Posted on 03/01/2012 1:50:50 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
I just finished Watching Sheriff Arpaio's press conference. The Sheriff's posse has concluded that the document was created on a computer and is therefore a forgery.
I will once again point out that if Obama was adopted, he would get a replacement birth certificate that will be designed to look like an original 1961 birth certificate, but it will in fact have been created by the Department of Health in the State of Hawaii at the Direction of an Hawaiian State Judge.
"The Obama was Adopted" theory addresses the "forgery" issue head on, and precludes it from being a crime. In my opinion, this is the simplest explanation for the fact that Obama's document looks cobbled together, and that Hawaii is tacitly confirming it as legitimate.
I will further add, (for those who have not already been so informed) that *I* was adopted, and *I* have a birth certificate which was created six years after I was born, and is in fact a replacement birth certificate that lists my new last name, new parent's names, etc.
This theory ties up a lot of the loose ends neatly (not all of them) and it doesn't involve believing that the Hawaiian government is involved in a criminal "conspiracy." I urge people to consider this idea before jumping to the conclusion that everyone involved with producing this document has committed a criminal act.
It’s not just adoption. Under Hawaii law, the facts on file can be changed any time a judge okays it. Any number of corrupt Democrat judges could have agreed to change the vital records in 2004, 2007, 2008, 2011 based on nothing more than Barry’s sworn say-so.
You wrote, in-part ...”a replacement birth certificate that will be designed to look like an original 1961 birth certificate”
You are not writing about rules or privacy. You are writing about format.
Bye
“Only the minor child can, once he reaches his majority.”
Incorrect.
The minor child can re-apply for there citizenship upon age of majority.
Parents can and do change their childs citizenship all the time.
Apollo:”It could not have been digitally altered from Hawaii, and then printed, redigitized, printed, and digitized again, because the act of printing and then taking a photocopy of the image (as they claimed they did) would have eliminated any artifact that pointed to intentional editing.”
cynwoody, after reflecting on this and your assumed order of events, I don’t know that I agree with your assumptions. You are proposing that Hawaii provided paper copies of the birth certificate, these were sent/carried to the White House, scanned and then modified and then reprinted.
I propose that maybe we were misinformed somewhat along the way (perhaps lied to?) and that Hawaii supplied the Obama folks with a digital copy of the certificate with the paper copies. There are two reasons I consider this likely. First off, wouldn’t the computers in the White House be more secure than most and wouldn’t it be unlikely that Sheriff Joe could gather the source of the document from something generated in the White House. It’s more probable that the work was done on less secure equipment such as what Hawaii might use. Secondly, Sheriff Joe mentioned at the end of the press conference he thought an investigation in Hawaii was one option. If he suspected the White House modified the LFBC, why would he recommend an investigation in Hawaii?
As you have posted in other threads, I think Hawaii is complicit in this cover-up (and have been for some time) and that the real birth documents need to be brought forward - IF they actually exist...
Apollo:”It could not have been digitally altered from Hawaii, and then printed, redigitized, printed, and digitized again, because the act of printing and then taking a photocopy of the image (as they claimed they did) would have eliminated any artifact that pointed to intentional editing.”
cynwoody, after reflecting on this and your assumed order of events, I don’t know that I agree with your assumptions. You are proposing that Hawaii provided paper copies of the birth certificate, these were sent/carried to the White House, scanned and then modified and then reprinted.
I propose that maybe we were misinformed somewhat along the way (perhaps lied to?) and that Hawaii supplied the Obama folks with a digital copy of the certificate with the paper copies. There are two reasons I consider this likely. First off, wouldn’t the computers in the White House be more secure than most and wouldn’t it be unlikely that Sheriff Joe could gather the source of the document from something generated in the White House. It’s more probable that the work was done on less secure equipment such as what Hawaii might use. Secondly, Sheriff Joe mentioned at the end of the press conference he thought an investigation in Hawaii was one option. If he suspected the White House modified the LFBC, why would he recommend an investigation in Hawaii?
As you have posted in other threads, I think Hawaii is complicit in this cover-up (and have been for some time) and that the real birth documents need to be brought forward - IF they actually exist...
Apollo:”It could not have been digitally altered from Hawaii, and then printed, redigitized, printed, and digitized again, because the act of printing and then taking a photocopy of the image (as they claimed they did) would have eliminated any artifact that pointed to intentional editing.”
cynwoody, after reflecting on this and your assumed order of events, I don’t know that I agree with your assumptions. You are proposing that Hawaii provided paper copies of the birth certificate, these were sent/carried to the White House, scanned and then modified and then reprinted.
