Posted on 06/14/2012 10:01:13 PM PDT by Perseverando
Filmmaker reveals new evidence Frank Marshall Davis was president's real father
NEW YORK – Did Barack Obama’s mother pose nude for communist poet and journalist Frank Marshall Davis?
Did Obama build his political career on a fairy tale that his father was a Kenyan who grew up herding goats?
Was Obama’s goal in writing his autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” to misdirect Americans away from a deeply disturbing family background and a Marxist political foundation?
These are questions filmmaker Joel Gilbert poses in the full-length documentary “Dreams from My Real Father,” which argues Frank Marshall Davis is the president’s biological father, not the Kenyan Barack Obama.
Gilbert reports he has recently discovered racy photos in vintage fetish and bondage magazines of Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, that he believes were taken by Davis. The photos, he says, bolster his belief that Dunham had an intimate relationship with Davis.
Joel Gilbert’s “Dreams from My Real Father” is on sale now at WND’s Superstore
Gilbert has given WND a preview of a new “Breaking News” page on his documentary’s website titled “The Intimate Ann Dunham-Frank Marshall Davis Relationship.” On the page, he presents a video that shows some of the 30-plus pin-up photographs he believes Davis took of Obama’s young mother and other models in his home at 2994 Kalihi Street in Honolulu, Hawaii.
Frank Marshall Davis, pornographer
In 1968, Greenleaf Classics in San Diego published a pornographic novel titled “Sex Rebel Black: Memoirs of a Gash Gourmet,” authored by “Bob Greene,” a pen name Davis later admitted was his own.
In the sex novel that Davis claimed was autobiographical, he describes a swinging lifestyle in which he and his wife had sex numerous times with an underage girl named “Anne,” a figure very suggestive of Obama’s mother.
As Gilbert documents, ....
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I am reminded of the woman who lost an earring...she was searching for it in the living room, and when her husband asked her ‘where did you last know you had it’? - she replied, ‘I think it was in the bathroom’
‘So why are you not looking in the bathroom’? he asked her.
‘Because the light is better here,’ she replied.
The light is better in Frank Marshall Davis’ living room.
And you are the foremost proof of your statement.
You don't have to address me, I have a mind of my own. I am pointing out that the evidence keeps piling up, and it isn't leading in the direction of your theory. Unless we postulate that Gilberts is a liar, we have to accept that he has established that house as the origin of those pictures. He even noted the same thing I did. The Windows were an uncommon type. (Which you pooh poohed.)
As Benjamen Franklin said: "One of the great tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of brutal facts."
Unless it is done by the State Government on behalf of an adopted child. Then it is perfectly legal.
That you should say such a thing means you are not comprehending the facts at hand. The wood grain pattern matches EXACTLY. So no, in fact there *IS* no other floor on the Island, or anywhere else in the Universe that will match that photograph. Only that floor found at that house will match that photograph because it is the same floor as is *IN* the photograph.
I can’t believe the straw clutching you engage in. Either you are clinging to this because you can’t bear to admit maybe you’re wrong,
I have no problem with admitting i'm wrong. I've done it once or twice since i've been posting here at Free Republic, and I've done it elsewhere as well.
or it’s because FMD bio dad and SAD bio mom would make him an NBC. I can’t think of any other reason.
I am not going to make up my mind about what is the truth just because it favors my side. I am going to look at where the evidence leads, and decide on the basis of what appears to be the truth, even if it goes against me. This is known as H-O-N-E-S-T-Y.
As for Obama being a "natural born citizen", people have pointed out that if Stanley Ann was legally married to the Kenyan, it makes no difference to the Legal system who the biological father is, the "birth" father is the Husband according to the Law. Obama could be the biological son of an American, but he would still be the legal son of the Kenyan, and therefore legally acquire his citizenship.
your gang of brutal facts has been reduced to a piece of flooring and the shape of a window as the result of the desperation of the author of a video who has been shown to be interested in nothing more than the $$$ he gets as the result of floating the theory that zero is the son of FMD and SAD on the strength of nothing more than some images from an erotic website now closed down, which showed images of a girl who bore a SLIGHT resemblance to Stanley Ann Dunham, VERY SLIGHT.
I understand the motives of the author of the film much better than your motives, which would appear to be to bestow NATURAL BORN STATUS upon a man whose birthdate, place of birth, parentage and nationality are UNKNOWNS.
I am thus, extremely suspicious of YOUR motives. And I ask you once more, please do not respond to comments I place on the forum which are not addressed to you.
