Posted on 10/13/2010 3:04:13 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
On consideration of the Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and Application for a Stay of Proceedings, the petition is DENIED.
(Excerpt) Read more at caaflog.com ...
I realize that I’m coming late to this discussion. About the “date stamps” looking different: We are talking about photocopies or scans of older objects, aren’t we?
If these are supposed to be true “date stamps” meaning somebody used one of those old stampers with the rolling numbers and an ink pad, then any two documents might look different depending upon the make and model and how many of each any particular office had. Those things did wear out over time, so documents produced at different times would not be expected to be exactly the same, with regard to the stamps. There’s also a problem with sample size. I look at all of those date stamps and see no particular differences among any of them.
“Why do Danae’s date stamps look so different?”
Do they?
If the answer is yes, then what are ALL possible explanations? What motivation would there be for THIS person, in particular, to fake her COLB, given that in this instance she’s proven that Obama’s people aren’t truthful when they say that nobody can get an original long-form anymore? Wouldn’t that be acting against interest?
Buckeye, I’m not addressing this to you in particular. Yours was just the comment that made me want to weigh in. I’m an old info-systems person, too. Old in both respects.
As someone who has owned SEVERAL malfunctioning laser printers, I can state that they do transfer print from one page to another, sometimes after they’re “dry”, sometimes sticking together at only one location. I can’t explain the chemistry of it, but it does happen.
Who hasn’t received in the mail papers that are sticking together because the “ink” wasn’t “dry” or somehow got “wet” again in transit?
It’s possible that the papers were sitting on a desk somewhere, waiting for somebody to put them into the envelope. It’s also possible that they were folded wrong, the address didn’t show through, so the folder took the pages out and bent the receipt to make that part show through the window. Isn’t it?
If one wants to conduct a scientific analysis, then first certain FACTS need to be known: What type of equipment was used to produce each and every document under analysis? What’s the point of arguing without the most basic of facts?
What’s the point of analyzing to this degree Danae’s most recent document? Who’s invested in proving it false? Why? Motivation is an important part of this analysis. Or is it all just distraction?
My opinion, not addressed to anyone in particular, just a general plea: I can understand pointing out things that SEEM to not make sense. I can’t understand personally attacking those with whom one disagrees. Ask for clarification. Questioning someone else’s integrity should be out of order, unless the person is OBVIOUSLY not debating honestly. El Sordo, imho, is a stand up guy, even if I don’t agree with him all the time, politically speaking.
I’m with butterdezillion: I’m getting tired of all the in-fighting and having to choose between fellow freepers and being forced to ponder who’s for real and who’s not. btw, I haven’t finished reading this entire thread yet, so bear with me if I say something others have said already.
The article that Niesse wrote, in which Okubo said they offer the 1961 birth index to anybody who wants it for $98,75 (and falsely said they hadn’t received any money yet, when my money was sitting in their office), was used to say that there aren’t many requests any more. They had to go back a week to be able to scrounge up 3 requests that were about Obama - and they were all 3 actually regarding the 1961 birth index and how to go about getting it.
You know what they told me about my request? They said their Vital Records Office was backed up on mail requests; had a 6-8-week backlog. Trouble is, they had sent me a mail response just 6 weeks earlier that they had responded to on the 9th business day after I requested it, so they were totally on schedule at that point. I told them that for them to be 6-8 weeks behind they had to do no work for 6 weeks’ time; Iquested to see all the disbursements for salaries within those 6 weeks so I could publish how much the State of Hawaii spent paying the Vital Records Office to do no work. lol.
It’s excuses, BT. That’s all they do. Excuses.
The birth index wouldn’t show anything about immigration. There’s no way to tell where any of those people came from or what kind of birth certificate they have.
It’s not that they’re protecting all index data; it’s that they are claiming all index data is about Obama - apparently revealing anything about any of the index data could potentially reveal something about Obama. Now how could that be?
And how could there be any problem with revealing what should be kept private, if all index data is public?
They’re being absolutely anal. The trouble, for them, is that to be anal you have to reveal your backside, and the public can easily see that these people are showing their own backsides in order to TRY to cover Obama’s. What they don’t know is it’s ALL hanging out - theirs and his.
The only reason there hasn’t been a legal investigation is because we don’t have the rule of law and the people have been castrated - rendered impotent.
No, but both my wife and my daughter-in-law were born overseas. Ive spent many, MANY hours dealing with immigration. I also know a number of military men who have married overseas.
You have very frequently brought up your wife, your children your father and your horses/dogs and now even your daughter-in-law on FR. I never, NEVER said any derogatory about your wife, and yes when bringing them into the discussion they also becomes fair games, which NOT the question here and has never been!
My remarks which was not more derogatory than when I remarked Miss Tickly's outburst as a possibly "Hormone Imbalance"!!
You being a fair game is my thoughts why you had to go to a lesser developed country to fine a soul-mate instead of linking to a wholesome American breed, which probably would NOT tolerate your tyranny. You still want to have flour in your mouth and blowing at the same time and you STILL want to control what other Friends are posting, things YOU don't like. A person willing to sell out his fellow soldier on the alter of keeping your dear usurper leader in office at any cost is something I detest together with most FReepers on this thread about Lt.Col. Lakin, which this thread is ALL about regardless your pitiful attempts to make diversions with all your Alinsky tactics. It's time for you to take off your "combat Knee-Pads" and act in the country's best interest. just remember the four words in read below the "POST" button!!!
