Sheriff Joe Now Investigating Obama Alias Harry Bounel: Obama Mama In WA In 1961 (Arpaio)

BirtherReport.com ^ | February 25, 2013 | Al Hendershot

[Seizethecarp]

Today, I had a conversation with an investigator from the Cold Case Posse in AZ. We talked and I expanded on several dossiers filled with evidence for over an hour. They asked for all of my relevant information on Obama, the Harry Bounel alias evidence, and the dossiers I completed on Stanley Ann Dunham, her parents, and Michelle Obama as well. They have it all. BTW they also say that it looks like my information cannot be disproved and will be useful.

I have proof, definitive proof that Stanley Ann Dunham was in WA state in "1961" as per the issuance of a SSN numident in her name with the SSN 535-40-8522. There is no way that she was in HI and I have proof because in the fall she was in college in WA, not HI.

[edge919]

Dude, it’s not two different women and nobody said the photographs were dental records.

[Fred Nerks]

It was in JULY last year that I first locked horns with you, then you superimposed an image of Stanley Ann Dunham over the face of the model and attempted to hoodwink anyone who was on that thread, into believing that piece of chicanery proved they were looking at the same person. But what really happened was that you gave the model a crooked nose with one nostril higher than the other.
There’s something similar about you and Joel Gilbert. And that is that in your lies, you actually end up showing the opposite of what you set out to achieve.

[edge919]

Dude, the only person here lying is you. Nobody gave the model a crooked nose. You’re simply making up nonsense and for no good reason. Again, why are you trying so hard to deny the obvious?? Nobody has proved the pictures were taken by FMD, but you’re hell bent on trying to stop the FMD narrative. Why???

[little jeremiah]

The feeble straws you are clutching aren’t helping you any.

FN said that “dental records” are not the same as looking at a couple of old photos.

ANd I posted links detailing exactly what dental records are.

You’re feeble, you know that? And obvious?

The only question is your motive; why you are trying (in vain, I may add) to make FN’s research look false, and your own feeble and frail efforts look accurate. Actually, all you are doing is harming your own efforts (whatever the motive may be) and helping anyone who is reading this see which comments and evidence make sense, and which do not.

[little jeremiah]

I really can’t think of any other reason for foisting this second “myth” upon the public. People don’t do and say things for no reason unless they are schizophrenic and entirely divorced from being able to even care for thesmelves. So, there has to be a reason for the “FMD/SAD” mythology. The new, improved life story of - well, whatever his real name is.

We discussed some time ago that the only logical reason for this new myth is that he would be a natural born citizen. And as you pointed out, they are more than willing to turn Stanley Ann - who is conveniently not on earth any more to defend her character - into a porn model (started her career in 1958 at age 15, no less!) and a slut who ran afte one dark skinned man after another. It’s pretty low class - revolting, really - to slander the character and morals of people who have died, just to further an agenda of deceit.

Hmm, I just thought of a secondary reason. By creating an entirely false tale about his identity, it helps distract attention of those who aren’t paying much attention, from the real research and step by step clues that are posted. People waving hands and saying “lookee over here! Yoo hoo!” distract from the not so salacious or colorful evidence presented.

And then some people - especially seeing the contention and vituperative language used by the new fairy tale purveryors - just give up reading or trying to figure out what’s really real and what isn’t. They also hope that casual readers never read all the threads, all the way to the end.

[Fred Nerks]

I think it’s game over, no one wants to read an argument that has no end. He’s been doing that to me since at least July last year and I’m thoroughly sick and tired of it. Looking forward to some sunshine tomorrow, I just fed the kookaburras and the magpies and the two black crows which always dunk their bread into the water in the birdbath before they eat it.
It’s a beautiful world. Be well, stay positive and happy. Don’t let the turkeys get ya...I sure won’t.

[Fred Nerks]

Yep...all that handwaving and jumping up and down and shouting and making accusations and saying lookie at me, I’m a qualified document examiner and I’m smarter than you and you are nothing but a traitor (which is pretty hard for me to be as I’m not an American) and making it look as if I am photoshopping images I am simply finding and downloading from the web at random and telling it as I see it, I’m the culprit, it’s me who is protecting zero by refusing to jump on the Frank Marshall Davis bandwagon...and the document examiner who never held a document in his hands to examine - he blows his whistle whenever I appear and out come the dogs snarling and biting at my heels...it all acts to create a diversion, so that the good freepers on a thread give it a miss because it’s too stressful and the Mods move it to the smokey back room...

They win because I never get to complete a thought and no one gets a chance to ask any questions. It always ends in stalemate. Cunning, what?

