Posted on 04/21/2013 9:17:31 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
Ah well, I suppose I just happen to have a few minutes day to indulge you a response, so here goes:
The specific wording of your explanation for Congress's choice to fiddle-while-Rome-burns, is wrong of course. If any Republican congressman is aware of an opportunity to publicly disgrace Barack Obama, there could be many motives for him to resist involvement, but there are very few politicians I think who would shrink back merely for fear of disavowing the word of the likes of Fmr. Gov. Linda Lingle and Dr. Chiyome Fukino. On the contrary, A typical Republican is quite content to disavow his fellows especially when he thinks doing so could win him increased recognition and favor among his constituents.
But I'm sure you didn't mean to have those particular words subjected to scrutiny, you merely meant them to provide a rather sideways segue into your larger point. So on that point, yes, I suppose it's possible that congressmen resist this issue not because they hate to disavow Lingle et al, but because they, like you, have only selectively and superficially reviewed the evidence.
I certainly can't deny that Lingle's words when taken by themselves make a decent case to the superficial observer that there's nothing to see here. I do not know what motivated the governor to issue that statement, but in the context of a very long list of questionable actions and statements flowing from officials in Hawaii, I find it woefully inadequate to seal our confidence that Hawaii and Team Obama have been fully direct and honest with respect to the birth certificate.
For starters, consider that Fukino (whom you seem to regard as an implicit source of reassurance about the birth certificate) used tortured and evasive language in the two key statements she made while still the Director. Then there is the matter of changing the name of the short form, the admission of Okubo, when pressed, that there was no way for her to say what the purported short form doc represented. There's the quiet name change of the short-form document and the quiet retraction of the recommendation that Long-form birth certs be used for applications to the Homelands program as well as the instructions for obtaining those forms. Let's not forget the fact that Hawaii kept insisting its hands were tied by the letter of the law regarding privacy protections, and yet they had no lawful justification for issuing oddly vague public statements about the birthplace and disposition of records for Obama. Oh and let's not forget the fact that Hawaii turned to the state legislature and their proposed vexatious requestor bill for relief while never once seeking relief by proposing to skeptics or the press that Obama himself could simply request that a certified copy of the long-form be mailed out directly from HDOH to some key doubting parties.
We have the curious matter of Virginia Sunahara, for whom at one time there were no records responsive to be found at HDOH, but then later was discovered to have a record that spurred Hawaii to fight the deceased infant's brother in court to prevent him from obtaining a long-form copy of her birth certificate, since doing so, HDOH laughably claimed, might bring harm to the fragile document. Let's see, there's the statement by Abercrombie, that there was something (something he would imply is less than thoroughly convincing) "actually written down in the state archives." Around the same time, as Butterdezillion reminds us, there was the curious appointment of Palafox and subsequent resignation by the same despite the fact that he had "no idea why" he resigned. Also chronologically coinciding was the inexplicably career jeopardizing detailed disclosure and immediate retraction by Mike Evans, radio personality and personal friend to Abercrombie. I'm sure you saw as completely innocent, the wrangling eight-week red-tape delay of HDOH to authorize an official verification be sent to the Secretary of State in Arizona, before ultimately capitulating with a weirdly worded verification, and equally innocent, I suppose was the refusal to confirm that content was "identical" in the verification sent to the Kansas Secretary of State.
Perhaps we would do well also to remember that at the lack of any plausible innocent reason, Team Obama took the extraordinary step of sending a law firm courier (with whom correspondence could be protected by attorney-client privilege) to carry the documents by hand from Hawaii to D.C., once they had finally made the decision, nearly 4 years into the controversy, to produce the long form. Lets see, there are all the many motions to stay discovery proffered by lawyers on behalf of Obama, not to mention utter refusal of those same counselors to provide as exhibit to the courts at any time through the lengthy legal battles a copy of even just the short form, let along the long form--though, to be fair, once a copy was unofficially printed on the back side of a page of official correspondence related to such a case in Georgia (nothing sneaky about presenting "evidence" that is officially off the record, is there?). Oh and lets not forget the litany of odd and foggy phrases concocted to for legal briefs crafted in defense of Obama to describe what we're meant to understand as being Obama's birth certificate.
