Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.
The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.
The perceived unreliability of the image has provoked petitions and widespread demands for Obama to submit for objective inspection the paper versions of the "birth certificate" he claimed in his book Dreams from My Father was in his possession, as well as the paper version of the Certificate of Live Birth for which the image on the Daily Kos and the Obama "Fight the Smears" website was supposedly generated.
Without a valid birth certificate, Obama cannot prove he fulfills the "natural born citizen" requirement of the Constitution, throwing into doubt his eligibility to run for President.
McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.
(Excerpt) Read more at web.israelinsider.com ...
We agree that he is a citizen, regardless of the location of his birth.
No, I don't think he is a citizen at all if he was born in Kenya. I remain skeptical about the operation of Sec. 1401 with respect to illegitimate children but even if RayCPA's analysis as set forth in Henry K. Chang's opinion is correct, I have heard from several divorce lawyers, one of whom is doing research to confirm his view, that any kind of marriage makes Obama legitimate and out of Sec. 1401, even one that does not comply with local law for other reasons.
In a Common Law jurisdiction, you can see the policy arguments that support that kind of rule.
We disagree re the boy in the two photos then. In the back of the airport photo to the left of the Dad’s head is what looks to me to be a 27” or bigger color terminal. That can help date the photo too.
Of course not. They get a star in the East. Weren't y'all watching?
The Chicago Tribune -Obama’s home town paper- says Neil Abercrombie says Barak and Stanley Ann were married.
That certainly proves it.
That is, if the monitor is a color — and that’s not obvious, the glowing screen image is blueish rather than grayish is the only clue I see — it makes the photo no earlier than 1972 at the very outside, and more likely 1973 or after.
I thought that BO, Sr was in his early 20s when he met Stanly Ann. He would have only been a early-mid teen when Malik was born if Malik was 10 in 1960.
Don't know the answer to that at the moment.
And another defect in the legend is that the boy in the airport doesn't look ten, he looks about 7--still some immature fat in his face. How old was Obama when his sister was born? Maybe that is part of the explanation for the couch picture which is being presented as Obama.
The site www.imdb.com/name/nm2138204 has this entry currently:
Maya Soetoro advertisement photos board add contact details
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview
Date of Birth:1 September 1971 more
Trivia:Half-sister of Barack Obama. They share the same mother, Ann Dunham.
The smoking gun. Maya has two birthdays. And birth places.
Life goes on, what can I say.
Does anyone yet know if the pictures of the Departure Lounge are the old Honolulu terminal or the new terminal. The new terminal was built in the sixties, between 1960 and 1970. So if these pictures were taken in the new terminal, both of them are in the 70's and Obama's simply mistaken about the picture of Ann being a "wedding picture". On the other hand, if both are taken in the old terminal, it fixes the pictures too early for the boy to be Obama and supports the "wedding picture" description and the version that has them in the departure lounge waiting to go to Kenya.
WOSG's point wasn't the current validity of the 1790 law, it was that the 1790 law provided a fairly accurate snapshot of the Founder's intent.
I submit that the 1790 law assumed that the off shore parent was a white male, and it was just to obvious for words to have to say so explicitly!
I have a friend who is trying to get out of a lesbian marriage.
Part of the problem (and what is making her lawyer rich) is you can't get a divorce if you aren't legally married. She was. Then the law changed and she retroactively wasn't, except she legally still is, even though she wasn't and was...
Gah! It's up thread. Let me get caught up and I'll see if I can find it.
Because Sec. 1409 only applies to out of US births--if he was born in Hawaii, he wins. He is both a citizen and eligible to serve as President.
Only reason Sec. 1409 is at issue is because of the assumption that he was born in Kenya.
Reason for the fake Birth Certificate is because there either isn't a real Birth Certificate available for a birth in Hawaii or alternatively a certificate of the data on file from August 8, 1961 will show information that casts doubt on the legend of Honolulu birth.
On this date in 1876, white supremacists kill five Black Republicans in Hamburg, SC.Democrats, like Marxists, kill to get their way.
Part of the problem (and what is making her lawyer rich) is you can't get a divorce if you aren't legally married. She was. Then the law changed and she retroactively wasn't, except she legally still is, even though she wasn't and was...
Off the cuff, not knowing what the facts are, that also reflects usual marriage law. The law tends to uphold the marriage as valid between the parties (until terminated by a legal proceeding) or between one of the parties and another person whose rights would be adversely affected by reliance on validity of a marriage which either didn't exist or is subject to some legal flaw.
FWIW, I don't think WOSG's tone is excessive. He (she?) is a passionate man, defending a passionately held belief.
It's not the language or tone I would take, but it is well within what I would regard as the limits of political discourse.
You if you, a lawyer ‘skilled in the art’ and with abundant time to dispassionately think it over, believe that a birth in Kenya would deny Barak American citizenship, what must Stanley Ann have thought?
Finding out her groom was already married must have been a bit of a shock...
We also know that US public records list her as being born on September 1, 1971.
Does the fact that the 1971 date is accessible through US public records mean that she has a US birth certificate? A US birth certificate existing for Maya who was born in Jakarta, Indonesia has to look like a strong possibility here. Otherwise why would she have two different birthdays.
Which day would they celebrate?
Must have been fun growing up in that household if they celebrated both. Maya would have gotten to have one birthday party on August 15th and then could have celebrated her birthday again on September 1st.
In her second birthday party in a month she would also get to say that she was a year younger than she had turned in her prior birthday party.
There are other women out there who would like to say that too.
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.