The Marriage of Obama's Parents: 'In Name Only'?

American Thinker ^ | March 8, 2014 | Shawn Glasco

[Fred Nerks]

I knew you would say that, I hesitated a long time before I posted that image, sensing it would be a total waste of time, based on my previous communications with you over a long period of time. But you’re not the only one reading this thread, so be my guest and ignore my reply, thanks.

[Plummz]

The model in the 1958 photos is not the same woman in the FMD Christmas-time photos.

[Fred Nerks]

Ann Dunham’s US State Department passport file as released per FOIA contains paperwork saying her son Barack is now an Indonesian citizen in no need of an American passport.

You will of course be so kind as to let us know just where in that file this information can be seen? We are aware she had BHO2 Soebarkah removed from her passport in August 1968, but just where is it stated Barack is now an Indonesian citizen in no need of an American passport?

[Fred Nerks]

The model in the 1958 photos is not the same woman in the FMD Christmas-time photos.

There are no FMD Christmas-time photos. They exist only in the imagination of the anonymous genealogist who sent them to the Brisbane 'academic' who then posted them on a link to his website. The images came from an erotic website to which I traced them through the name of the site and the serial number on one of the images, which had been removed. The name of the website was vintage-porn com.

The same model also appeared in various magazines, one of which was Exotique in which she appeared in 1958.

It's the same model all the way through. But of course as you prefer to ignore the evidence of images, it all won't mean anything to you.

[PhilDragoo]

The son of Malcolm and the daughter of a professor, presented to the manly-named daughter of an odd couple associated with Frank Marshall Davis, she to be the caretaker, viz., she had no idea how to change a diaper.

Ayers the author of Dreams; the repair contractor David Maraniss and his pathetic "girlfriends."

Of course there is no record of a marriage between Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Dunham, nor of the birth of a son to them--though all the King's horses' hindquarters labor like Sisyphus to construct same.

Behold the enemy of the Constitution and his Muslim DCI, their sponsorship of the Islamization of the region's regimes presently hitting the Putin bedrock behind Assad.

Cora Weiss' airy tale of an airlift passenger who never was, whose 1962 passport application claimed he'd not been in Kenya for seven years.

Hoover's FBI hounded Malcolm from 1951, placing a mole in the Chicago office of NOI.

Was there something in the water in Seattle in 1960 when Malcolm established NOI Temple 67, or did he meet the daughter among those women he extolled in his writings of the time?

The beginning is a legend, and the end is somewhere between Saul Alinsky's bonfire of the West and the apocalypse in the ride of the Four Horsemen of the Muslim Brotherhood Meets the Mau Mau vengeance of Malik Al Shabazz.

[Fred Nerks]

The beginning is a legend, and the end is somewhere between Saul Alinsky's bonfire of the West and the apocalypse in the ride of the Four Horsemen of the Muslim Brotherhood Meets the Mau Mau vengeance of Malik Al Shabazz.

Supersize me and I'll have fries with that...thanks

[Backtolife]

You may not be aware of your distortion of what is being said, but I am.

I have no idea why you appear to be spoiling for a fight with me. “If” there are those who insist on going down a “resemblance” route and “if” they are going to look at potential resemblances.....then....and only then.....in my view they ought not to ignore the apparent resemblance (to some, not all, observers’ eyes)to the man who ostensibly has the same daddy.

That’s all that’s being said. If you disagree that there is a resemblance that’s fine. If you disagree that in those conditional circumstances such speculators ought to include Mark Ndesanjo and if for some reason you perhaps think that they ought to totally ignore Mark Ndesanjo in their considerations, just say so....but please stop this tiresome and unnecessarily aggressive process of pretending that I am saying something which I am not.

[Backtolife]

Since you introduce the question, no you haven’t got it right. That’s not what I either said or implied and no-one could reasonably conclude that was what was being said or implied.

As regards images what was said and/or implied was that for those who wish to consider physical facial resemblances there was more reason to see resemblamces between the images of Obama and Mark than between the images of Obama and the other speculative candidates such as FMD, Malcolm X or Subud.

[Backtolife]

Since you bring it up, I have been “reading” the research concerning Obama’s origins since 2008 in a multitude of places, including on here. There is unlikely to be any element of such research that I haven’t at least seen as it has been a hobby that I have probably spent far too much time on.

