Posted on 12/03/2008 4:53:04 AM PST by Raquel
Well, well, well, it looks like all us conspiracy theorists might be on to something after all. The Office of the President-Elect has not produced a true copy or original Birth Certificate showing that Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States, and is qualified under the United States Constitution, to become the next President, after numerous requests to do.
And guess what? There is absolute silence from the pissant media, including some of the countrys most hardened conservatives and so called purveyors of truth. No surprise here. Its in countries like Communist China that information is purposefully withheld from the public, and the way things have been moving along lately, only us conspiracy theorists or internet bloggers are unafraid to uncover the truth.
There have been many articles floating around and I will try to link to as many as I can (h/t to larwyn, contrairimairi, Mitchell Langberts blog, Freedom March, and Free Republic) at the end of this commentary, and my readers can determine for themselves what is credible and what is not, but this is a topic that cannot be ignored any further.
A quick word to the naysayers. Even the U.S. Supreme Court has found merit in at least one of the pending lawsuits, and that case is scheduled to be heard Friday, December 5, 2008, yet not one so called media outlet (not even the revered fair and balanced FOX news channel) has informed the American public that this reality exists, and many Americans have no clue that the mere question has been posed. Needless to say, I am grateful that the highest Court in the land appears to be the only venue that is impartial. We can only hope that they get to the bottom of this inquiry.
(Excerpt) Read more at raquelokyay.com ...
Mr. Non Sequitur certainly seems to have an apt name for posting. He clearly is ignoring the affidavits, proof of citizenship in another country that would have been inconsistent with U. S. citizenship, use of visas that would have been inconsistent with U. S. citizenship, indication of his mother’s not meeting the requirements, the law in Hawaii at the time, and the common assumption that missing documents should not be found to be in favor of those who allege their are problems with them when those in whose control they are could but do not produce them. Then there is the question of the Polarik reports exposure of the use of altered documents by the Obama campaign and those closely working with it. In the law, the use of altered documents raises a presumption of fraud.
And in the case of those Presidents there were no suspicious circumstances such as we have just pointed out. It will be interesting to see if trolls will be able to effectively suppress the truth by the sort of distortion and misrepresentation that you are engaging in.
When you got your driver's license, the DMV must have asked for proof that your were over 16. And? You told them to prove that you weren't?
C'mon!
And I'm assuming Obama did the same thing. So if the DMV vouches for him what more do you want?
How can they when you're on the job?</sarcasm>
Now you want to change the subject? Fine.
Having a drivers license isnt one of the constitutional requirement for the Presidency.
How silly the argument they are using is. It’s like telling the bartender that they have to serve you if they can’t prove you’re under 21.
No, but obviously your state requires you to provide your birth certificate to get a drivers license. That's state law and there is nothing you or I can do to get around it. But there is no federal law tasking a particular agency with checking the candidate's credentials. There is no law requiring Obama present his birth certificate. It'd be nice if there was, that would certainly solve any issues we're having. But there isn't. And until there is there is no way we can force Obama to present his birth certificate other than in court, and there is no way that will happen unless solid evidence in presented showing he is not eligible to be president. And so far the cupboard is bare in that department. So continue trying to make the link between the DMV and the presidency if you want, it's still apples and oranges.
There is certainly a better chance that propagandists such as yourself will less successful because of forums such as this that enable us to speak the truth.
It must make you feel real good to engage in falsehood in order to trash the Constitution.
Have you ever, by any chance, had to take an oath to protect and defend it against enemies foreign and domestic?
Sure.
It must make you feel real good to engage in falsehood in order to trash the Constitution.
Please point out the falsehood I've engaged in. What with you being so high on speaking the truth and all.
Have you ever, by any chance, had to take an oath to protect and defend it against enemies foreign and domestic?
Yes and I did it for almost 30 years, too. Navy.
>I would be satisfied merely to know exactly where in Honolulu the Anointed claims to have been born.
<
A manger in the back of some Honolulu hotel. Didn’t you hear? Woe to ye who hath questioned the chosen one.
That explains it. ;)
Looks like people in high places are covering for him. Guess one can expect the same behaviour while he is President.
Looks like people in high places are covering for him. Guess one can expect the same behaviour while he is President.
NS is not a troll.
NS just happens to have a different view on things and he has supported his view point very well.
I dont agree but that hardly makes him a troll.
I see, what does outright misrepresentation of the truth make one other than a troll? When it involves misrepresentation of what the Constitution says and requires it hardly makes one a patriot.
It is difficult to see, for example, how denial of the fact that there are ample suspicious circumstances, and even statements and affidavits supporting the challenge to Obama’s eligibility signals a devotion to the truth of the matter.
Asertions that earlier presidents who had no such suspicious circumstances are equivalent to Obama hardly make one seem to be interested in an honest appraisal.
I just did.
What can you point to in the situation of any past president that presents suspicious circumstances such as those that have surfaced with regard to Obama?
Did anyone of them, for example, refuse to reveal his birth certificate? Is there any one of them who would have stood silent while a fraudulent document purporting to be their birth certificate were posted in a public medium by those affiliated with their campaign?
As pointed out, the use of altered documents, in the law, raises a presumption of fraud.
None of them were required to, and neither is Obama.
And you've yet to point out any falsehood.
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.