Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.
The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.
The perceived unreliability of the image has provoked petitions and widespread demands for Obama to submit for objective inspection the paper versions of the "birth certificate" he claimed in his book Dreams from My Father was in his possession, as well as the paper version of the Certificate of Live Birth for which the image on the Daily Kos and the Obama "Fight the Smears" website was supposedly generated.
Without a valid birth certificate, Obama cannot prove he fulfills the "natural born citizen" requirement of the Constitution, throwing into doubt his eligibility to run for President.
McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.
(Excerpt) Read more at web.israelinsider.com ...
“So I concede that the photo of Ann and Obama Sr could have been taken in 1960-61, but I still believe that is Obama Jr. with Obama Sr. when he came to visit in 1971-72”
Both pics were in 1971. Its absurd to posit that they were at different times when Barack Sr and the background had exact same details. same xmas decorations, same ties and glasses and hair etc.
And now that Malik was born in 1959 has been established, fantasy detail no. #38, that it is Malik not barack jr, can be debunked.
It’s barack Jr with Sr in 1971, and with the other details, the other pic is from 1971 too.
What difference does it make? It's certainly not Bill Ayers. Anyway, Obama has had REAL associations with Ayers. I list a few below. As I suggested to you previously, why don't you try and find some photos of these two together at these events? However, I suspect it will be very difficult, if not impossible, since they were probably very careful not to have had any photos taken at these events. Or have already confiscated those that were.
"It was at the Chicago home of [Bill] Ayers and [Bernardine] Dohrn that Obama, then an up-and-coming 'community organizer,' had his political coming out party in 1995. Not content with this rite of passage in Lefty World — where unrepentant terrorists are regarded as progressive luminaries, still working 'only to educate' — both Obamas tended to the relationship with the Ayers."
Article: The Company He Keeps:
Meet Obama’s circle: The same old America-hating Left
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YThjYTU1ZDBjNmQ2YzcwNzU1MmYwN2JiMWY0ZGI0NDA=&w=MA==
From WorldNetDaily:
Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund's website. Obama served on the board with [Bill] Ayers, who was a Weathermen leader and has written about his involvement with the group's bombings of the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972.
Article: Obama worked with terrorist
Senator helped fund organization that rejects 'racist' Israel's existence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231
From Sept 11, 2001, New York Times article/interview with Obama associate and friend, William/Bill Ayers.
Article title: "No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen"
"Mr. Ayers, who in 1970 was said to have summed up the Weatherman philosophy as:
'Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at,' is today distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
New York Times, September 11, 2001: "No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
The Center for Public Intellectuals & The University of Illinois-Chicago (UIC)
April 19th-20th, 2002, Conference
[Participants include: William/Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Sen Barack Obama]
http://www.uic.edu/classes/las/las400/conferencealt.htm
>>>So.....what exactly am I supposed to clear up?
I rang you up for another freeper. You found him/her already :) Thanks.
Obama is the fraud for representing that a fraudulent document is legitimate. A fraud for not presenting any satisfactory documentation. A fraud who is engaged in a "modified, limited hangout" of facts that we, as citizens, properly request the whole truth.
To request legitimate documents is not a silly or bogus or whacko thing. It's normal. It's the right thing to do.
On this issue Obama has been the fraud. Obama has been bogus.
The allegations that the Birth Certificates so far provided come from those who are certified forensic examiners and have worked with law enforcement agencies for years — see techdude’s analysis at the Atlas Shrugged blog, the latest is here:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/who-died-and-ma.html
I haven’t seen ANY analysis that says the documents are real by anyone who could be considered to be a reliable expert in the field.
Came across this today- it may (or may not) put to rest the was-she-wasn’t-she married discussion:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/10/michelle-obama-talks-abou_n_111975.html
(Michelle said) His own mother, she said at the beginning of her remarks, was “very young and very single when she had him.”
Don’t fail to note the Clinton parsing possibilities represented by the phrase “when she had him”.
Also new this morning- AJStrata replies here:
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5649
To this -from techdude and Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs here:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/forensic-expert.html
I think you are correct--the black may not be the phone cord but you can see the bump on his wrist that is the watch--and it is in the usual position on top of the wrist.
These pictures are all the same taken on the same day in 1990 or 1991 (December-January) when they are getting on an airplane to go somewhere to get married. And it needs to be a long distance away because it is way too early to be going there for a wedding on February 2.
Think she means when she had him after she was abandoned when the kid was less than a year old and divorced the sucker.
She was the classic single mother--abandoned with a kid less than a year old; divorcing the father.
Don’t you mean 1960 or 1961?
You’re likely right, both of you. Parsing is all.
>>>These pictures are all the same taken on the same day in 1990 or 1991 (December-January)
1990 or 1991???
bump!
Right. I type it that way regularly (1991 for 1961); this is the first time I haven’t caught it.
The trail I was following was to confirm that the picture was not bogus. I think it will probably be shown to be real and from 1971.
By confirming that you had been in the airport in 1971 or so, and that you recognized the background of the picture, it would have put to rest (at least for me) that the picture could not have been taken in 1961, as many are speculating here.
I do still have questions about the details of the BC.
“it would have CONFIRMED(at least for me) that the picture WAS NOT taken in 1961, as many are speculating here.
CORRECTED
"In the most detailed examination yet of Senator John McCain’s eligibility to be president, a law professor at the University of Arizona has concluded that neither Mr. McCain’s birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a 'natural-born citizen.'"
We all know that Jeffrey Toobin and the other TV lawyer commentators other than Greta (who as far as I know has not yet addressed the issue) come down on the same answer, together with the Boston University Law Review and other secondary authorities.
The McCain question is important to the subject matter of this topic for the reason that it may well be the lever best used to pry the lid on Obama's denial campaign.
And McCain affords the courts, if they become involved, the opportunity to render a politically neutral decision, throwing both candidates out.
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.