I propose that maybe we were misinformed somewhat along the way (perhaps lied to?) and that Hawaii supplied the Obama folks with a digital copy of the certificate with the paper copies. There are two reasons I consider this likely. First off, wouldn’t the computers in the White House be more secure than most and wouldn’t it be unlikely that Sheriff Joe could gather the source of the document from something generated in the White House. It’s more probable that the work was done on less secure equipment such as what Hawaii might use. Secondly, Sheriff Joe mentioned at the end of the press conference he thought an investigation in Hawaii was one option. If he suspected the White House modified the LFBC, why would he recommend an investigation in Hawaii?
As you have posted in other threads, I think Hawaii is complicit in this cover-up (and have been for some time) and that the real birth documents need to be brought forward - IF they actually exist...
Apollo:”It could not have been digitally altered from Hawaii, and then printed, redigitized, printed, and digitized again, because the act of printing and then taking a photocopy of the image (as they claimed they did) would have eliminated any artifact that pointed to intentional editing.”
cynwoody, after reflecting on this and your assumed order of events, I don’t know that I agree with your assumptions. You are proposing that Hawaii provided paper copies of the birth certificate, these were sent/carried to the White House, scanned and then modified and then reprinted.
I propose that maybe we were misinformed somewhat along the way (perhaps lied to?) and that Hawaii supplied the Obama folks with a digital copy of the certificate with the paper copies. There are two reasons I consider this likely. First off, wouldn’t the computers in the White House be more secure than most and wouldn’t it be unlikely that Sheriff Joe could gather the source of the document from something generated in the White House. It’s more probable that the work was done on less secure equipment such as what Hawaii might use. Secondly, Sheriff Joe mentioned at the end of the press conference he thought an investigation in Hawaii was one option. If he suspected the White House modified the LFBC, why would he recommend an investigation in Hawaii?
As you have posted in other threads, I think Hawaii is complicit in this cover-up (and have been for some time) and that the real birth documents need to be brought forward - IF they actually exist...
Sorry for the multiple post. I was getting a Proxy error and actually only pressed the button twice!
Strange....
However, the legal parents (by birth or adoption) on a corrected/amended BC would still remain the same.
One would think so, but I am not so certain. In any case, the two newspaper advertisements indicate that those names are what were being used in 1961 anyway. It doesn't bother me to think they were the original names put on his original birth certificate, I just doubt that Stanley was there when the paperwork was initiated.
It is probable the grandparents became the official guardians of obama (as opposed to adoption). A legal formality rich with documentation, but the paperwork is out of our reach.
This is likely true in ordinary cases, but it appears that Obama was the adopted son of a foreign national. It may have required a defacto adoption to straighten out his citizenship issues. I'm sure it was a legal tangle back in 1971.
Thank you. I too, make a habit of admitting something when I am wrong.
I have read a lot of long threads on this issue. I'd be willing to bet I am more familiar with this stuff than 90% of the Freepers discussing it.
I have long thought that the vehmenent opposition on this issue is the result of it being a sensitive or weak spot for Obama. Why else do his minions show up and try to obfuscate the discussion?
I will now say that I believe I was wrong. I won’t try to blame it on being tired, or anything else. Wrong is wrong and I believe I was and I admit it. I should have taken more time reading your past posts and not jumped on the band wagon with the others calling you out on this thread.
Thank you for that.
I just saw where you defended Bushpilot1 and that’s good enough for me.He should not have been zotted, he was set up by after-birthers and trolls. He was one of the good guys and he got zotted and the trolls are left standing. It sucks!
I thought his point was taken in an unfair light, and I think it was absolutely wrong that they banned him on such a flimsy basis. Did you notice how much the Obot loons screamed about how insulted they were? (When he pointed out the Founders were racist.) It's like they got a scratch, and screamed that their arm had been ripped off! They are pathetic babies, and their tantrum should not have been rewarded.
You know better than I. What can be done about getting him reinstated? He is an exceptional researcher, and a staunch ally. He was one of the first people to make me feel welcome when I first signed on.
So, to set the record straight, I should have taken more time, ( I usually do) and I believe I was wrong and I apologize.
Thank you. I understand the sentiment about the obfuscation trolls, I deal with them a lot. Nowadays, it's difficult to discern which is which because so many conservatives want to argue for the other side. (The Entire crew of the Ace of Spades Blog, "Hot Air" e.g.)
