Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Rathergate' expert doubts Obama's birth certificate
WND ^ | June 23, 2011 | Jerome R. Corsi

Posted on 06/23/2011 5:38:48 AM PDT by RobinMasters

The typography expert who played a key role in ending the career of CBS News anchor Dan Rather has told WND he has strong suspicions the Obama birth certificate released by the White House is fraudulent.

Joseph M. Newcomer, who exposed the "Killian documents" as fraudulent in 2004, has told WND the Obama birth certificate released by the White House April 27 is a "highly suspicious" document that deserves professional forensic examination.

"There is something deeply wrong here," Newcomer told WND. "There are artifacts in the birth certificate document that are strongly suggestive of a forgery. The document screams out that something is wrong."

Newcomer's 7,000-word analysis of the Killian documents in the Rather case demonstrated that the purported memos regarding George W. Bush's experience in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War were produced on a modern computer word processor, not a 1970s-era manual typewriter.

Newcomer stressed that he was relying on published charges that the Obama birth certificate was fraudulent, including the analysis by scanner expert Doug Vogt and by typography expert Paul Irey.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; certifigate; eligibility; fraud; naturalborncitizen; obama; palin

1 posted on 06/23/2011 5:38:50 AM PDT by RobinMasters
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

Kenyan.


2 posted on 06/23/2011 5:41:20 AM PDT by safetysign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

Paging Dr. Ukulele.


3 posted on 06/23/2011 5:41:35 AM PDT by 6SJ7 (atlasShruggedInd = TRUE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters; Buckhead

Gee. I thought it was the FREEPER BUCKHEAD who discovered that.


4 posted on 06/23/2011 5:41:49 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
'Rathergate' expert doubts Obama's birth certificate

WHO DOESN'T?


5 posted on 06/23/2011 5:43:00 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Nothing surpasses the complexity of the human mind. - Leto II: Dar-es-Balat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Buckhead isn’t a Truther like Corsi, so Corsi doesn’t trust him.


6 posted on 06/23/2011 5:45:54 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7

Me thinks it will be some time before this goes away.


7 posted on 06/23/2011 5:46:33 AM PDT by freebird5850 (Of course Obama loves his country...it's just that Sarah Palin loves mine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

What we need is a Congress that will impeach and prosecute.


8 posted on 06/23/2011 5:48:25 AM PDT by freebird5850 (Of course Obama loves his country...it's just that Sarah Palin loves mine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: freebird5850
What we need is a Congress that will impeach and prosecute.

Fat chance. I am beginning to think that the current administration knows that the GOP used their once-in-a-lifetime chance to impeach Slick Willy. No way would the Dems let the GOP impeach the next Dem president without even more demagoguery than before. Also, the Dems will never vote for prosecution it in the Senate. So, O is free to do whatever he wants, because the Dems will have O's back.

The only way O gets impeached is if the Dems call for it.

9 posted on 06/23/2011 6:01:21 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freebird5850

“What we need is a Congress that will impeach and prosecute”

What we need is a grand jury that knows the law...

The rights of the People are secured against tyranny by the judicial power of the grand jury. A grand jury that truly possesses the judicial power emanating from the People will act in harmony with the following rules from the Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. 38:
The grand jury is of ancient origin.
The grand jury is summoned to serve the court.

