Greenperson, your statement on circumstantial evidence is central to the person presenting himself as "Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.":Circumstantial is what we’re left with when there’s NO primary evidence in sight. NONE presented to ANY court, even though there were ample opportunities. We’re to believe that the “birth certificate” is real. If so, then why did he not present it to the very first judge? Why did he not present it to ANY reporter who asked to see it? Why is it still not available for scrutiny? Why did Mr. Lakin go to prison when Obama could have simply showed him the document?
There are no documents to authenticate forensically, or even SEE. There are NONE.
People have gone to the gas chamber on circumstantial evidence alone. It’s legitimate evidence and sometimes, it’s all there is. Anybody who’s ever sat on a jury knows that. The evidence is presented. The jury weighs it and decides. OFTEN in a jury trial, there is conflicting evidence. It’s the jury’s decision to weigh credibility. Imho, Obama has none.
What is clear is that the evidence presented by DBA Obama is forged, fabricated, altered, suppressed, suspect, stonewalled, hence not authentic, not complete, not credible, inadmissible.
The personal statements have been contradictory, continually revised, ultimately unreliable.
The documents are blatant concoctions (the shadow under the text of the birth certificate when laser printing bonds the ink to the paper eliminating any possibility of shadow).
The transcripts are embargoed.
The photographic record is laughable.
As to your question in re why would a son be more at risk than a daughter, some considerations.
Malcolm X was under FBI surveillance beginning in 1951. The first raid with shots fired was in 1957.
The FBI placed a number of its operatives in NOI to neutralize Malcolm X, and this likely became a kill operation.
The FBI operative ("former FBI agent") John X Ali Simmons met with the convicted/confessed assassin the night before the Audubon Ballroom shooting.
This is years after the birth and transfer to Indonesia of the son.
The daughters were likely no more targets than Betty.
The son bore a double mark: he had to be hidden to protect Malcolm's reputation, but he would bear a target upon him as a potential successor.
After all, in NOI, Elijah's sons and grandson had leadership positions.
Cora Weiss soon began weaving Barack Hussein Obama into an airlift which never happened.
He declared in 1962 that he had last been in Kenya seven years prior, making it 1955. No airlift for him.
Yet it looms large in the legend.
The son of the man who was suspended from NOI for calling the JFK assassination "chickens comin' home to roost" spent two decades in the church of the man who called 911 "chickens comin' home to roost".
There is a sense of completion in the hypothesis.
There is no Kenyan father nor Kansan mother.
We're not in Kansas anymore.
“There is no Kenyan father nor Kansan mother.”
Please take note of this from the article at the top of the thread:
The “researchers” claim that they earnestly want to remove Obama from office. But wouldn’t revealing ALL EVIDENCE of a foreign mother and foreign birth (which they also claim) be the most logical approach to removing Obama rather than hiding the identity of this alternative mother for years while attacking FR threads that sincerely attempt to find out where Stanley Ann Dunham was when she gave birth to Barry?
In my opinion, the best evidence that Valerie Sarruf is NOT Barry’s mother is the mountain of evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham IS his mother, which the “researchers” have totally failed to refute.
Again, please use this thread for discussion of and links to any evidence that either supports or refutes a claim that Valerie Sarruf IS Barack Obama’s mother with or without Malcolm X being his father.