While this whole "assembled" PDF document the White House put out could be a ruse and trap to further embarrass the "birthers" as Mario considered in his new article, I had another thought. What's to say that the copies given to Obama's lawyer sent to Hawaii, and attested to by Hawaiian officials, actually show the same information on those two paper copies that is now being displayed on the internet in this very badly assembled PDF document.
As I recall the former HI director when interviewed in recent weeks, she said when she saw the alleged original Obama birth registration document she said it was half typed and half hand written. What we are being shown on the net is something that is entirely typed except for the signatures. That does not comport with what the former HI Health Dept Director said.
What if the Obama powers sent the lawyer to Hawaii to provide the necessary cover story that they did get two copies of the Obama vital record there ... but the image on the net now is NOT of the paper copies that they picked up ... say because there is something on it that Obama still does not wish to reveal. So he has a version cooked up once again to put online, and someone screwed up and did not flatten the PDF file prior to release to hide the layers. Would Hawaii officials speak up to affirm or deny that what Obama put on the net is not an image of the copy of what they gave to Obama's lawyer. Or would they keep silent in much the same way they did regarding the Certification document, the short form images on the net since Jun 2008. Remember that Hawaii never confirmed that any of those images on the net were copies of something that they issued. Hawaii has been very willing to cooperate with Obama's stonewalling and game playing regarding the vital records in HI for Obama. And, Obama is playing such a cat and mouse game with the American electorate about all his hidden records that one can never tell with him as to what is real or what is memorex. It is a disgrace how this administration is treating the American citizenry. And the main stream media does not call him out on this and instead helps and enables Obama to conduct such offensive disinformation tactics on the American electorate. Journalism no longer exists in this nation. The media should be ashamed.
Nothing is impossible to create nor too perverse, depraved or borderline or actual criminal action with these cretins.
Why does Kreep make no mention of the Founders’ writings and intent .. AND THEWON’S DUAL ALLEGIANCE TO THE USA VIRTUE OF HIS STATED PATERNITY ???
(Unless it’ll be a stealth hearing issue he’ll raise)
BEYOND FRUSTRATING WITH THESE SO-CALLED ATTORNEYS ~~~!!!
~~~~~~~
On the topic - sideways: the loudmouth fool, Serrano .. AGAIN!
__________________________________________________
Justice Breyer Enters Birther Debate
By Paul Bedard
Posted: April 27, 2011
###
There are that if those who question President Obama’s American birth, like Donald Trump, get a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, there could be a lively and unpredictable debate.
At a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing this month, Justice Stephen Breyer waded into the white-hot discussion of whether those born outside the 50 states can be president.
His comments came when Bronx Rep. Jose Serrano, a Democrat and Puerto Rico native, asked if he could be president.
“That still hasn’t been settled,” Serrano said. “Does the person get aggrieved [and sue] at the time I declare my candidacy, or do I have to be elected first?”
Breyer took the bait. “Why would anyone be aggrieved if you were running for president? Wouldn’t they be pleased?” he said before quoting the Constitution: “It says no person except a natural-born citizen. Well?”
Serrano chimed in, “I’m a natural born citizen.”
Breyer: “OK.”
A gleeful Serrano: “I can’t believe we just had a Supreme Court decision.”
A vague Breyer: “Well, you said you are a natural-born citizen.”
Serrano said, “Well that’s what I believe I am,” before assuring the hearing room that he would not make a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/04/27/justice-breyer-enters-birther-debate
________________________________________
From Rules for Radicals = Alinsky
###
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat.... [and] the collapse of communication.
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time....”
8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative.”
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’...
“...any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments.... Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target...’
“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.”
On ethics
“Alinsky’s second chapter, called Of Means and Ends, craftily poses many difficult moral dilemmas, and his ‘tenth rule of the ethics of means and ends’ is:
‘you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral arguments.’
He doesn’t ignore traditional moral standards or dismiss them as unnecessary. He is much more devious; he teaches his followers that
‘Moral rationalization is indispensable at all times of action whether to justify the selection or the use of ends or means.’...
More here
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
wow great post a lot to think about there.