The grand jury is an arm of the court, but is not the court itself.
The grand jury is under the general supervision and control of the court, at least “to the extent that it is organized.” 38 C.J.S. Grand Juries, Section 1, p. 981, note 26.
The grand jury is not under the control of the court to the same extent as the petit jury.
“It is generally conceded that, after it is duly organized, the larger part of its functions is to be performed by it as a separate and independent body acting apart from the court.” Ibid., p. 981, note 34.
“It must act free from influence, fear, favor, affection, reward, or hope thereof, preceding from, or without the court.” U.S. v. Olmstead, D.C. Wash. 7 F.2nd 758[2].
Some cases hold that the grand jury is independent of the court and is separate, distinct and “may act independently of the court.” Ibid. Notes 35-413, p. 981, 982.
The grand jury is usually officered by a foreman. Ibid., p. 1009
The foreman is the presiding officer of the inquest. Ibid., p. 1010 note 74.
“The ordinary conception of the powers and duties of a grand jury is to guard the rights and liberties of the people, in the preservation of morals and social order.” Ibid., p. 1027, note 79.
The court cannot limit the grand jury in its legitimate investigation. Ibid., p. 1028, note 95.
“Members of the grand jury may bring to the attention of their members any crimes known to any of them even though no complaint is presented by any prosecuting officer.” Ibid., p. 1028, note 98.
It is the duty of the grand jury to inquire into all offenses within its jurisdiction. Ibid., p. 1029, note 5.
It cannot be a blanket inquiry to bring to light supposed grievances for the purpose of criticizing an officer or department of the government. Ibid., p. 1030, note 21.
“...a grand jury has plenary inquisitorial powers, without any instruction or authority from the court, and may, on its own motion, originate charges against offenders, regardless of how the information on which it acts is brought to its attention. Ibid., p. 1031, note 35.
“...It is empowered to institute and initiate, as well as to manage and control, such investigation, without any interference or hindrance from the court or prosecuting attorney.” Ibid., p. 1032, note 37, 38.
The manner of conducting a hearing before a grand jury depends in a large measure on the good judgment of the grand jury. Ibid., p. 1037, note 96.
It is improper for the prosecuting attorney to participate in the deliberations of the grand jury, to express opinions on questions of fact, or as to the weight and sufficiency of evidence, make arguments, or in any way influence or direct the grand jury in its findings. Ibid., p. 1042, notes 91-96.
The grand jury cannot appoint its own attorney to supplant the advice and council of the prosecuting attorney, but an attorney may be summoned to appear before the grand jury in the capacity as an expert witness(es). Ibid., p. 1046, note 26, 27.
A stenographer can be present and take down testimony and information. Ibid., p. 1046-47.
The grand jury can call witnesses before it. Ibid., p. 1049.
Grand juries are protected in the discharge of their duties during the whole of their proceedings. Ibid., p. 1065, notes 60, 61.


10 posted on 06/23/2011 6:02:45 AM PDT by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY&feature=youtu.be

This guy proves the thing is a fake and shows how it was crudely done and shows how you can find the same proơf in a few minutes if you have Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Illustrator.

11 posted on 06/23/2011 6:02:54 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freebird5850
freebird5850 wrote:
What we need is a Congress that will impeach and prosecute.

That won't solve the underlying problems. We have two serious problems that put Obama in office.

First, the media refused to bring his obvious faults to light. They were the propaganda arm of his campaign, and since he was elected, they have been the propaganda arm of his regime, and of the Democrat party.

Also, the public voted for someone was associated with well known socialist revolutionaries and who told us he wanted to "Fundamentally change" our country into a socialist utopia. It was no secret that he wanted to "redistribute the wealth" and he regularly talked about "green jobs" and other pie in the sky. Still, what? About 52% of the people in this country voted for the guy? Even if it wasn't him (because of the Birth Certificate issue), they'll still vote for a socialist who will take from "the rich" and give it to them. That's the fundamental problem. A majority of the people in this country want the security of slavery, not the challenges of freedom. Removing Obama doesn't fix that.

12 posted on 06/23/2011 6:03:20 AM PDT by cc2k ( If having an "R" makes you conservative, does walking into a barn make you a horse's (_*_)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cc2k

AND, holding your node and voting for Obama Lite (R) does nothing to fix that either. It just masks the symptoms and prolongs the disease.


13 posted on 06/23/2011 6:19:58 AM PDT by MikeSteelBe ( "Failure to speak out against evil is evil itself" - Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MikeSteelBe

“holding your node “

Now,,,, that’s a funny typo Mike! 8^)


14 posted on 06/23/2011 6:24:23 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cc2k

I agree with your post. I just want to say a couple of things. First, Rush, Sean, Levin, and a few others, with all of their millions of listeners, If instead of being chicken shits, and talking about the fact that the ineligible fraud in the white house released a forged gov’t document and is and has committed Social Security fraud with a CT base SSN, they could have put an end to this after the first year. But with their silence, they have allowed this fraud to usurp this Republic. I put a lot of blame on them for not covering this story. The OBL story was a diversion, libya was a diversion and weiner was a diversion.