I haven't even mentioned the document itself. In short, to this day no one has proposed a plausible sequence of events that would involve simply innocently scanning and uploading a pdf of Obama's birth certificate that could have resulted in the digital characteristics we observe in the pdf. In particular, there is no normal innocent means by which a document would have visible content hidden by a clipping mask, would have many high contrast elements that bear no trace of red-blue distortion, would have small white specks on one layer that when pealed back reveal the green thatch pattern behind them (x-ray scanning?), or would have multiple single bit-depth layers without corresponding layers of increased color bit depth. Zullo now contends he has a court certified expert who has sworn his conclusion that the document is not what Team Obama has implied that it is. By the way, let's do keep in mind that only one select media correspondent was allowed to touch the raised seal, and that, strictly behind closed doors.
Now I know the Selective Service System registration card isn't the same thing as a Birth certificate, so maybe it's silly of me to mention the fact that Obama's card has a two digit date stamp against all reasonable expectation, but one that is a stunningly perfect fit for what a person might produce if he had to come up with a 1980 date stamp in 2008. Yeah, I guess your right; even if there is something suspicious about the SSS form, it's surely for reasons unrelated what whatever circumstances make the birth certificate seemingly suspicious. Also, for the same reason, I'll ignore the fact that the SSS changed their rules regarding what they have to produce to aid which law enforcement entities only after MCSO began its investigation. And again since these things are surely too distant to be related, let's also think nothing at all about the fact that no one has yet proposed a decent explanation for why Obama is carrying a Conneticut-issued SSN, nor should we bother pondering why microfilm was supplied to MCSO documenting international arrivals for all of the months surrounding Obama's birth but the one week in which he was born. And, come on, it's crazily off topic to mention the photograph released through one of Obama's official web sites that curiously demonstrates how during a time in Obama's youth, his mother's left arm terminated into an oversized hand and wrist bearing pigmentation consistent with a person of African descent.
As I suppose you well know, this is a very brief summary of many of, but far from all of, the ocean of issues which persuade me to think that Obama's background narrative and supposedly supporting identity documents should be subjected to intense further investigation, including subpoenas forcing document access and law enforcement conducted interviews.
. . . But then again, as you've already pointed out most helpfully, there is that comment by Former Governor Linda Lingle, well-known to be a GOP teammate, that really just settles the whole question and should be seen as fully sufficient to set our minds at ease. I mean come on, what real reason is there to doubt the what the Madame Governor said?
Noble Emperor Nero, please accept my apology for supposing that people should take the forgery evidence seriously.
Excellent smack-down.
Anybody who is not suspicious is either brain-dead or an Obot at this point (but I repeat myself. lol)
We also mustn’t forget that Larry Sellin overheard a R Presidential primary candidate explain that nobody will touch the eligibility issue because they know it is way deeper than anybody wants to delve. IOW, they KNOW THERE IS TREACHERY, and they are afraid of stirring the waters.
I’m hoping that the terror attacks by terrorists that Obama’s regime had been warned of for 5 years, complete with specific ties to specific terror groups, and yet ignored..... along with the possibility that North Korea has a super EMP from Russia that is already in orbit just waiting to shoot through a hole in our south-facing radar..... will let these people know that if the treachery is not confronted, America faces an existential threat from OUR OWN WHITE HOUSE AND ITS THUGS.
Way past time for the stupid excuse of “embarrassment”, and the “don’t stir up the water” excuse no longer flies either. If we don’t stir up the nest we will be left vulnerable to all the attacks our enemies want to make on us.
IOW, it’s crunch time. Either we rise up and survive, or we cower in the corner and die. Members of Congress and the “conservative” media, it’s time. Now or never.
You say. . .
In fact, the reality that the Birth Certificate is forged, leaves us to even wonder whether the official line on Obama's parents is accurate at all.
You may be onto something there.
Whenever his Presidential passport expires, he’ll have to apply for another one. I would suggest that they focus their efforts on that fact. He can’t leave the country without a passport? Who knows.
1/ At the highest level the Republican party allready knew in 2008 Obama was not eligible due to basic US citizenship issues. Exposing him in 2013 means exposing the Republicans still in office from 2008 to severe damage, and possible legal sanction.
