Thanks for the ping. I haven’t been following the discussions lately, so it was very helpful.
I gather that one of our more beloved Freeper/Birthers is under fire for promoting a ‘nutty’ theory. It’s safe to assume, then, that the Mal-Valers are under fire for their psychotic theory, correct? After all, there is at least claimed evidence of frogmen; of Malcolm X as Obama’s father, of Valerie Sarruf as his mother, and of the nonexistence of his half brother, David Ndesandjo, there is NOTHING.
Jack Cashill having adeptly and devastatingly disposed of the ‘Malcolm X as father’ idea, let’s have a look at where the ‘David never existed’ claim stands.
According to Mal-Valers:
David’s brother Mark posts a photo of David on the Net, & this means David never existed.
Mark posts a photo of the same child-David-~three yrs older, posing with Mark, and this means David never existed.
Ruth Ndesandjo consistently affirms that she had a son named David Opiyo Ndesandjo, Mark’s full brother, and this means David never existed.
The Ndesandjos’ neighbors, in extensive interviews, affirm David’s existence, and this means he never existed.
Sally Jacobs, who conducted most of the interviews, affirms David’s existence, and this means he never existed.
David Maraniss, famed for his exhaustive research techniques, affirms David’s existence, and this means David never existed.
The largest newspaper in David’s hometown affirms his life and death, and this means he never existed.
The second largest newspaper in David’s hometown affirms his life and death, and this means David never existed.
Several genealogy sites list David as Mark’s younger brother, and this means David never existed.
No person, not a single one, who actually knew the Ndesandjos has ever claimed Mark never existed. In fact, there is no record of anyone, other than the Mal-Valers, making this claim.
So which is more believable? The frogmen, that at least a couple of people claim see, or David’s nonexistence, which flies in the face of ALL countervailing evidence? [For the record, I don’t believe in the frogmen. However, it is a fact that more evidence, such as it is, has been put forth to argue for their existence than has been put forth in support of the claim that David Opiyo Ndesandjo never existed.
So, which is the nuttier theory?
[And for the record, Seize, of course you never claimed to be an Obot. I don’t know why people are allowed to smear others this way. It’s not conducive to maintaining a fully functional, cohesive conservative community, nor does it serve any good purpose. It’s just a smear, pure and simple.]
For those who have never read Cashill’s tour de force take down of the wacky Malcolm X as Obama daddy theory, here’s an excerpt and the link:
‘The Malcolm-as-father proponent usually begins with photos of Malcolm and Obama. (Yes, they do look vaguely alike.) He then builds a case by adding any random detail that might support his thesis and ignoring those that don’t. The latter category includes just about everything known about Malcolm X’s character and history.’
http://www.cashill.com/intellect_fraud/no_malcolm_x.htm
Does Richard Ndesandjo exist?