I agree that much of that research here and elsewhere is indeed stellar. However it is also the case that much of it is totally absurd nonsense. The key is in how to assess which may be which. All of us, including you and me, appear to think we are very good at that lattermost part. The reality might well be that none of us are.

Making premature assumptions about anything or anyone, including other posters, on inadequate information, is never wise. You have absolutely nowhere near enough information about me to have any reliable basis on which to found an opinion as regards how much I already know about “Obama research” let alone as regards what intelligence or arrogance I may possess.

[Fantasywriter]

Aggression is all they have. If for once they debated their theory calmly, politely & rationally they would lose spectacularly. On some level they must know this, because they invariably substitute aggression, personal attacks, bullying, name-calling, insults, snark, mockery, ridicule & outright lies for honest, factual debate. They’ve been doing it for years. Heaven only knows how many posters they have driven from the site for good. That appears to be their goal—to hound, harass, harangue & demean everyone who disagrees with them to the point that detractors just hang it up and go elsewhere. They would prefer a tiny echo chamber to a large, level-playing field discussion. Because on the latter, they would lose every single time.

[ResisTyr]

Add me please Lucy. Thanks

[ResisTyr]

The too left small photo in your compilation cannot be zerObama. The ears are totally different than in the other users, most noticeably the right ear. The other pics, however, all appear to be authentically zerO.

[ResisTyr]

What was it about Chicago, originally, that lured all these radical leftists there? I mean I know the city was basically run by the Mob forever, but that doesn’t seem to explain it.

[Backtolife]

Thanks fantasywriter. I give everyone at least the same fair crack of the whip they give me. In my view there are no winners or losers as far as the actual personalities in such discussions go. The only winners I like to see are the somewhat more abstract things like common sense and rationality. I go wherever they might take me regarding the subject in hand. I don’t care what that might mean for the politics or personalities involved in any given conspiracy theory.

Only three conspiracy theories have attracted my close attention and caused me to do extensive boning up on them......if the truth be told part of me wishes now that I hadn’t wasted so much time researching them....they are faked moon landings, 9/11 trutherism and Obama eligibility doubting/birtherism.

So far I haven’t come across any significant aspect of any of those conspiracy theories and claims which stands up to being objectively held up to the light. That being understood, I’m by no means saying that no aspect will ever arise which stands up to scrutiny nor is it up to me to say that anyone is wrong to believe in those theories. If and when any specific aspect of those theories does actually stand up to objective examination I’d be the very first to hold up my hand and say so.

In the meantime I don’t shy away from engaging anyone who wants to discuss any specific aspect of Obama eligibility conspiracy theories, one at a time, sensibly with an open mind. However, on occasions when people become welded to belief in what are patently to all practical intents and purposes actually “impossible to be true” aspects, for random illustrative example such as the claim that “Obama attended Columbia on a Fulbright foreign student scholarship/loan/grant” even when it is explained to them with citations that for starters, apart from anything else, Fulbright loans/grants/scholarships for foreign students were never ever, and still aren’t, given to any students other than foreign POSTGRADUATE students only and that Obama, even setting aside the ‘foreign’ question, whatever else he might have been, quite clearly was not a ‘postgraduate’ student at Columbia but an undergraduate student...at those times I sometimes wish I had more tolerance and patience.

[Fantasywriter]

Thanks for your interesting reply. I am quite surprised to see you lumping fake moon landings, 9/11 trutherism & Obama eligibility questions all into the same category. The first two issues have attracted 99.9 percent crazy/psycho believers. I am unaware of any serious ppl w actual credentials who espouse either one. Rather, their fiercest proponents reside squarely in the lunatic fringe.

Otoh, many serious, sane people, some w excellent credentials, have discredited much of Obama’s purported lifestory. Even some liberals have disproven fundamental chunks of it. The number of legitimate questions re: his nativity is legion. Have you really investigated every single one, and disposed of them all? That wd certainly be a full time job, & wd entail quite a bit of travel. [See my tagline.] Yet those who have dedicated the most time & travel to the issue are the harshest critics of Obama’s tall nativity tales. Interesting point, isn’t it?

