Posted on 01/13/2011 10:16:28 AM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
CBS News allowed the following comment to be published on its website, following an article about Obama’s visit to Arizona yesterday:
... Who were the doctor(s) and nurse(s) at Kapi`Olani that delivered Barack? My ex-wife worked at the hospital and I understand the records at Kapi’Olani are impeccable. Where are the foot prints? What public records exist that can even demonstrate that Mrs. Obama was even at Kapi’Olani on the day of Barack’s birth? Talk at Kapi`Olani, would have been unabashed, the city of Honolulu at the time very racist towards black people.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
“Maybe she was sent ‘away.’”
To Africa?
“It wasn’t exactly the thing for “nice” girls to be pregnant at 18 to a black man the girl wasn’t married to.”
But she was married to him. Not at conception, but by the time she gave birth. Unless that’s a lie, too.
“Maybe she intended to give the baby the baby up for adoption, but became attached to him and changed her mind.”
What does that have to do with Kenya?
Yeah, no more NS although he likely came back under a second screen name "Drennan Whyte" but that got the zot too LoL.
NS, aka Drennan Whyte the zot.
Well that was the point of the two books...his life is presented as a script. The books - his version of the teleprompter for you.
It is all smoke and mirrors and designed to manipulate people.
Facts and truth have no place in Obama’s agenda.
Too bad President’s ego’s weren’t fueled by the TRUTH.
If what the HDOH has presented is accurate, then that’s true. Unfortunately, we always have to wonder whether the HDOH is telling the truth and presenting genuine records because they have been caught lying.
I’ve heard general claims that there were lots of claims to a Hawaii birth that weren’t really Hawaii births at all, but as far as I know it could only be documented by auditing the actual individual birth records and AFIK that has never been done.
There is a definite incentive for people to lie because if they were born in Hawaii and claim a certain percentage of native Hawaiian blood they can stand in line to receive land for free - and if Congress would pass the Akaka bill which Obama has promised to sign, almost all of the land in Hawaii would be up for grabs and (if I understand correctly) the whole state of Hawaii would become a big Indian reservation basically, with the US taxpayers paying basically reparations for having annexed Hawaii. And though it would be subsidized by the rest of the US, the Hawaii government would be sovereign.
That’s my understanding but I could be misunderstanding so if somebody knows otherwise, please correct me.
The point, though, is that there IS an incentive to be “native Hawaiian”. And within a week or two of Fukino’s July 2009 announcement about (legally non-valid, which she didn’t say) vital records verifying that Obama was born in Hawaii, Obama signed an executive order giving LOTS of financial and other kinds of aid to native Pacific-Islanders including native Hawaiians (which is Fukino’s pet project).
And recently Obama said he thought the US should go along with the UN in saying that people who are not indigenous to the land should not be able to own land - which would mean that my parents’ land would be taken away and given to Native Americans. And all of Hawaii’s land would go (via redistribution of some kind) to native Hawaiians.
So there is definitely motive to cheat.
Well said. Why Obama-defenders don’t grasp the blackmail angle is beyond me. You have the Lakin judge coming right out and admitting the BC info is an “embarrassment”. What a weird thing to say. The MSM would lose their collective minds, such as they are, if it were publicly acknowledged that a Republican president were being aided and abetted in concealing an ‘embarrassing’ fact on so basic a doc.
But let it be known that a Dem POTUS of color is doing same, and the MSM (1) give the story a good leaving alone, and (2) intensify their attacks on those who wish to see the BC. They are without integrity, and wholly lacking in any vestige of love and concern for the USA.
" CBS News has allowed the following AMAZING Birther letter FROM HAWAII to be posted!!!"
did not match the linked source and has been changed to reflect the title of the published blog piece.
The blog you linked has imposed a copyright restriction upon Free Republic requiring all of their blog posts to be excerpted before posting them here on Free Republic. Your continuation of the blog piece in the first response was in violation of those copyright restrictions and had to be removed.
The Activism topic sidebar is reserved solely for Free Republic's Chapters. Also this blog piece should have been posted in our Bloggers forum. This thread has now been removed from the Activism topic sidebar, out of the News forum and moved into the Bloggers forum.
It is much easier for us and far less time consuming to pull threads so please take note.
Thanks.
“You are confusing ‘people having legitimate doubts’ and the ‘truthers’”
You cannot be unaware that the former is exactly how the truthers portrayed themselves. Which is why they are called truthers. You know, because they wanted the truth. “We’re just, like, asking questions, man.”
“’Truthers’ are the ones who are perpetuating the ‘wacky’ unsupported conspiracy theories. They are asserting, unequivocally, that Bush blew up the Towers and a missile struck the Pentagon’”
Yes, and no birther ever purports to believe the theories they publicize. They’re just asking questions by asserting theories. Unlike the truthers, who say they’re just asking questions but are actually asserting theories. There’s a difference there, somewhere, I’m sure.
“The difference with Obama’s birth issue is this: It is OBAMA who must present valid credentials to PROVE his eligibility”
Must he? Not according to the U.S. legal system.
Oh, please! My daughter is 31 years old now. After she was born my wife was in a "semi-private" (as opposed to barracks) room with four beds with new mothers for several days. I remember one of the couples from that time because something stood out about them. They were reporters for the NY Times.
Three years before that I was in that same hospital for a time, also in a semi-private. I can still tell stories about some of the people who went in and out of that room while I was there.
ML/NJ
What group would want to argue a case before a judiciary they know is badly compromised on this issue?