The Democrats actually helped John Mccain over the finish line to the Republican nomination, because there was a possible counter-charge on eligibilty to be made against Mccain, i.e. the confusion over his exact birth place and its status, so they knew that a “non-agression pact” could be signed with him.
2/ Even the Republicans not in office in 2008 are still subject to threats from those that were, especially the GOP-e ringleader John Boehner.
3/ The Media, especially broadcast TV National networks will be used to beat up any republican immediately with charges of “evil-RACIST!!!!!!!!!” “BIRTHER!!!”
4/ Hawaii politicians are leaning on Hawaii DOH to back up the lies allready told about Obama’s Legend - so any civil challenge in the courts that nails Obama will still be a long drawn out battle of attrition - making any Republican politician who speaks out a punching bag for the MSM for years.
5/ Fox news is cowed by threats against the business interests of Rupert Murdoch, i.e. Fox can be attacked by the DOJ [you are an evil monopoly in the cable business..” and the FCC can attack some Murdoch owned assets and any future Murdoch ambitions to own a new or existing National Broadcast Network go into the toilet.
That means no friendly, or at least neutral, news coverage from Fox if a Repulican lawmaker dares to raise his head above the parapet.
If he's that confident hen indict someone and put those documents into the judicial process.
No he couldn't.
And again in 12. Mutt's daddy was born in Mexico.
The fix has been in from "both" (actually the same) sides, for a long time now.
Looks like we had a pretty good “army” on the streets of Boston. Just deploy the them when the riots start.
Trey Gowdy?
He would need control of the Media and backing from the GOP-e and a GOP-e Republican candidate for president who would support a 3x Obama run.
If Article 2 can be ignored by the political class, why not the 22nd amendment?
I notice the 22nd amendment has a part 2 that renders it inoperable, all that is needed is some “Lawyering” and the support of the media, GOP-e and...
Mitt Romney is a natural born Citizen, he was born to American Citizens on American soil.
“In short, to this day no one has proposed a plausible sequence of events that would involve simply innocently scanning and uploading a pdf of Obama’s birth certificate that could have resulted in the digital characteristics we observe in the pdf.”
Have you heard of mixed raster content compression?
“one that is a stunningly perfect fit for what a person might produce if he had to come up with a 1980 date stamp in 2008.”
But they were able to find an obsolete, round, Honolulu Makiki Station Post Office handstamp? And why would they need a 1980 stamp, couldn’t they use a 1970 stamp or 1960 or 1985 or 1995 and cut off the first two digits?
4zoltan,
You know there are certain moments when I think I could rather enjoy a long debate with one of you guys who is not merely committed to refuting kooks like me, but to doing so with a seemingly legitimate effort to employ logic and intellect in the process. Unfortunately, I generally wind up deciding that I simply can’t spare the time to engage in such a debate to any significant length.
That said, this is a less busy moment for me, and your questions here seem fair enough. (Although I probably won’t have these answers ready until someone has already addressed you questions better than I will have.) Yes, I’ve “heard of” mixed raster content compression, and I gather that when applied to images it can yield layers with differing color bit-depths, but I do not have in-depth knowledge of the technology, so I am willing for you to bring me up to speed on what software products currently implement MRC in such a way that they would tend to optimize a scan of the Birth Certificate so as to produce the types and number of layers, clipping masks, etc. that are present in the White House pdf. To my, admittedly limited, knowledge, no one has yet to get the details right in their attempts to demonstrate with currently available software how to arrive at a layer set that is principally the same as that contained in the White House pdf. If you are aware of a convincing demonstration that does accomplish principally the same layering scheme, then please share the details.
As to your questions about the date anomaly on the SSS card, I don’t pretend to know all the steps that were taken nor the rationale for each decision, but I can propose a line of reasoning that I think could adequately serve to address both of the concerns you’ve raised. I would suggest that the alleged forgers were able to obtain either a paper copy bearing the Maliki Station postal seal in combination with a round postal seal stamp containing the year-insertion recess which matched the proportions of the seal that would have been used Maliki station, or perhaps they were even able to gain a round stamp that was just like the one used by the Maliki Station during those years. The US Postal Service policies would, of course, dictate that great care be taken to implement procedures to ensure that year stamps are destroyed as soon as possible after the year for which they were created comes to an end. However, the surrounding round stamps, into which the year stamps would be inserted, would logically have been less subject to USPS procedural controls of that nature since the same round stamp would have been intended for use over the course of several years.
