Posted on 07/06/2009 8:32:09 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
(From Plainsradio blog)
POLARIK springs some startling news re; McJuan's birth certificate.
Private ping: The "other" forged birth certificate From Polarik | 06/25/2009 11:33:30 AM PDT new
Keep this under your hats until I spring it on people
I was doing research today on the eligibility and birth certificate controversy that PRECEDED Obama.
Namely, the one on John McCain. It appears that:
1. Not only was there a forged birth certificate for McCain, he didn’t produce it. SHADES OF RATHERGATE! Someone named Don Lamb in Panama forged a Panamanian BC showing that McCain was born there in 1936.
Wait! There’s more!
Not only is the typeface on it from a Selectric IBM, it has the same Rattan background pattern as is on the Hawaiian COLB! (but in black and white). No one ever challenged it. McCain did not want to publicly release his BC, but he did show it to Newsbusters and the Washintton Post, as well as the Senate.
2. The mainstream media was all over it, including CBS, NY Times {twice}, Washington Post {twice}, Dallas Morning News, Newsbusters {twice}, and HuffingtonPost. The first time that the Washington Post published a story about McCain’s eligibility was in 1998!
3. The Hollander v. McCain lawsuit was, without a doubt, the weakest, lamest lawsuit ever brought on the NBC issue.
4. After that lawsuit was thrown out because of “lack of standing,” a term already very familiar in the legal community long before Hollander brought his suit, and obviously long before Berg brought a similar suit, but one much stronger.
5. In July 11, the NYT ran their second article on McCain’s eligibility issue AFTER the Hollander suit was tossed, AFTER the Senate resolution of April 30 proclaiming that McCain was an NBC, and AFTER Obama’s own NBC status was questioned. The NYT argued that the Senate resolution was nonbinding, and they also included an analysis by U. of Arizona law professor, Gabriel Chin who focused on a 1937 law that conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, but after McCain’s birthday to make him a natural-born citizen.
So, all of this crap happened six months before Factcheck did their “Born in the USA” article that was supposed to be “the final chapter.” The Libtards were all over McCain’s ass all that time, right up until the heat was turned on Obama.
Then, suddenly WE were the wingnuts with the tinfoil hats.
Yep!
And this poor guy went to all that trouble to call me out on it, both on here and on plainsradio.
Serously, I’ve got some stuff I’d like for you to look at.
Gracias, Amigo!
Now, all we need to do is to find out who was born there on that date.
sorry I don’t understand what you are talking about.
I went back through a couple of quick posts and not sure what you are referring to.
Means nothing. The leftward serif at the top of the capital A is characteristic of the Courier font, which was developed in 1955. This document is dated 1980, by which time Courier was found on most office typewriters.
You didn't read the whole post. Practices were different in 1936 than in 1956. By '56, almost all births were in hospitals, with the mother staying for at least 2 nights after the birth. But in '36, many babies were born at home, even if attended by a doctor. If the father is an officer and the grandfather an Admiral, before they became a dime a dozen during the war, the doctor Would make a housecall, even if they did not routinely do so, which I suspect they did.
Shoot, my doctor called at my house once just to see how I was doing, and that would have been just shortly after you were born. Same doctor who delivered me (in a hospital), and the same one who gave me my college entrance physical. Dr. George Place.
Post 1980? That document is supposed to be the equivalent of the CoLB, IOW, an abstract, made in 1980. Which of course brings up the interesting question of where a 1980 abtract of McCain's birth record would have been found, if not provided by McCain, or one of his family members.
Of course none of that explains the "artifacts" in the document, such as the ghost line, different typefaces, etc.
Would have been a factor in the election. But it doesn't matter a hoot in a holler as to his eligibility. In fact the Constitution specifically bars it making any difference in eligiblity. (Last sentence of Article VI)
Only speaks to citizens at birth, as defined by Congress. Not Natural Born Citizens, which, truth be told, has never been defined. Congress has no power to define the term, for purposes of Constitutional eligibility anyway. The term must mean what it meant when the Constitution was written.
If Congress could willy nilly redefine terms in the Constitution, they could perform all sorts of mischief.
They do have the power to define rules of naturalization, so that is what they must have done in Title TITLE 8, CHAPTER 12, SUBCHAPTER III § 1401. Thus a person who is a citizen at birth because of the rules in that section, or any other law passed by Congress, must be considered Naturalized at birth. If the person were born in the US, they are not naturalized, and are a citizen at birth, via the 14th amendment. But still not necessarily a Natural Born citizen, unless they fit the definition of that term as it existed when the main body of the Constitution was written.
I know you posted this yesterday, but...
The "facts/truth" have been missed as usual. But when does that matter[?]
It doesn't. The only facts/truth that will matter is what is happening on the ground, in your (generic) AO, and time zone, to you and your family in the coming months. Everything else becomes moot outside your time/space.
I see how things are going, and feel rather pessimistic. From preachers in pulpits around America telling congregations to prepare their stores, to local militias training. Really, could the "balloon go up," on our soil? Seems kinda surreal to me.
And to think, all of this rant over a darn birth certificate. Go figure...
5.56mm
Ping. You should see this thread, for reasons that will become obvious.
Explain the ghost text and lines.
I’m waiting....
It’s amazing to me that people cannot see a clear difference between the lettering in the birth date and USA.
USA is crystal clear and the birth date is fuzzy.
Also, if the document is forged, why does it not place McCain's birth clearly on base? There are those who think that matters, you know, even though they are wrong.
Cleveland? I didn't know he had "natural born citizen" issues. Do you mean Chester Arthur?
Yes, Arthur,
Just seeing who’s awake.
No. I've been working with copy machines going back to thermal copiers. Ghosting occurs when parts of the top of a document is carried over to the bottom. Ghosting does not create unique words that are different from the words already there.
This is entirely different. This is a graphically altered image, and the age of the original has no bearing on how it was forged, but the need to make an additional copy will lower the quality a bit.
Anyone can see that the long one has had several generations of copying. Not so for the short, first one.
These are names typed across the exact, same lines as where names would be placed, and the floating lines clearly indicates that parts of the underlying document had not been completely covered electronically.
Please don't engage in fishing for all kinds of excuses to find one that changes the conclusion. We don't make changes to fit preconceived notions.
This forgery was used against McCain, not for him. How else do you think the issue of McCain's birthplace arose if not with a forgery to document the charge?
*sigh* Yes. Brain fart.
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.