Posted on 12/15/2016 4:30:41 PM PST by Fractal Trader
A years-long forensics investigation into the computer image of the long-form Hawaiian birth certificate image that Barack Obama released during a White House news conference during his first term and presented to the American people as an official government document reveals it is “fake.”
It also confirms those who were subjected to the derogatory “birther” label from many media outlets and Democrats for badgering Obama with lawsuits, petitions to the Supreme Court, and more, were right – at least in the dispute that the document was manufactured and the questions about Obama’s birth and legitimacy to be president under the Constitution’s requirements still are unanswered.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
You have a very low opinion of liberals. The idea that a liberal Obama-fan would lie like a rug to fundamentally harm Obama, in a misguided/non-credible* effort to sell books, places liberal morals in the toilet.
But perhaps you have insider info on this subject?
*Andersen’s target audience was/is liberals. Conservatives, with a few negligible exceptions, don’t buy Obama bios written by Obama-fans. Liberals, otoh, don’t buy Obama bios to see their hero’s honesty, credibility, integrity, work ethic and purported literary talent humiliatingly demolished. The argument that Andersen trashed Obama to sell books doesn’t hold water—not even toilet water.
Bttt.
5.56mm
For the reason he gave: that two independent sources gave him the same story, and it was sufficiently substantial to include in the bio. He presented it in as sympathetic a light as possible, but he was too honest to completely suppress/censor it.
Jmo.
At least I don’t post nonsensical speculation, such as your suggestion that Andersen lied his butt off to boost sales. (When in fact the ploy, if such it were, would have backfired badly. Can you imagine the backlash if it had come to light that Andersen LIED to harm/discredit Obama??? Andersen would have been destroyed—and rightly so.)
Something tells me that you have probably been presented with this evidence before. My recollection is that there are seven, perhaps eight pieces of circumstantial evidence that support the position of Obama being adopted by Lolo Soetoro. I have posted them numerous times, but I no longer have links for you, nor any inclination to hunt up links.
From Memory, Indonesian law makes an adoption automatic if the child is under the age of five when the father marries the mother. The divorce papers between Stanley Ann and Lolo Soetoro indicate that Barack Obama was regarded as a dependent child. Lolo did claim Obama in an application to remain in the Country. Obama's sister said that Lolo had Adopted him. Obama is listed on an Indonesian school record as "Barry Soetoro". Stanley Ann Dunham's passport application listed him as "Barry Soebarkah, which someone who claims knowledge of Indonesian language and customs asserted means "son of" and I don't recall what the other one or two things were.
Why is Obama still referred to as the step-child and Soetoro as the step-father in 1967?
Who was doing the referring? Even in an adoption, and especially if the child is aware of the adoption, it is not uncommon to refer to the step father as the "step father." I always did if the topic came up. The rest of the time I just called him "Dad."
Why is there no mention of an adoption when Soetoro was petitioning to get back into the US in 1967?
If it didn't work in 1965, why would he expect it to work in 1967? He already tried that and it didn't get him anywhere.
It is implicit in the fact of adoption. Do you think adopted kids keep using their old names and birth certificates?
No, the normal practice in adoption is that new birth records are created for the adopted child. Here. Educate yourself.
I happen to have learned about this process at the very young age of 5. Why? Because I went through it myself. I also have my original birth certificate as well as my current "official" birth certificate.
Well which is it? Do you believe Andersen tole the truth about the two Chicago friends of the Obamas, who revealed how Dreams came to be written, or do you believe Andersen lied?
Was unaware that Remnick spoke to the issue of Dreams authorship. You learn something every day.
I do not think Hawaii created a fake birth certificate in 1961. I think they created some sort of birth record in 1961 that may or may not be a birth certificate, but I do think they created a new birth certificate for him in 1965 when Lolo adopted him after marrying his mother. .
That is how things were done in those days. It was the proper and expected thing to do when marrying a woman with a child.
