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.
Doesn't explain the need to create a recent "copy" on a computer. The recent "copy" implies an annulled adoption or some other court room trick.
Seems to me then that no matter how much trouble it is the state of Hawaii -- with Obama's approval -- could produce the actual 1961 (1971 or whatever) document. Seems to me that it would solve a lot of problems and be worth the effort.
State Governments have Rules, Procedures, and Laws, and in MY state, you can't get an original (which was sealed by an adoption) without a court order to unseal it. Yes it would be easier, except it would violate a rule, procedure, or law, which is Unthinkable to a State Government bureaucrat.
Sheriff Joe said it's a forgery -- so just release the real thing.
Yup. Agree.
I remember people saying that it's all a trap. An October 2012 surprise will be the real document and all the "birthers" will be proved to be total fools, Obama will win by carrying all 57 states and . . . .
It was a very effective tactic. It shut up most people. Unfortunately for them, there were those of us who would not be in such haste to see what they wanted us to see.
Well it ain't going to happen .. they overplayed their hand with this shenanigan -- BTW the news conference said that they have the name of a person "of interest" who could be or know who done it.
I just hope it gets enough play in the regular media to wake people up. They need to quit taking peoples' WORD as proof of something.
And many of them give me silly advice. If you have an ACTUAL criticism of the theory, put it on the table. Just saying i'm wrong is plain childish. It's like saying "because."
I’d go further and say he’s the spitting image of Stanley Ann.
Canada for Obummer’s birth is certainly an option, and it adds credence to recent blogs that some fellow applied to an outlying Canadian court changing his name in court to Barack Obama. If it were Obummer, he would have to produce his Canadian birth certificate in a Canadian court to do so if born in Canada. There are so many options that one suspects all these options are just more attempts to muddy the waters...sigh. I thought Sheriff Joe’s announcements today about the paperwork of passengers on incoming international flights for most airlines being missing the pertinent first weeks of Aug l961 was another vote for Obummer being born in Mombasa.
A
I think you have SERIOUSLY misunderstood what I am saying.
I think Barry is Stanley Ann's Child. His father might be Barack Obama Sr, but it doesn't really matter for my argument.
When Stanley Ann Married Lolo Soetoro (1965, I think) All that had to occur for Barry to be adopted by Lolo Soetoro is for Lolo to say so to a government bureaucrat who came out to the house to ask. The indications are that Barry WAS adopted by Stanley Ann's second Husband.
My argument was that he was later (1971) adopted by his Grandparents, so as to get the Soetoro Adoption set aside, and so that they could become his legal guardians. (They Kept him for 8 years, don't you think they had legal custody?)
Barry recently got that adoption or guardianship annulled so as to get a document that says what he needed it to say. The Hawaiian Department of Health, under a Judge's order, created a new document which was designed to look like the original, using a modern computer and program.
Yes, it's fake, but it's a LEGAL fake. That is my theory.
I would say that just about anything you can come up with as documentary alternate proof has already been thoroughly vetted. These trained investigators are not pikers and have resources that you do not, that none of us have.
Obama himself had spent nearly 2 million dollars in obscuring the true facts of his documentation, in travel expenses and legal fees , before the DOJ took over the task from Obama’s private funding using his campaign chest ( yes he did get permission from the Federal Election Commission to spend the money to obscure his birth facts.
The fact is that we do not know who Obama really is, we have only a documentary construct of who Obama wants US ALL to think who he is.And your theory of adoption results only in further obscuration. Its time to get to clarity on the defacto ( not dejure) situs of Obama's birth, and his parentage, as well as his subsequent travels under both his Indonesian and US Passports.
If you do not see the constitutional necessity of the initiative undertaken by the Arizona Cold Case investigators, my conclusion is the same as Freeper Jarofants:
Pretty harsh for someone who has done nothing to you. I'm not discounting the competence of the investigators, I am simply suggesting that they may not have considered the Adoption/replacement birth certificate angle.
I have personal first hand knowledge of it because it applies to *ME*. Were it not for the fact that I happen to have two birth certificate documents, I very likely wouldn't have thought of this idea either.
You are a newbie TROLL who seeks only to further muddy the waters of the issue, rather than to clarify them.
You seriously do not know me. As for muddying the waters, do you think they can get more muddy?
So who do you respect on this forum? Do you know Red Steel, Fantasy Writer, Rxsid, Edge919, Frog in a Pot, Spaulding, Butterzillion, etc ?
Tell me who you know that discusses this birth certificate issue, and it is likely they are familiar with my writing on this issue.
I may have only been here for a year, but I bet i've written more about this subject than most people have in three years. You should do me the courtesy of addressing my arguments, and at least reviewing what I have written over this past year before jumping to the conclusion that I am a troll.
I have to go feed my kids, i’ll come back to respond further when I can.
Did you read the “Auntie” thread in its entirety? That was where I got 100% that he is no blood relative of the purported parents. Or any parent of the purported parents.
100% with you that something had to happen in 1971.
Grandparents would not take responsibility of a child without clear and clean guardianship and citizenship status.
But Hawaii has never released anything directly. Nada.
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?
The adoption process would be a legal meat grinder of actual documents. But Hawaii seems to want to keep an arms length away from this.
Your argumants are specious. Have you not been reading as much as you have allegedly posted? Adoption is a red herring at this point. Why cling to it? What is your point? It appears to be obfuscation of the real issue at hand: Forgery. Why do you cling so desperately to your own personal theory?
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.
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.
What about the Selective Service Card Forgery and fake SS numbers.
Felonius Obama...
It’s quite common for Permanent Resident Alien minors to be in the custody of a Social Service Agency in one state, while in the physical custody of a relative in another state.
Some people have invested too much time and money into false theories and won’t give it up. Or you can cling to the hope his BC is fake, his SSN is fake, his Selective Service is fake and everyone is in on it since the beginning.
Because the possibility occurred to me that there are people who have not heard and considered it. If you have, then surely you have good reasons for thinking it is wrong?
I would start with those rather than just flaming about it.
I suspect it varies from state to state. Mine says nothing about being amended.
Here's a case where it was obvious even to a creature as fascistically stupid as a Floriduh civil servant:
http://73adoptee.blogspot.com/2008/10/adoptee-denied-drivers-license-in.html
If only people had shown such diligence regarding Barack, rather than just take Nancy Pelosi's word for something.
I found that information interesting. I personally have little faith in the "Kenya theory" but if evidence comes out to support it I will re-evaluate it.
DL, I have always give serious consideration to this theory. For what it is worth, I think you are right. An adoption would most certainly cause changes to be made in Barry’s birth documents, changing them permanently until such a time as Barry decided to tell the state to revert the records to their original state, undoing the adoption. That would be part of the record as well, but could NOT erase the change in his citizenship status, particularly if he had gone to school as a foreign student!!!
Are you talking about that massively huge thread? I've read some of it, but I certainly have not read all of it. I've read Fred Nerk's stuff.
He comes up with some interesting stuff, but I think he reads too much into too little. Pictures are interesting, but resemblance is a funny thing, and no guarantee of a genetic relationship.
A Naturalized Citizen is NOT eligible for POTUS. Just ask Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Why would his supposed mother Stanley Anne want her parents to adopt her son? Her first born? Funny that was the same year Frank Marshall Davis and his wife got a divorce and she left. That’s when he and Gramps began hanging out with ole Frank and became Barry’s mentor.
You really are out in left field with that crap you wrote. You know that, right?
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.