That’s why the retired military superiors eventually pushed to have Lakin get a different attorney who would drop the eligibility/Constitutional issue. They knew the judiciary is very badly compromised and cannot be trusted to give just decisions if they are forced to take a case.
As to WHY they are compromised - I have my suspicions, but it is something that SOMEBODY should investigate, possibly by an impeachment of Kagan and Sotomayor for the ethics breach of refusing to recuse themselves when there is a huge, glaring financial and personal conflict of interest.
Won’t happen until we have even an inkling of integrity from those who dwell and work in the cesspool.
The hope for this country is with the states, if anywhere.
For some odd reason I can’t reply to this thread now unless I do it from my comments page.
There are some great comments here.
I think it is very significant that (a) CBS posted these letters and (b)0h0m0-bots are here frothing.
And probably forgery, violating the Federal General False Statement Act, suborning perjury, and/or perjury as well.
And probably treason, although I’m not sure if a non-citizen can commit treason against a country. That’s if he’s not a citizen, which is a possibility if he’s not been naturalized.
I guess maybe your own experience might not be the only way things might go. Some time ago my high school had a night to honor several teachers. One of them was a math teacher of mine whom I liked, and he liked me I think. This was at least 30 years after I graduated and I had seen him last. He recognized me and I recognized him (less remarkable). He knew my name, and more.
ML/NJ
I'll humor you and I won't have to bend over backwards to do it. Well, let's see - here's the quote:
“On August 4, 1961 Obama’s mother, father and grandmother were attending a Muslim festival in Mombassa, Kenya. Mother had been refused entry to airplanes due to her 9 month pregnancy. It was a hot August day at the festival...”.
They were already in Kenya, see? And, as a bow to you, I see where you got that she wanted to leave from this quote. She was refused entry to airplanes to leave Kenya, not come in and join them.
But you already knew and understood that, didn't you little agent-provocateur, you. And I won't even impugn your reading comprehension, because I know you read it correctly.
“He/she knows this silly resigned vs. thrown out is a red-herring”
A red herring? Which I am supposed to be using to distract everyone from you from the fact that Nixon’s crime was lesser than Obama’s? Well, I happen to think the situation wasn’t as serious as it was at the time and has since been made out to be, but impeachable nonetheless. However, an illegitimate president would certainly be more serious.
In other words, I agree with the original point. So why would I be using a re herring? Because it wasn’t a red herring. Just like it’s not a red herring when people correct other factual or grammatical errors which have no bearing on the larger point. Imagine, if it makes you feel better, that instead of committing a factual error in hyperbolizing a point, the original post accidentally put down the wrong historical date or failed to capitalize the first letter of a sentence.
“Then we’d be dicussing it for another 20 posts”
Why on earth would you carry on discussing whether I was male or female for another 20 posts? That’d be ridiculous.
The fact that his supposed daddy was not a US citizen makes it all a moot point anyways.
He posted a forged COLB to his campaign website. His attorneys asked Judge David Carter to make “judicial note” of the fake COLB, as if it was public knowledge that it was authentic, which is fraud on the court. According to the Federal General False Statement Act, he is guilty of the equivalent of perjury if he deceives the public on a matter of federal jurisdiction so even if he hadn’t personally posted the forgeries he had a duty to tell the public and the federal government that it was a forgery.
He also signed oaths that he was Constitutionally eligible. Depending on where he was really born that could be outright perjury. Race Bannon says that in the summer of 1981 (or was it 1980? It was right before he switched from Occidental to Columbia) Obama told him he was born in Mombassa, lived in Indonesia, and was going to be president someday. And Obama’s book referenced a birth certificate. If that was based on reality at all and Obama didn’t have a HAWAII BC until 2006 then it would be known that Obama perjured himself by claiming to be eligible because he knew he was born in Kenya to parents who couldn’t even give him CITIZENSHIP at all if born abroad, much less natural born citizenship.
So yes, if the records were allowed to be seen and if they match what the HDOH has said, he would be proven guilty of multiple crimes.
The day of thinking that the 0h0m0 toady supporters just “don’t get it” are long gone.
They “get it”, they are just on the other team.
The ever expanding conspiracy...when conservatives are unwilling to jump aboard the birtherism train, they become part of the conspiracy. Read about Landmark. Levin is not afraid to take on any cause he believes is an obvious violation of the Constitution. He was chomping at the bit to file suit against Congress when they tried to construct the Slaughter rule to deem healthcare legislation passed.
I ask again, do you have a problem with the search for the truth?
When birthers begin to publicly and aggressively dismiss the likes of Inspector Smith, Ron Polarik, Andy Martin, Orly Taitz, Joseph Farah and some of the other frauds promoting the cause, I'll believe they are interested in "the truth"...until then, I watched too many birthers on these threads refuse to acknowledge the truth because it didn't support what they sincerely want to believe.
Sure it would be ridiculous for me, but it wouldn't stop you from attempting it. Just like you're doing with this Nixon thing. So, on this topic I am going to follow my own advice and stop feeding the troll.
Have fun!
“My daughter is 31 years old now. After she was born my wife was in a ‘semi-private’ (as opposed to barracks) room with four beds with new mothers for several days. I remember one of the couples from that time because something stood out about them. They were reporters for the NY Times.”
One couple, eh? And the Obama’s would have to be that one, wouldn’t they?
Oh, yes, you do say something stood out about them. Which leads us back to the standby that people must remember baby Obama because he’s mulatto. That argument far less convincing to me than, it appears, to others.
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.