I have no idea where the name Shirly came from, urban legend has it that it came from the first edition of ‘Dreams’ but I don’t have thousands of dollars to throw away to find out of that’s true.
I have a question — is it possible we have (2) ann dunhams—a shirley ann dunham and a stanley ann dunham? see link and the +2 next to shirley ann— twin?
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=REG&db=gen32207&id=I40286
Good post, but wasted. The name of the new game around here is, ‘The nastiest poster wins’. Politeness and decency will get you nowhere...fast.
I would be confident in believing he has some photographs of it at least. I don't think this crew is comprehending the fact that this man WENT to that house and did research. He talked with the neighbors, he dug through archives, he took measurements, he interviewed people, searched records, and he has found the location where those photographs were taken, and he has discovered many more of them. He found a picture in the local newspaper showing Frank Davis sitting on the same couch with the same lamp and nightstand as are in the girlie photographs.
This is first level research. It is not speculation, it is getting to the bottom of things by direct examination of physical evidence. All of the rest of us are just poser wannabees, this man actually did the leg work to establish his proof.
Now you say Fred has persuaded you somewhat that those are not images of Stanley Ann. I ask you, if it is established beyond all reasonable doubt that the location of those photographs were the House of Frank Marshall Davis, what are the odds that he would just happen to know ANOTHER woman who is a dead ringer for Stanley Ann Dunham, right down to the same crooked front tooth? (upper left lateral incisor.)
The odds against such a thing are so high as to be preposterous.
Anything is possible — perhaps S Ann Dunham was in childhood a set of twins living as one identity — the Dunhams alternating which one they kept and which was away at a boarding school in Lebanon or wherever.
Earlobes and part of ears showing are exact. Upper lip is long in both these women. I am not convinced, but the similarity is obvious.
I don't know what your experience is with three dimensional graphic manipulation, but I have done quite a lot of work creating and manipulating three dimensional graphics and textures. I write code in C++ using Microsoft's DirectX graphical engine, and I also have experience in Autocad and 3Dstudio max. (And I also program in Assembly and Machine code.)
If you think you can accurately and easily match three dimensional vector points from different angles, you are fooling yourself. Pixel data does not give you dimensional information unless it is referenced by a Z-buffer.
While we are on this subject, I have seriously thought of creating a three dimensional representation of Stanley Ann's face and rotating it through the various angles to create a synthetic aperture composite of the three original images. It would result in a serious sharpening of the image because pixels would be created by the interpolation of the pixel data contained in all three images. Now that Gilberts has positively identified the Origin of the photographs, It is no longer worth putting so much work into such a thing. (Believe me, I have plenty of work on my plate currently.)
Looking at images of two noses taken from different angles does not tell you conclusively that they are different noses unless the differences are substantial. In this case they are not.
The real telling point is that both girls possess a crooked tooth in exactly the same location in their mouth. This is not extremely rare in and of itself, but when the two women look so much alike, and the location of the photographs has been conclusively established as the Davis residence, it becomes an exercise in extreme fact avoidance to overlook the obvious. The odds that they could be different women are just too unlikely to be taken seriously. Ergo, it is a virtual certainty that it is the same person.
Wifey was into young girls too.
W this post you made a convert. I have reserved judgment on this pics, and have said as much in past posts. But the two photos you posted, combined w what you explained of Gilberts’ researches and methods, won me over. I believe the pics are of SAD. Whether she slept w FDM, and whether that resulted in pregnancy, I have no idea. But she posed for him—of that much I am convinced.
B.S. There was an episode described by FMD in some sort of bio he wrote, that took place between himself and his FIRST WIFE AND A BLACK GIRL FROM JAMAICA.
And even then, he could have been stroking his own ego.
The odds of it being anyone other than SADO are very long in my opinion. What is the likelihood of two women who are identical in appearance, knowing Frank Davis around about 1960, and have a crooked tooth in the exact same spot?
Now as far as him being the father, just because he photographed her naked does not necessarily mean that he is the father. If the photos were taken in 1960, then it certainly makes it more likely, because this was just about the time she became pregnant.
If the photos were taken from 1962 to 1965, (also a possibility) then obviously they have no bearing on his paternity or lack thereof. I am assuming they were taken in 1960 based on the lack of discernible stretch marks or other evidence of child birth. This is, of course, not conclusive, because some women can give birth and not long thereafter show no visible signs of having done it, though many women do show signs of child birth.
But you are right, we don't have conclusive evidence of who the father is. I won't be surprised if it's either of them, or neither of them, though at the moment I am leaning towards Frank.
STANLEY ANN DUNHAM AND THE MODEL SIDE BY SIDE.
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.