From the very beginning. When he was first asked about his birth certificate, and he produced that pathetic little computer print-out with the Birthcertificate number redacted, I imediately thought he had something awful he was trying to hide. No other explanation made sense.
He has always been playing some sort of game with his proof of eligibility, and the State Election officials should not have put up with it. Unfortunately, because he was so politically popular at the time, not a single one of them had the balls to stand up and tell him "This is not good enough."
Agreed. An already married father precludes a legitimate marriage to HIS mother. (And there is little evidence that there was one anyway.)
Little commie mommy was a promiscuous young thing and BO, with an ego the size of Indonesia, couldn’t staten to be called a bastard, ergo, the forged birth certificate.
I think the forgery has more to do with his eligibility than his concern about being a bastard. He did say in his book that his parents marriage was surrounded by so much murk that he didn't have the courage to look at it. (or some such.) I suspect he knew all along his parents were not legally married.
Back in the early 1960’s, a young white girl having a black baby would have been an outrage. No wonder little commie mommy took little bastard Barry to indonesia!!
In many states, it was a felony crime at the time! (Those laws were all overturned in 1965 I think.) I have pointed out that from news articles discussing Madelyn Dunham (the grandmother's) co-workers at the bank where she worked, that she seemed embarrassed about him. They claim that they did not even know she had a grandchild until he started running for President.
Why would a Grandmother not tell her co-workers that her daughter had just had her first grandchild? It was likely because she was embarrassed. Interracial pregnancy was taboo in 1961.
I am not addressing the Selective Service issue. That may very well be an illegal forgery. I am addressing the Birth certificate issue. The fact that Hawaii is tacitly tolerating his displaying of it as his defacto "birth certificate" leads me to believe they regard it as a legal document from their office.
Knowing that it is a cobbled together piece of work, leads me to believe THEY are the ones who cobbled it together, and if so it was likely done under a Judge's order, making it a legal replacement document. (Though not the truth, and not an original.)
Why does a legal institution need to “manufacture” a seal.
They don't "NEED" to, but on computers it's just as convenient to copy and paste, especially if you are already putting it together out of pieces in your data base.
Why would they not make the changes and then endorse the document properly.
Good question. Incompetence?
Doesn’t make sense to me.
It is hard to make sense of it, but the Annulled Adoption theory makes the most sense to me (and some others) at this time.
I would think you would mean when did he become BARRY Soebarkah. My guess would be 1965, or shortly after they arrived in Indonesia. As I mentioned, Indonesian law makes adoption of a child younger than five, automatic. All the father has to do is admit he accepts the child to a governmental official. No fuss.
I don't know if you've read Lame Cherry's blog, but he had a pretty good analysis of the Soebarkah part of this issue.
Which he must have been at some time, for there to exist a need to have that name removed from her passport in August 1968.
I agree. I'm thinking he was adopted in 1965 when Stanley Married Lolo.
Did he accompany SAD to Indonesia or elsewhere UNDER THAT NAME in July 1965 when her passport application was dated?
At that time, I think she carried him under her passport.
If I were you I would not publish it, you will only get attacked for it. Unless you feel really strongly about it, let it go. Once your anonymity is gone, and flipping nutcase can pick it up and go all sorts of freaky on you and your family.
That was exactly what I was worried about. I've been a conservative activist for years. I've been attacked by Demobots before. (They set fire to my grass twice, among other things. Those people are NUTS!!!) I knew what to expect if they could get a hold of my personal details, and how it would bring all that much more fire if it was actually effective in hurting them.
Again, I have to say I admire the courage you had in making your decision to release your birth certificate. My sister said it wouldn't bother her to release HER birth certificate(s), but I don't think she appreciates the trouble it might cause her. I told her never mind.
Again, thank you for your sacrifice. Hopefully they will forget about you eventually.
Agreed.
However, there's another theory of his parentage that is as amusing as it is implausible. That's that Stanley Armour is not his grandfather, but his father, and that his mother is an unknown black woman whom Stanley Armour came to know through his friendship with Frank Marshall Davis. Wouldn't that be a hoot! But how it would have ever got past Toot is the big question.
Jack Cashill suggested this in his book. I am convinced that Barack has his grandfathers genes. (The similarity of appearance is too striking.) Whether they be through Stanley Ann or Directly from his Grandfather, they are there. If evidence comes out to support the grandfather theory, i'll give it a closer look.
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.