They needed a 1980 stamp (thus making a 2008 stamp the ideal counter part), in short, because some days or weeks prior to the request that prompted the release of the full document image, the SSS had already responded to an FOIA inquiry with a date and basic details of Obama’s purported registration in bare text form. Also, it’s crucial to understand that Obama had to register before he reached a certain age (18?), and that the date had to come only during those years when registration was a federal requirement, and a place and date had to be chosen which could be reconciled with the publicly stated narrative of Obama’s travels during those years.
The problem with using the digits ‘19’, as I think you may be suggesting, from a 1960 or 1995 year insert, etc. is course attributable to the same difficulty that arises with trying to find a 1980 stamp in 2008. In order to prevent stamp misuse and postal fraud The Postal Service mandates that the year inserts are to be destroyed as soon as each new year begins.
By the way, now that you mention it, this raises a point about another key anomaly that I had not remembered to include in my long list. When the first bare text date of registration was emailed in response to an FOIA requester, a date was relayed that wouldn’t have coincided sufficiently to put Obama in the right place at the right time at the right age. The requester then responded asking for clarification, pointing out that the date provided could not fit Obama’s timeline for being in Hawaii. Without further explanation, dates provided for all subsequent FOIA requests were modified so that they reflected a more plausible date, the same date which later then appeared on the full registration card image.
I’m not sure I’ll have the time to make it another round with you any time soon, but I think this addresses (inadequately, I suppose you’d say) each of the questions you’ve raised for this round.
By the way, I don’t suppose you’d like to propose a explanation as to how the two-digit date stamp could have occurred as it did on the SSS registration card which would in no way rely upon the occurrence of tampering or manipulation?
“If you are aware of a convincing demonstration that does accomplish principally the same layering scheme, then please share the details.”
Not a demonstation but a statement by one of the developers of the Mixed Raster Content (MRC) compression standard after he reviewed the whitehouse pdf,
“I took a birth certificate which has a similar background pattern, scanned and compressed using an older DjVu tool. It has shown the same problems as POBC, like text letters that were missed and sent to background, and multiple text styles. It didn’t have halo, though, because its algorithm decided to obliterate the whole background pattern. Perhaps if I had time to toy around with packages and parameters I might find something very close to what was used to generate the document shown by the WH, but I unfortunately do not have the time right now.”
“In summary I can only say I see much stronger signs of common MRC algorithmic processing of the image rather than some intentional manipulation.”
Sincerely
Ricardo L. de Queiroz”
“As to your questions about the date anomaly on the SSS card”
The timeline for information release was like this:
February, 2008 - Selective Service reports that Obama’s SS registration is in order.
August, 2008 - Selective Service in an e-mail to PJMedia says there is nothing out of the ordinary about Obama’s SS registration.
October, 2008 - Selective Service releases copy of Obama’s SSR card.
The Selective Service in a 2012 letter to Mike Zullo, explained the process for SSR cards. The information is transcribed into the computer system, two microfilm copies of the card are made and the original paper card is destroyed. The two microfilm copies are kept in separate Federal Data Centers. One copy is kept as the record copy and the second is used as a working copy.
So for this to be a forgery, someone would have to break-in to at least one of the data centers and replace the existing microfilm roll with a replacement roll that contains the forged SSR card, or at the very least splice the forged image of the SSR card onto the existing roll. And do that before October, 2008.
There would be no need to actually create a paper copy of the SSR card, but instead just create a image that coud be put onto microfilm.
“a date was relayed that wouldn’t have coincided sufficiently to put Obama in the right place at the right time at the right age.”
The law for that time reads - “1-103. Persons born in calendar year 1961 shall present themselves for registration on any of the six days beginning Monday, July 28, 1980.”
Obama was in Los Angeles from September, 1979 to at least June, 1980 and again from September, 1980 to June, 1981 (Occidental College years). Could he have been in Hawaii in July, 1980?
