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.
Grandparents would not take responsibility of a child without clear and clean guardianship and citizenship status.
But Hawaii has never released anything directly. Nada.
Most states won't. I have read through some of Hawaii's adoption law, and the privacy section is pretty huge, though again I argue, Eligibility for Presidency should TRUMP all privacy laws. Verifying constitutional requirements for office should not be thwarted by a state statute.
Prior to July 2009 they issued statements that allude to ‘our records indicate...’ but they would not directly say ‘Obama was born in Hawaii’.
That changed in July 2009 when the US House of Representatives declared Hawaii to be a son of Hawaii. This was the first ever government statement to that effect. Then, LATER THAT DAY, Hawaii indicated in a apparently unsolicited statement that Obama was born in Hawaii. Choreographed? Coincidence?
I don't know. Legal requirements can be pretty weird sometimes. I think you are suggesting that they complied with some legal Kabuki dance which enabled them to make such a claim. Could be. Again, Legal technicalities can be pretty weird.
The adoption process would be a legal meat grinder of actual documents.
Especially if it occurred TWICE, with an annulment or modification at the end!
But Hawaii seems to want to keep an arms length away from this.
Who would want their state's first President to be declared illegitimate?
There are many massively huge threads. I’ve been reading obsessively since summer 2008 on this.
The Auntie thread needs to be read in its entirety by anyone even slightly interested in Zero’s background. And the Auntie thread has nothing whatsoever to do with physical attributes. If you want the link I’ll post it. If you don’t want it, I assume you are wedded to your view; but in truth, you should read that thread. It’s not about “Hey, he looks like so and so”.
But Obama's mom didn't seem like the sort of person who did things by the book. If Indonesia said her child had to be a Muslim and the son of a citizen, I really doubt she had him converted or adopted. She probably just told the authorities what she or Lolo thought they wanted to hear.
Likewise with turning her son over to her parents. There may or may not have been some kind of guardianship or power of attorney, but I doubt she'd let the grandparents legally adopt him. By all accounts she wasn't much for paperwork and formalities. If nothing was on paper, she could maintain that what happened was temporary and that she was still a good and responsible mother.
Also, if it was just about paperwork, I really doubt they would have wanted to bring Barack Sr. to Hawaii. They could have worked through a lawyer and just exchanged documents.
You came to FR in April, 2011. For nearly TWO years you have done ONE thing on FR and only one thing and that is try to defend Barry Soetoro and the issue of his birth certificate and other inconsistencies.
You post on NO other threads, NONE!!! The ONLY thing you do on FR is defend Barry Soetoro and your past posting history is proof of that.
Therefore you are a troll and it’s sad the mods haven’t noticed what is as obvious as the nose on their face.
Here is your first page of past posts from 4/2011. Each one up until today looks the same. All defending the Kenyan usurper.
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:diogeneslamp/index?more=75584307
No they aren't, and my spelling is better. :)
Have you not been reading as much as you have allegedly posted?
Oh, absolutely. Plenty of stuff. I don't recall seeing much writing from you.
Adoption is a red herring at this point. Why cling to it?
Who's clinging? I'm throwing it out there. That is the OPPOSITE of "clinging." :)
What is your point? It appears to be obfuscation of the real issue at hand: Forgery.
Not at all. I'm not claiming it isn't a forgery, i'm suggesting it is a LEGAL forgery.
Why do you cling so desperately to your own personal theory?
Again, who's clinging? Show me where it's wrong, and I'll say "Hmmm... that theory doesn't hold water." So you got something to show me or what?
The topic is and will now be forgery.Certainly you must have read Polarik’s opus and those who did subsequent forgery research whose names all are on posts in this thread.
Oh boy. Am I not writing clearly enough? I'm not disputing that it is fake, i'm just saying that it could be a LEGAL fake.
As I said, your motives appear to be very doubtful here.We can’t really let the Orly Taitz gang gain any traction eh?/S
Get past it.
And the REAL investigation is now underway, a probable cause finding has now launched a very comprehensive investigation into the forgery itself. Thats a very good thing.
And those many, many Freepers who have treated the issue as a forgery on the face of the documents at hand are now vindicated.They have helped tremendously to bring the matter forward to this point, in Arizona.
Okay, whatever. If you can't understand me, I don't see the point of trying to understand you.
You are a newbie TROLL who seeks only to further muddy the waters of the issue, rather than to clarify them.
_________________________________
I just read his entire past posting history. 10000000% troll or Obot. For 2 years defending the O birth certificate. That’s all he does on FR. Who spends that much time on something they think is BS? NOBODY, unless it’s their job of they have an agenda.
I have no qualms with that. I'm just suggesting the idea because it seems the simplest way to make sense of the situation based on what I know. Obamas staff placed that thing prominently on the White House website, and he did such a little dance I honestly think he believes that it's legit.
The fact that Hawaii is not disowning it implies that it has the approval of their Dept of Records, and therefore possesses some sort of legitimacy. Couple that with all the original dodging and weaving he did on the issue, (implying that everything wasn't kosher) and it leaves you with a plausible theory of some sort of legal manipulation to make the records say what he wanted them to say. Subsequent modification of Adoption, or an annulment thereof might explain what we are seeing.
Others have suggested the (multiple)Adoption theory to explain much of this, and it just makes sense to me.