15 posted on 06/23/2011 6:33:26 AM PDT by rambo316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Joseph Newcomer is a genius level expert in computer typography, having written one of the earliest drivers for high resolution computer printing. His resume is here: http://www.flounder.com/resume.htm

I believe his post on his website, flounder.com, on the Rathergate documents was the first comprehensive technical analysis, and it was conclusive and devastating.


16 posted on 06/23/2011 6:46:29 AM PDT by Buckhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rambo316

Faux News is owned by a Saudi prince. What do you expect?


17 posted on 06/23/2011 6:48:46 AM PDT by MikeSteelBe ( "Failure to speak out against evil is evil itself" - Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cc2k

18 posted on 06/23/2011 6:49:05 AM PDT by ASA Vet (Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rambo316
You can blame the media, the so-called "Constitutional scholar" Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, or any of the rest of the "Conservative" cowards.

I blame every single member of congress and every commissioned officer serving on or after Jan 20th, 2009. They all failed their sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

19 posted on 06/23/2011 7:00:59 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

“....that are suggestive of a forgery....”

Suggestive?

Good grief, only liberals are stupid enough to not see the hundreds of clues there.

That joke of a document was created by the same “talents” that created our current economic disasters.

The West Wing Clown Show of felon/cretins is still winning, however...due to the fact that our MSM is even lower on the intelligence ladder.


20 posted on 06/23/2011 7:10:18 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

It would have been much better if he could have done that in English.


21 posted on 06/23/2011 7:13:00 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: phockthis

How do we get a grand jury called so it can prosecute this?


22 posted on 06/23/2011 7:20:37 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
Godebert wrote:
I blame every single member of congress and every commissioned officer serving on or after Jan 20th, 2009. They all failed their sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

You can shift the focus however you want.

I don't want judges making up new laws, even if I agree with the laws those judges create. You can't elect a replacement federal judge, and once the law is written by the judge, it really can't be repealed easily (if at all). Yet, that seems to be the goal of the lawsuits surrounding the birth certificate and Obama's eligibility.

I also don't think that a mutiny or military coup on January 20, 2009 would have been a good outcome. That seems to be what you wish had happened.

Just look at all your neighbors if you want someone to blame.

About that oath to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." People have been breaking that oath for decades. In my state (Florida), you sign that oath when you register to vote:

From the Florida Voter Registration Application (PDF version):
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida, that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida, and that all information provided in this application is true.

That's right next to the space where you have to sign the form.

I'm sure other states have a similar oath for voters. Even if there isn't an explicit oath shown on the form, ultimately, it's the job of the citizens of this country to protect ourselves and to protect our Republic and the Constitution it's based on. We the People have failed to do that. Obama is a symptom of that failure.

If We the People are unwilling to protect the Constitution, why would anyone else do it for us?

23 posted on 06/23/2011 7:51:28 AM PDT by cc2k ( If having an "R" makes you conservative, does walking into a barn make you a horse's (_*_)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cc2k

If even a fraction of active duty field-grade officers resigned their commissions over Obama’s eligibility, it would have forced the issue on the cowardly traitorous congress.


24 posted on 06/23/2011 7:57:56 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cc2k

Currently there is no U.S. military. Just an armed force serving under a usurper.


25 posted on 06/23/2011 8:00:08 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

As far as I can tell, you have to be on one?

I’m sure there is some way to create one, but I have come across it yet.

Still searching though.

I found this site late last night, but I haven’t had time to research it yet. It seems to have a lot of useful info so I bookmarked it.

http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=WorldCh08

exerpt;

Criminal Syndicalism

Although the World Order has control of the legal system and the courts, it remains vulnerable to any enforcement of the pre-existing body of law which the host had formulated to protect his society. This body of law forbids everything that the parasite is doing, and forces the parasite to maintain a precarious existence outside of the law. If the law were to be enforced at any time, the parasite would be dislodged. The existing body of law clearly forbids the operation of criminal syndicates, which is precisely what the hegemony of parasitism and its World Order is. Criminal syndicalism denies the equal protection of the law to citizens; only by acting against criminal syndicalism can the state protect its citizens.
Corpus Juris Secundum 16: Constitutional Law 213 (10) states:
“The Constitutional guaranty of freedom of speech does not include the right to advocate, or conspire to effect, the violent destruction or overthrow of the government or the criminal destruction of property. 214: The Constitutional guaranty of the right of assembly was never intended as a license for illegality or invitation for fraud — the right of freedom of assembly may be abused by using assembly to incite violence and crime, and the people through their legislatures may protect themselves against the abuse.”