[There is a sharp demarcation between legitimate questions re: Obama’s fraud & deceit, and wild speculation. It’s unfortunate that the least substantiated theories suck up so much oxygen in this debate. Matters of pure, subjective speculation only obscure, & to a very real degree discredit, the more serious, evidence-based questions, inconsistencies, anomalies, non-corroborating evidence, & other problems connected to Obama’s birth narrative. Iow, it’s critical to distinguish between the doubts/issues Obama has personally engendered w his lies, secrecy, suspicious behavior & questionable documentation & the more fanciful theories advanced by tiny minorities w’in the so-called ‘birther’ movement. If you’ve spent a lot of time investigating the least substantiated speculations re: Obama’s nativity, that was indeed a waste of energy & resources.]

[elengr]

Given the half-truths, outright lies and paucity of verifiable facts that are available about the origins of the apparently gay, marxist, islamophile figurehead of “the most transparent administration ever,” no one can be certain about aka obama’s nativity and who he really is.

But it is certain beyond a doubt that aka obama has lied about his life’s story for the purposes of getting elected and has committed criminal identity fraud against the American people and very probably is not a natural born Citizen, either of which should have disqualified him from ever becoming the putative president.

[Backtolife]

Thanks. It’s obviously impossible for me to know if I’ve seen ‘everything’ that you are referring to. I can however confirm that so far I can’t recall yet seeing evidence supporting any alternative theory concerning Obama’s nativity and relevant to his eligibility to be President, which has stood up to objective scrutiny or which is any more convincing than the existing evidence that he was born on August 4,1961 in Hawaii to SAD, fathered by BHO Sr.

Generalities aren’t much use to either of us in these circumstances. Perhaps if you gave me one specific example of a theory about one specific aspect....maybe pick the ‘doubt’ theory of a specific aspect of his nativity which you think has the strongest credibility amongst those with excellent credentials who doubt the official line.... and I could first tell you if I’ve seen it, and if I have, could then set out the specific reasons if and why I don’t think it has so far stood up to scrutiny.

I am adding, for the benefit of the drive by snipers as opposed to you, that my having so far not seen any convincing evidence to doubt his eligibility to be President has nothing whatsoever to do with me holding any opinion about his competence as a President.

[Fantasywriter]

Okay; here you go. Do you believe Barack Obama Sr. came to the USA via the Kennedy airlift of young African students? Did BO Sr. receive a JFK scholarship to study at the UoH?

Do you believe BO Sr. & Stanley Ann lived together as man and wife at the address listed in the two newspaper announcements? Do you also believe they lived together as man & wife for two years, prior to a separation leading to a divorce?

[Backtolife]

“Given the half-truths, outright lies and paucity of verifiable facts that are available about the origins of the apparently gay, marxist, islamophile figurehead of “the most transparent administration ever,” no one can be certain about aka obama’s nativity and who he really is.”

.....I’m not sure that anyone can ever be 100% certain of who anyone is. All we can operate on is the balance of probabilities given the known evidence......

“But it is certain beyond a doubt that aka obama has lied about his life’s story for the purposes of getting elected”

.....I’d agree that there’s no doubt that there have been some lies about his life engineered to improve electability.....

“and has committed criminal identity fraud against the American people and very probably is not a natural born Citizen, either of which should have disqualified him from ever becoming the putative president.”

....There we part company. I haven’t yet seen any convincing evidence of criminal identity fraud. Have you? Despite what Mr Zullo and others might have some believe, it seems to me that on the basis of past history there appears to be no real prospect of any evidence of criminal identity fraud being forthcoming in the foreseable future. Nor have I yet seen evidence that would justify an objective conclusion that he is “very likely not a natural born citizen”. Courts have concluded that he is. Congress, without dissent from a single Democrat or Republican member, clearly concluded that he is. The Congressional Research Service concluded that he is.

I’ve seen plenty evidence that he is not an effective President. Not the same thing.

[Fantasywriter]

“I’ve seen plenty evidence that he is not an effective President.”

‘Not...effective’ is one way to put it.

Here’s the analogy I wd draw to that characterization:

‘The brain surgeon decapitated his patient. Thus it may be concluded that he is an ineffective surgeon.’