Goodnight.

[edge919]

FN said that “dental records” are not the same as looking at a couple of old photos.

A) You're making a specious argument because no one ever said that looking at a couple of old photos is the same as dental records, however, B) your own citation said:

The uniqueness of a set of teeth is a powerful tool in confirming the identity of someone unknown ...

So if the teeth match between the two photos, then it is a powerful tool in confirming the identity of someone unknown; and C) dental records often INCLUDE photographs as well as charts to show the distinguishing characteristics. Congratulations in helping debunk your own counterargument. The important thing is to get at the tooth, the whole tooth and nothing but the tooth ... ummm, well the truth. Fred's motivation is to irrationally discredit the FMD narrative because he thinks it will be inconvenient, but this is a specious agenda because the photos he denies don't prove the FMD is the father, so there's no real need to deny the obvious.

[Fred Nerks]

Here you go, I made you a composite without any red circles, I really didn't need to use Joel Gilbert's poor excuse for an image of what the model and Stanley Ann Dunham's teeth look like, the original untouched photographs available all over the web do it much better. They have always been two different girls, and you and Joel know it. Next, I expect that Joel will remove his pathetic attempt at trying to turn two girls into one. It wouldn't be the first time he changed something in the DVD or on his website after it was first shown. And I didn't need photoshop to make the composite, if you learn to use FOTOFLEX anyone can do it. All it does is create a group image such as the one of the very handsome, dapper Frank Marshall Davis, with whom Gilbert claims Stanley Ann Dunham created you know who. Seithecrap identified him as an attractive dapper man. Seizethecrap desperately needs glasses. Here he is, every seventeen year old girl's dreamboat:

The image in which he's shown smoking is from around 1948, so by the time 1960 came around, you need to jump a couple of spaces.

[GregNH]

Dude...?

Seems your showing just how immature you are Obot. People like me who are just reading your garbage and insults just have to wonder how young and ignorant you are. I can't understand how you have lasted this long around here.

[GregNH]

Yup, yes sir, looks like a 15 year old girl to me. Geeesh.

[little jeremiah]

Here’s something for rational people to consider.

When two or more people are debating or discussing an issue, if one of them uses deceit, changes the terms of the discussion at his whim, changes the point of the discussion when he’s lost a point but pretends he didn’t lose, attacks others for what he is doing, and so on - it’s a pointless waste of time ‘to continue the discussion.

You aren’t rational, you don’t play by any kind of rational rules, and it is obvious you have no interest in finding any kind of truth; your purpose is merely to attack those who are.

I mean, at this point you’re the ethereal version of someone with spittle and froth flying while you jump up and down and scream, and fling handfuls of poo.

[little jeremiah]

People on FR or elsewhere can try their best to bury the truth of who and what he is. They can succeed for a while. But there are other people involved in this than a handful of nobodies on FR.

Powerful people are not finished with this, and the end result remains to be seen. I don’t think these puny efforts (and they are puny) to get people to shut up or not pay attention to actual research will be successful.

Just like this: if there is a dead body hidden, the murderer may attmpt to hide it and get people “Off the scent”, but sooner or later that carcass will stink so bad no one can hide it any longer.

Your and others’ efforts to find the truth will, I am convinced, not go in vain.

[chicken head]

[chicken head]

http://www.seat61.com/Map-southern-africa-train-routes.htm

[chicken head]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCQSUdWG_bA

[Fantasywriter]

‘Monumental malice’, Fred? You believe Edge bears you ‘monumental malice’? Just because he disagrees w your theory? Seems a bit overblown. Hitler bore the Jews a monumental malice. He wanted them dead. Do you really believe Edge wants you dead?

Look, I just got through observing something quite amazing: Edge engaged in a protracted, pitched battle w a very aggressive liberal—and Edge was defending the Constitution. What’s more, Edge came out on top. It was magnificent to see; it really was.

You may disagree w Edge, but a more staunch defender of the Constitution you will not find. Just a little something to think about, when the rhetoric turns heated.

[Fred Nerks]

You’re right about her age in that photograph, her friend Maxine Box supplied that to Getty Images with the information that is was taken in 1958. SAD was born in November 1942.
And 1958 was the year the exotic images of the model first appeared in the magazines printed in New York.

[Fred Nerks]

I don’t know what else to call it when someone fabricates an image by placing the face of one person over the top of another and tries to present the result as proof that the hybrid thereby created is the face of a 15 year old high school girl who posed nude in 1958 for Frank Marshall Davis.

Monumental Malice will do. And your screen name suits you.

[Fantasywriter]

You have a nice day too.