I think that some other custodial document, perhaps an amended birth certificate, was created in 1971, but whatever it was, it wasn't this document that we have seen which purports to be Obama's birth certificate.
I think this current document was created at the behest of Obama's attorneys and made to appear as if it were a 1961 birth certificate. (Making birth certificates appear to be the correct type for the age of the person involved is the normal and routine practice in all states.)
I think the reason this current document is so easily discerned as a fake is because the States do not normally devote a great deal of effort to make their fake documents look perfect. In normal circumstances they are only intended to fool the child who looks at it, or the authorities that might need it for some legal matter short of the Presidency.
The state does not devote much time to making it look like a perfect fake because in the vast majority of cases this is unnecessary. Fake birth documents produced by a state agency were never intended to withstand the scrutiny that would be brought to bear regarding the office of the presidency, and of course it's faults and inconsistencies were quickly ferreted out.
So there it stands. We have a demonstrably fake document about which the vast majority of Americans do not give a sh*t. Those that do are simply dismissed by their apathetic and comfortably ignorant countrymen.
told
‘I think the reason this current document is so easily discerned as a fake is because the States do not normally devote a great deal of effort to make their fake documents look perfect. In normal circumstances they are only intended to fool the child who looks at it, or the authorities that might need it for some legal matter short of the Presidency.
The state does not devote much time to making it look like a perfect fake because in the vast majority of cases this is unnecessary. Fake birth documents produced by a state agency were never intended to withstand the scrutiny that would be brought to bear regarding the office of the presidency, and of course it’s faults and inconsistencies were quickly ferreted out.’
That is an excellent analysis. I had assumed the klutziness of the doc was due to the rush of putting it together so quickly (to stop the bleeding, once Trump’s spotlighting of the issue began to seriously undermine Obama’s credibility). Your explanation makes more sense.
Bookmarking.
Progress! At least you’re open to the possibility that Ayers wrote Dreams, and Obama is a lying, unaccomplished choomer. You keep this up, and one of these days you’ll have a bona fide breakthrough. From then on, there’ll be no looking back!
No, I never been presented the evidence. Indonesian law is not evidence of anything. since ther is zero evidence that an adoption occurred we may was well cite Chinese adoption laws.
Obama’s sister never said that he was adopted - this is a misstatement made by people who want an adoption to have occurred.
Her passport application lists him as Barack Hussein Obama and in a separate line it lists the word Soebarkah. Someone else who is a linguists says Soebarkah means there is a familial relationship - which a stepfather would have.
The reference to him being a step-son was made by the Immigration Department. In fact, he met the legal definition of being a step-son.
Nowhere in the immigration file does it refer to an adopted son. In every case before he left the US and after he was gone the only hardship was to his wife Stanley.
A court order or a congressional subpoena can bring about release of the original birth document for inspection and comparison of the data with the copies that have been scanned and photographed.
As long as the state of Hawaii stands by the authenticity of the birth documents that have been seen publicly, there is little that can be done.
There is no evidence that has been found for an adoption by Lolo Soetoro.
Speculating on possble birth scenarios is fun for an Internet discussion forum but definitive proof would be needed of a birth somewhere else and thus far that proof has not been uncovered.
Remember that Obama also has the souvenir birth certificate with his infant footprints from Kapi’olani Maternity and Gynecolgical Hospital.
On August 31, 1961 Barack Obama Senior told the Immigration and Naturalization Service that he had a U.S. citizen wife and a newborn son, born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/07/INS-6.jpg
Which is why, when somebody has ACTIOINABLE evidence, their family car has the sheathing on the wiring removed or they suddenly show up with unexplained lead in their systems that cause brain damage...
What you contribute is just talk - keep us all distracted with your arguments, which always boil down to the idea that since nobody’s been prosecuted yet, there’s nothing wrong and those of us who say otherwise are idiots who embarrass the “true conservatives”.
Seems like your M.O and arguments align very closely with those of the people who attacked my family.
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.