For many of the same reasons the first “O” and the second “L” in Honolulu are missing on the hand stamp.
That is the nature of ink handstamps, sometimes the image doesn’t come out complete.
Plus repeal of the 22nd Amendment. Good luck with that one.
If Article 2 can be ignored by the political class, why not the 22nd amendment?
Is Article 2 being ignored?
I notice the 22nd amendment has a part 2 that renders it inoperable, all that is needed is some “Lawyering” and the support of the media, GOP-e and...
And a time machine putting Obama in office in 1951.
I will be out for a while but will get abck to you.
In the meantime, here is something else to consider:
Obama’s SSR card has a ten digit Document Locator Number (DLN) - 0897080632. This DLN was stamped on the card at the time it was processed.
Susan Daniels and Linda Bentley obtained SSR cards for two individuals who registered within days of Obama at the Makiki Station Post Office in Honolulu. Their DLNs are as follows:
Date - JUL 31 1980 DLN - 0897 080 653 (Darrel Oniwa)
Date - JUL 29 1980 DLN - 0897 080 632 (Barack Obama)
Date - AUG 2 1980 DLN - 0897 080 613 (Bruce Henderson)
So the forger was able to get a DLN from the 1980s but not a 19xx stamp
Wow, thanks for taking the time to reply in such depth, I appreciate all the effort.
Can you name ANY Tea Party endorsed Republican in either House of Congress who has called for congressional hearings on either the constitutional definition of the term “natural born citizen” or for hearings on the bona fides of Barry Soetoro?
By way of contrast, the House of Representatives has been more than willing to issue myriad congressional subpoenas for every file in their “Fast & Furious” investigation and even hold for the first time in American history, the Attorney General in Contempt of Congress for his recalcitrance (and he’s black).t
Can you name any well known conservative constitutionalist attorney (such as any of the former Republican Solicitor Generals) who has submitted an amicus brief in support of any Obama eligibility challenge?
Both former Governor Lingle and former Director of Health Fukino were sued multiple times to force the release of birth records related to Obama’s eligibility ( as has been current Health Director Fuddy)). Lingle and Fukino prevailed in all the lawsuits against them.
There has been ample opportunity to raise and examine all the issues you have discussed. There have been 206 Obama eligibility civil actions filed in courts in practically every state in the nation. To date, 201 of those civil actions have been adjudicated. There have also been 90 state and federal appellate level rulings and 25 denials of certiorari or applications for stays, injunctions or extraordinary writs such as mandamus/prohibition at the Supreme Court of the United States. Every one of the Justices in the 5-4 conservative majority except Justice Alito has had the opportunity to grant a stay or an injunction but none have.
Here are quotes from two conservative judges who have adjudicated cases involving these eligibility issues, first a Reagan judge and second a Bush #43 judge:
“Ever persistent, plaintiff (Orly Taitz) has once again come before this court in an effort to uncover “the biggest cover up in the history of this nation.”
She believes that the President is using a “fraudulently obtained” social security number and that the Social Security Administration—among other agencies—is involved in a scheme to cover up social security fraud, IRS fraud, elections fraud—and possibly treason” committed by the President.
As her numerous filings with the court demonstrate, plaintiff will stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.”—Chief US District Court Judge for the District of Columbia, Royce C. Lamberth. Taitz v. Astrue, 8/30/11
http://www.legaltimes.typepad.com/files/Lamberth-opinion-4.pdf
“A spurious claim questioning the president’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—Rhodes v MacDonald, US District Court Judge Clay D. Land, US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19809978/RHODES-v-MacDONALD-13-ORDER-denying-3-Motion-for-TRO-granting-8-Motion-to-Dismiss-Ordered-by-Judge-Clay-D-Land-on-09162009-CGC-Entered-0
When you total the multi-judge appeals court panels, the state elections boards with citizen members hearing ballot eligibility challenges (there were challenges heard in 22 states in 2012) including the 206 original jurisdiction judges, pretty darn close to a thousand Triers of Fact have had opportunities to examine allegations and evidence concerning birth records, father’s place of birth, social security numbers, Selective Service registration, kerning, photoshop, layers, smiley faces, Virginia Sunahara’s birth certificate and every other allegation.
But since 2008: zilch.
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.