26 posted on 06/23/2011 8:41:36 AM PDT by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

Amen, Brother. You got that right. God Bless.


27 posted on 06/23/2011 1:39:00 PM PDT by rambo316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

How do we get a grand jury called so it can prosecute this?


Locate a prosecuting attorney who is interested in looking at the evidence. If a prosecutor feels that the evidence is credible they convene a grand jury to look toward indictments.
The Clinton impeachment began as a local Little Rock, Arkansas investigation into the billing records of the Rose Law Firm that employed Hillary Rodham Clinton.


28 posted on 06/23/2011 7:54:32 PM PDT by jh4freedom (Mr. "O" has got to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: jh4freedom

So if a prosecutor in Nebraska, for instance, was willing to look at the evidence that Nancy Pelosi perjured herself when she swore that Obama was eligible on the Certification of Nomination that allowed Obama’s name to be put on the Nebraska ballot, he/she could call a grand jury and start issuing subpoenas?

Who all can be a prosecuting attorney? Could my county attorney be a prosecuting attorney in such a case, since the Nebraska ballots were used in this county?


29 posted on 06/23/2011 8:02:30 PM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
Here is a different analysis concerning the signature stamp and date stamp and their positions on two separate documents that shows that the longform was constructed:

Longform Fake

30 posted on 06/23/2011 8:29:21 PM PDT by TheCipher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

So when do we hear fromDonald Trump again?


31 posted on 06/23/2011 8:32:14 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

So when do we hear fromDonald Trump again?


32 posted on 06/23/2011 8:32:19 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woofie

sorry for the double post


33 posted on 06/23/2011 8:33:21 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

So if a prosecutor in Nebraska, for instance, was willing to look at the evidence that Nancy Pelosi perjured herself when she swore that Obama was eligible on the Certification of Nomination that allowed Obama’s name to be put on the Nebraska ballot, he/she could call a grand jury and start issuing subpoenas?

Who all can be a prosecuting attorney? Could my county attorney be a prosecuting attorney in such a case, since the Nebraska ballots were used in this county?


Your county attorney is a prosecuting attorney. That’s what the job description is for any county attorney, city attorney, district attorney, state Attorney General or US Attorney.

The Grand Jury in the United States
Origins and Practice

The grand jury system, an institution of English-speaking countries, was established in the US by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. It is a codified practice of Anglo-Saxon or Norman common law. “The grand jury is supposed to function as a body of neighbors who aid the state in bringing criminals to justice while protecting the innocent from unjust accusation,” according to Consumer Law.

All but two states and the District of Columbia use grand juries to indict, according to the University of Dayton law school; Connecticut and Pennsylvania have retained the investigating grand jury. A subset of these states, 23, require that grand jury indictments be used for specific crimes; Texas is in this subset.

What is a Grand Jury
A grand jury is a group of citizens, usually chosen from the same pool as trial jurors, that is sworn in by a court to hear a case. The grand jury is composed of not less than 12 and not more than 23 persons; and in the Federal courts, the number shall not be less than 16 nor more than 23.

Grand juries differ from trial juries (which consist of 12 jurors) in other significant ways: • Unlike trial juries, grand juries can indict with only a majority (not unanimous) vote.
• Trial juries decide whether a defendent is guilty or not guilty of a crime. A grand jury listens to evidence and decides if someone should be charged with a crime. Thus the grand jury determines probable cause, not “guilt” or “innocence”. According to the American Bar Association: Since the role of the grand jury is only to determine probable cause, there is no need for the jury to hear all the evidence, or even conflicting evidence. It is left to the good faith of the prosecutor to present conflicting evidence.
• Unlike trial juries, grand juries do not usually convene daily. Many federal grand juries sit only once a week or twice a month.
The Subpoena
Grand juries can use the power of the court to subpoena (command) evidence although they can also invite (not command) witnesses to testify.

Should you receive a subpoena but think you should not have to testify, or you think what the subpoena asks is “unreasonable or oppressive,” you can file a motion to quash the subpeona. If you simply refuse to do what the subpoena asks, you can be held in civil (not criminal) contempt. If you are held in civil contempt, you will be jailed until you agree to comply with the subpoena or until the grand jury’s term ends, whichever comes first.

