of a force that is destroying the country that one professes to love and cherish. How does any of it make any sense at all?

I can't think of another parallel circumstance (current or historical) in which so many people are committed to arguing down and besmirching discussion of an issue that would only serve to bring about consequences in their favor.

[zzeeman]

Thanks LJ. I know there are many others that have racked their brains trying to make sense out of this rather unique phenomenon!

[zzeeman]

Thanks STE=Q and OWS. I just can not figure out the sanity in what I see, on a daily, non-stop basis.

[zzeeman]

Thanks Kevmo. I am not sure what they are. They most likely all are not completely homogeneous. Some may just be argumentative nuts...

[zzeeman]

Thanks SP, on both counts!

[zzeeman]

Thanks NB54. I agree with both your reasoning and conclusions.

To add another element, I sometimes see the discussions that go along the lines that a result could be "great civil unrest, rioting in the streets, etc." If enough of our fellow citizens ever get to the point that we are unwilling to fight against the existing tyranny (and the clear view of additional levels of tyranny coming very soon) simply for fear of potential side effects, we are doomed as a nation.

[little jeremiah]

What I’m reminded of is how Hollywood became infiltrated with many card carrying Communists and fellow travellers, trying their best to influence the public. Of course, there were Communists in other areas of public life at that time, but thinking of this in particular. The outcry of evil “blacklisting” still reverberates, and yet it turned out later there were indeed real Communists, really funded by Stalin, in the US, and many in Hollywood.

[Natural Born 54]

The A109 Road (also called the Mombasa Road) from Nairobi to Mombasa is 290 miles but that road was probably not there in 1961. Looking it up gave me the distance between the 2 cities, however. Travel then was much more likely to be done by train. In 1901, because of the importance of Mombasa as a port city, the British completed the building of a railway that stretched from Mombasa to Uganda and WENT THROUGH NAIROBI. Not a long trip between the 2 cities on a train. At 50 mph, the trip would take less than 6 hours. A pregnant girl could easily make that trip. That’s why the majority of evidence pointing to Mombasa as the birth place (good hospital for whites, the possible present of Obama Sr. there at the time, etc.) is not a logistical problem.

There are some other plane schedules - one for S. African Airways included at this link:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts?page=8573#8573

One of the sources I used for the railway information is at this link:

http://www.africatravelling.net/

[Natural Born 54]

Yes, please let me choose between civil unrest and the world according to Obama - the former wins hands down.

[Natural Born 54]

Remember the crap Ann Coulter got when she wrote a book justifying Senator McCarthy’s committee? There’s a name that’s going to get a different treatment in history books if we have anything to do with it!

[little jeremiah]

And a bit later (can’t remember dates, darn brain), one of the doctors listed on Inspector Smith’s Kenyan BC lived very close to 0bama Sr in Mombasa.

I hope I’m remember details properly, someone will correct me if I’m wrong.