Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Data like this is why the left wing lawyers killed Able Danger.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165414,00.html
His mother would have had an up to date passport on which the son, probably known as Barry Dunham, and later adopted as Soetoro, would have been included. Minor children don't require their own passports, do they?
It's not the existence of a birth certificate as such that we are discussing, I'm sure he has one somewhere...but until he produces it, regardless of what it reveals, (perhaps his name really is/was Barry Dunham and his parents were not married?)the questions will continue.
The COLB posted on the fightthesmears website just makes things worse. I have better documentation for my pedigreed dogs!
I was also adopted, granted it was a long time ago, I travelled from Germany to Australia on my stepfather's passport - and because of the adoption, I became POLISH, taking the nationality of the adoptive parent.
This opens up a whole new can of worms. Obama just might be Indonesian...and hold a dual Indonesian/American passport. One lie just leads to another...
“Its 8 weeks til the convention. Forged docs, illegal contributions, flip-flops...I dunno.”
As of yesterday, The Obamination had probably 99.9999 % of the mediots the MSM elites in his pocket. So he could get by with fraud, lies, flip flopping and nothing would be said or done.
When Mo Dowd puts out data like this instead of attacking GW, something is happening.
“Think $140/bbl oil.
This has been approved by the DNC and the Obama for President campaign. There is no need to send in contributions.....we’ll do it for you! “
Absolutely, I was trying not to think about it tonight.
The Opecker Thugs and Princes who fund Iran’s serial killers could easily fund the Obamination with just a percent of the price increases per barrel in the past year.
Thanks for posting this information.
I’m getting ready to hit the sack.
Would you or Big Look or someone post Mo’s article as a stand alone thread and ping those of us who have commnented your reply re Mo.
Then we can ping our mail lists to ensure that others get to see this. Otherwise it will probably die over the 3 day weekend.
Thanks
At age 10, Barry was celebrating Christmas with his Mother and father. We must concede, it doesn't look very Islamic.
He very well might be legally Indonesian.
I frankly do not recall a prior election where we cannot discern the nationality or eligibility of a candidate for POTUS.
And where such candidate presents a fraudulent birth certificate.
Maureen Dowd attacks Obama bump.
I’m guessing that the Maureen Dowd article is bogus. It doesn’t match up with her June 29th column in the NYT...
:-(
This is a typical maternity top of the 60's.
If Barrack Obama was 3 in 1967 then he would have been born in 1964. Another site claims that Obama is 46 years old now. So how could he have been born in 1964? 2008-1964=44 years old. So how can articles claim that he is 46 years old when he should be 44 years old by his date of birth?
Article giving state of birth: http://www.mydamnchannel.com/blog/tag/Stanley%20Ann%20Durham%20Soetoro/page/1/default.aspx
Article stating his age: http://news-lanka.blogspot.com/2008/06/senator-barrack-obama-clinches.html
Looks like he was born sooner than claimed in the article unless they are lying about his age or are confused.
Thanks. Check out the age discrepancy problem I have noted in post 1172. The timeline they are giving doesn’t jive with his age. He can’t be both 44 and 46 years old. Simple math.
If Obama is 46 years old as articles state he would have had to have been born in 1962, not 1964. 2008-46=1962. Which is it? A lot of explaining to do here!?!?
“Im guessing that the Maureen Dowd article is bogus. It doesnt match up with her June 29th column in the NYT...”
I think you might be right about that...it doesn’t appear on her page:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/maureendowd/index.html
This might be the source:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.martial-arts/msg/7e603b4929b2d98c
Birth certificate on the LA Times blog site says that he was born in 1961? If so how could he have been 3 in 1967 as the other article claims. He would have been 6 years old, not 3 in 1967 if he was indeed born in 1961. So how can the article claim that he was 3 in 1967. Could be a mistake by the journalist, don’t know.
http://www.mydamnchannel.com/blog/tag/Stanley%20Ann%20Durham%20Soetoro/page/1/default.aspx
http://www.mydamnchannel.com/blog/tag/Stanley%20Ann%20Durham%20Soetoro/page/1/default.aspx
It states he was 3 in the picture in 1967. 1967-3=1964.
Should read doesn’t jive, not doesn’t jove.
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.