Witness Right to Counsel
In a jury trial, defendents have a right to counsel; the lawyer sits alongside the defendent in the courtroom. In a grand jury investigation: In the federal system, a witness cannot have his or her lawyer present in the grand jury room, although witnesses may interrupt their testimony and leave the grand jury room to consult with their lawyer. A few states do allow a lawyer to accompany the witness; some allow the lawyer to advise his or her client, others merely allow the lawyer to observe the proceeding.

Secrecy
Grand jury investigations are shrouded in secrecy; violating that secrecy is considered criminal contempt and can also be considered obstructing justice. Those who are bound to secrecy include everyone but the witnesses: prosecutors, grand jurors, court reporters, and clerical personnel. Identities of grand jurors are kept secret.

In 1946, Supreme Court created created the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which simplified common law and codified grand jury secrecy in Rule 6, subsections (d) and (e). The first provision limited who could be present in grand jury sessions; the second imposed a general rule of secrecy.

Grand jury proceedings are secret because: • Anyone being investigated cannot interfer with witnesses or otherwise tamper with the investigation.
• Secrecy decreases the likelihood someone who is about to be indicted will escape before indictment.
• Reluctant witnesses can speak more freely when their remarks will not be made public nor reach the target of an investigation.
• Secrecy protects anyone who might be implicated, but who is not indicted.
Witnesses are not sworn to secrecy in Federal grand juries, which allows witnesses to refute rumors surrounding their appearance or testimony before a grand jury.

Length of the Grand Jury
A “regular” federal grand jury has a basic term of 18 months; a court can extend this term for another 6 months, bringing the total possible term to 24 months. A “special” federal grand juriy can be extend another 18 months, bringing the total possible term to 36 months. State grand jury terms vary widely, but from a month to 18 months, with a year being average.

Oath of the Foreman
The oath of the foreman is generally like this, reflecting its roots in history: “You, as foreman of this inquest, for the body of the County of ____ , do swear, (or affirm) that you will diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of such articles, matters, and things as shall be given you in charge or otherwise come to your knowledge, touching the present service; the commonwealth’s counsel, your fellows’ and your own you shall keep secret; you shall present no one for envy, hatred or malice; neither shall you leave any one unpresented for fear, favor or affection, hope of reward or gain, but shall present all things truly as they come to your knowledge, according to the best of your understanding (so help you God.)” Returning An Indictment
After the prosecutor presents evidence, jurors vote on the proposed charges (the indictment), which were drafted by the prosecutor. If a majority of the jury believes the evidence shows probable cause of a crime, the jury “returns” the indictment. This act initiates criminal proceedings.

If a majority of the jury does not believe the evidence shows probable cause of a crime, that “no” vote is called “returning a bill of ignoramus” or “returning a no bill.” No criminal proceedings follow this vote.

However, this does not necessarily mean the end to an investigation. A person who is suspected of having committed a crime is not protected by the constitutional prohibition of “double jeopardy” in this instance, because the person has not yet been “put in jeopardy” (made to stand trial).


34 posted on 06/23/2011 8:43:20 PM PDT by jh4freedom (Mr. "O" has got to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jh4freedom

Very interesting. Thank you.

I wonder if a county attorney would be considered to have jurisdiction in the case I suggested.

Having communicated with my county sheriff, I suspect the big snag that would be used as a reason for a prosecutor to not call a grand jury would be lack of funding; if they prosecuted Nancy Pelosi (for instance) she would have tons of money for lawyers, and my county doesn’t have that kind of money to put toward the effort.

I wonder if the county could accept donations for the prosecution of such a case.

The state AG has ambitions of being a Senator so he won’t do anything politically risky. That’s the trouble with the law enforcement system being so entwined with politics. It wouldn’t be so bad if we had a decent media but with a lying media a person who does what is right has a target on their back forever after.


35 posted on 06/23/2011 9:16:34 PM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
'Rathergate' expert doubts Obama's birth certificate

WHO DOESN'T?

The Hawaii Department of Health. "On April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth." -- http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

36 posted on 06/23/2011 10:46:21 PM PDT by BladeBryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Geeks have a hard time speaking other languages.


37 posted on 06/24/2011 1:39:52 PM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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