Beyond that, I have to say I appreciate your allowing your own personal birth certificate to be used for the purpose of comparison and verification on this issue. I have thought about showing both of my birth certificates just to punctuate my point,(I did show bushpilot1 portions of both documents) but the idea of Obamatrons or Identity theft people chasing me for the rest of my life simply does not appeal to me. I for one, appreciate your sacrifice, and hope that it does not later cause you trouble.
I would assume it was because he was "cramping her style." The boy obviously wasn't well liked in Indonesia, and I suspect he was a source of friction between her and her man. She would not be the first to let Grandmother take care of her children.
You can say otherwise, but you cannot deny she ABANDONED him for the rest of his minority.
Funny that was the same year Frank Marshall Davis and his wife got a divorce and she left.
I am comfortable with the theory that Frank Marshall Davis may well have been his father. I have presented my own evidence that this was likely the case. Do you remember it?
That’s when he and Gramps began hanging out with ole Frank and became Barry’s mentor.
No argument from me about this.
How? It makes sense to me. If it doesn't make sense to you, then one or both of us isn't understanding something correctly.
I am not arguing that a Hawaii adoption makes Barack Legitimate. It doesn't. I am pointing out that we STILL haven't seen his original birth certificate, and so we cannot establish that he was born in Hawaii. (And therefore he hasn't proven his legitimacy.)
Why did you come to Free Republic and why is you one and only interest in the birth certificate? You are all over every singe thread and you even start them yourself. I think you are fishing. Does nothing else on FR interest you?
Give me the link. Between arguing with Obots and other Obama legitimacy advocates, I will read through it. It sounds familiar though, and I may already have done so. Does it not contain all those pictures of his relatives in Africa, and Barack's other children from Ruth and such?
Most of the time I focus on researching stuff regarding the meaning of "natural born citizen" and such, but I can break away some time to look at this. It's not like the opposition ever puts up much of an argument. :)
So your saying yours is from HI???
Not at all. I’m not claiming it isn’t a forgery, i’m suggesting it is a LEGAL forgery.
_____________________________________
blah blah blah, it’s clear what you are doing here on FR. You have one goal here, and only one. Your past posting history speaks for itself.
That’s a rather arrogant view and well deserving of flaming.
you coulda fooled me, I never saw it that way...not at all, can we have a vote on it?
just wondering...IF your amended bc showed the name of a mother who wasn’t your mother, might you see a different outcome?
You are relating your personal experience to circumstances that may be nothing like your own.
There’s no way you can know when and by whom zero was adopted, if he was.
But Obama's mom didn't seem like the sort of person who did things by the book. If Indonesia said her child had to be a Muslim and the son of a citizen, I really doubt she had him converted or adopted. She probably just told the authorities what she or Lolo thought they wanted to hear.
Stanley Ann may not have had to DO anything. I have read quite a bit from others on this subject. It is my current understanding that Under 1960s Indonesian law, a child is AUTOMATICALLY adopted if he is under the age of five when his mother Marries an Indonesian citizen. (Here is the law in effect at that time.)
The only requirement is that the father must identify the child as his in front of a government official who comes to the house.
(1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.
If this occurred (very likely) then Grandma Dunham may have been advised by her lawyer to use a subsequent adoption to straighten out the mess this might cause for him as an American Citizen.
Likewise with turning her son over to her parents. There may or may not have been some kind of guardianship or power of attorney, but I doubt she'd let the grandparents legally adopt him. By all accounts she wasn't much for paperwork and formalities. If nothing was on paper, she could maintain that what happened was temporary and that she was still a good and responsible mother.
From my perspective, Stanley was a outlier starting with her name. Everything she did was not typical by the standards of the day. (Studying Russian in 1960?) From my perspective (and the fact that she DID leave him with the Grandparents for the next 8 years) allowing them to do whatever they wanted was perfectly within her character. SHE may not have been much for paperwork, but Bank Vice President Madelyn Dunham lived by it. I have little doubt she sought legal advice for what to do.
Also, if it was just about paperwork, I really doubt they would have wanted to bring Barack Sr. to Hawaii. They could have worked through a lawyer and just exchanged documents.
I've seen that discussed. It has been suggested that the Original father can assert a position of better legal authority (in conjunction with the actual mother) to demand his rights to the child, and then subsequently sign them over to the Grandmother.
This is uncharted waters for most legal types I would assume. How often does an American Grandparent acquire guardianship of her American Grandchild which was adopted by a foreign national?
As for Poor, (financially weak) broken down, Drunk, Barack Obama Sr. getting to Hawaii, how and why would he do such a thing? He even mentions that he is there on "Family business" though I don't have that quote readily available.
Barack Sr. could not afford to fly to Hawaii in 1971, and he could barely walk. (Crippled from previous drunk driving accidents.) It makes sense that his financier for the trip (and the Hotel Room where he stayed) was Madelyn Dunham, Vice President of the Bank. If this is the case, then his presence must have been necessary for some reason, and I can only assume it was to sign legal documents and affirm before a Judge.
There is no such thing as a legal forgery.
And the fact that you apparently aren’t aware that there are NUMEROUS massively long threads on FR researching Zero’s background nor have you read them, shows that my initial suspicious about you are factual.
And when I suggested reading the “Auntie” thread you weren’t interested in a link, and sneered about physical similarities, which are not the point of the thread in question.
The fact that you trot out this crap thread today shows you for what you are.
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.