But because of your family ties you probably have more than ONE allegiance, and in my former country we called them Quislings???
I suggest you do not make statements you cannot back up, ie STFU about things you know little or nothing about.
Each case is individual, and hiring a lawyer would be my first step if I had to repeat it. But for the issue of Obama Jrs citizenship, it is irrelevant. Obama Jr, if born in Hawaii, met the definition of NBC used by the courts. He most certainly met the definition of citizen by birth if born in Hawaii. In those circumstances, if his parents were not diplomats or members of an invading army, he was and is a citizen.
If born in Hawaii, meets YOUR definition of NBC and YOUR interpretation of court cases, not the commonly accepted one. Maybe you should get your family to post on FR, no one else seems to agree with you.
WOW, where is that a difference from what Lt.Col. Lakin is asking???
Please don't blow the flour out of your mouth at the same time!!!
Likely right. However as you said before, the clerks could have given access to limited query functions as in reports they could run to update their binders. The push the button report. As you said the clerks would not have access to change or add to the database using some query language.
Hawaii may also may be able to run a transaction history and have an audit trail that would show all changes to their databases. The audit trail would show which program, user, time and date of change, and what record was accessed or changed.
It would certainly seem to be against the spirit, if not the letter, of the law regarding disclosure of public records, to refuse to run a simple database query in response to a citizen’s request. SQL is not that hard to learn. They CAN do it; they just WON’T do it. It would take no time at all. I know it. They know it. OIP SHOULD know it, too.
You got to be very impressed by his “Typing” skills. The other day I saw him “publish” a post with several thousands words with less the four (4) minutes. Even in ultra-high speed Morse codes that would be impossible!!!
I agree.
:)What a wonderful story. She sounds like a very special person. God bless her.
LOL....Troll Tax!
“If born in Hawaii, meets YOUR definition of NBC and YOUR interpretation of court cases, not the commonly accepted one.”
The only court to formally issue a ruling on Obama’s eligibility is the one in Indiana, which wrote:
“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born Citizens for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf
No other court will even bother with the merits of the birther case, refusing to consider them since the people bringing the case have no ‘standing’. And those who do - the 50 states, each with a legislature, each with a DA, each with a SecState, 535 members of Congress, etc - reject your interpretation.
In fact, the American People, by a vote of 69 to 60 million, rejected your argument. Want to explain again why “no one else seems to agree with [me]”?
I have no idea what “Please don’t blow the flour out of your mouth at the same time!!!” means. Care to explain it?
People entering the military need to show their birth certificate. As a case decided recently points out (http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20CACO%2020101025033.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR), a Presidential candidate does not. FWIW, I fully supported an attempt in Arizona to require all future candidates to show proof of eligibility, but the legislature backed down at the last moment. I think they figured between 1070 & allowing unlicensed concealed carry, they had done enough for one month.
Iej könt nich bloazn en t mel in n moond hoaldn
Literally, you cannot blow and keep the flour in your mouth.
‘Bloazn’ also means ‘to brag’, so its real meaning is the same as “put your money where your mouth is”
Well put Buckeye! Hawaii is indeed covering its own arse. Obama knows it and is using it as leverage.
Here is a qwestion. Under UIPA laws and FOIA.... is the entire index database subject for release under those laws?
Forcing the release of THAT to a party capable of disseminating the information it contains..... Thats an interesting question no?
Interesting question. As a DBA, I would fight that release like holy hell. It gives the public insight into the structure on my database and thus compromises its security. I’m one of those uppity, control freak DBAs who won’t let people query the database unless they have a legitimate reason for doing so.
As a citizen wanting to see the data ... I say release it.
No, the whole database wouldn’t be subject to the provisions of those laws. But you could probably get them to release the index data they’re required to provide for every birth on record.
Wow .. denying actual American history.
Tick .. tick ... tick ...
~~~~~~~~~~~
"This 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel is of special importance to scholars of constitutional history and law, for it was read by many of the Founders of the United States of America, and informed their understanding of the principles of law which became established in the Constitution of 1787.
Chitty's notes and the appended commentaries by Edward D. Ingraham, used in lectures at William and Mary College, provide a valuable perspective on Vattel's exposition from the viewpoint of American jurists who had adapted those principles to the American legal experience."
____________
'Samuel Adams in 1772 wrote, Vattel tells us plainly and without hesitation, that `the supreme legislative cannot change the constitution. Then in 1773 during a debate with the Colonial Governor of Massachusetts, John Adams quoted Vattel that the parliament does not have the power to change the constitution.
John Adams as so taken by the clear logic of Vattel that he wrote in his diary, "The Idea of M. de Vattel indeed, scowling and frowning, haunted me. These arguments were what inspired the clause that dictates how the Constitution is amended. The Framers left no doubt as to who had the right to amend the constitution, the Nation, (that is the individual States and the people) or Legislature (which is the federal government.)"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Character for life: an American heritage : profiles of great men and women ... By Don Hawkinson
This the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on and on ... This is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on and on ...
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.