Free Republic

Thanks.

Length?

That’s why I’m asking. I noticed before that freepers complain when someone excerpts from a blog. If someone copies and pastes the whole thing, that seems unfair to the writer; but I see your point about excerpting from your own blog. I’m relatively new and just trying to figure out the rules.

Is there anything new on this front? Bounel was in the “news” some time ago. Anything NEW?

Can someone explain the concept here? Is there a prohibition on excerpting blogs?

Thanks for the in-depth response. Would he have been “stateless” if his Indonesian citizenship was voided? Wouldn’t he still be a US citizen, provided he was born in Hawaii, which we don’t know for certain?

Ann took him off her passport, he got an Indonesian one, and he traveled to Hawaii where he met up with BHO, who then handled the paperwork to have him declared a Kenyan citizen. It’s confusing.

There are photos of Ann in Hawaii at Christmas time, when BHO was still there. Barry is in them, too. Both parents were there. She traveled on her US passport? Barry on his Indonesian one? Then what?

They gave guardianship to her parents who perhaps adopted him? That would seal the original birth records and even if it was later put back the way he wants us to believe it originally read, Hawaiian laws state that all amendments have to be listed on any certified copies.

Whatever happened, that’s probably what they’re hiding. What was it they say about Watergate? It’s not the crime, it’s the coverup? They’ve dug a deep hole now.

So what if this was legal and done to transfer him from a dangerous situation (which sounds like obot rationalization. Sorry.) I don’t believe that because they took him there precisely when it was dangerous. By the time he came back, things had settled down, I believe.

But he lied about it, which is the big problem. He ought to have explained it from the beginning, if it was on the up and up. Why instead send Lakin to prison?

I’m interested in your theory about Obama I making Obama II “100% Kenyan” in 1971, especially after the revelation of the publisher’s biography that said Obama II was born in Kenya. Now there’s another item that suggests he was born in Kenya, or at least that he pretended that was true as late as 1990. http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/obamas-tessellated-pattern-of-reality-more-from-the-1990-harvard-law-revue/#more-15932 A Harvard publication said Obama is an “African African-American”.

Is your theory that he was a U.S. citizen through his mother and a Kenyan citizen, too, through his father’s intervention in 1971? Or do you believe his mother gave up her U.S. citizenship and so couldn’t reinstate his U.S. citizenship? This is really confusing. Why did she have to take him off of her passport? I’ve never understood that part of it.

At Harvard he could have been a dual citizen, if he didn’t let that Kenyan citizenship expire shortly after he reached the age of majority.

Didn’t his campaign say in 2008 that he was born a British subject who automatically acquired Kenyan citizenship, when Kenya became independent? If he didn’t do anything to keep the Kenyan citizenship, then it expired. His campaign said that it did, but we can’t believe anything they say.

How does that fit into the theory that he became 100% Kenyan in 1971?

Do you believe that he attended Punahou as a permanent resident and a citizen only of Kenya? Maybe that’s how he was able to attend those expensive schools, right up through Harvard Law, with foreign student scholarships or grants.

I’m interested in your theory about Obama I making Obama II “100% Kenyan” in 1971, especially after the revelation of the publisher’s biography that said Obama II was born in Kenya. Now there’s another item that suggests he was born in Kenya, or at least that he pretended that was true as late as 1990. http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/obamas-tessellated-pattern-of-reality-more-from-the-1990-harvard-law-revue/#more-15932 A Harvard publication said Obama is an “African African-American”.

Is your theory that he was a U.S. citizen through his mother and a Kenyan citizen, too, through his father’s intervention in 1971? Or do you believe his mother gave up her U.S. citizenship and so couldn’t reinstate his U.S. citizenship? This is really confusing. Why did she have to take him off of her passport? I’ve never understood that part of it.

At Harvard he could have been a dual citizen, if he didn’t let that Kenyan citizenship expire shortly after he reached the age of majority.

Didn’t his campaign say in 2008 that he was born a British subject who automatically acquired Kenyan citizenship, when Kenya became independent? If he didn’t do anything to keep the Kenyan citizenship, then it expired. His campaign said that it did, but we can’t believe anything they say.

How does that fit into the theory that he became 100% Kenyan in 1971?

Do you believe that he attended Punahou as a permanent resident and a citizen only of Kenya? Maybe that’s how he was able to attend those expensive schools, right up through Harvard Law, with foreign student scholarships or grants.

Sorry, but no way is St. Louis worse than Chicago. No way. The reason it looks that way in the lying statistics is that “St. Louis” is the inner city, with a population of about 300,000. The entire metropolitan St. Louis area is close to 3 million. The population of the independent city of St. Louis is about half black and half white. When you hear things like St. Louis is the most dangerous city in the USA, that’s because, unlike most cities, it doesn’t absorb its more peaceful and safer suburbs, which helps other cities to dilute their stats. It would be like using the Boston “combat zone” to represent the entire city of Boston. Most of the crime is in the northern half of the city of St. Louis. There are some cities/suburbs within the St. Louis metro area that have far worse crime rates.

Most readers won’t know that the wealthy cities of Clayton and Ladue are NOT “St. Louis” (They have crime, but mostly of the non-violent type). They’re in another county altogether, confusingly called “St. Louis County.”

The city of St. Louis is NOT within St. Louis County. In any case, what I saw on the news is that these tanks or military vehicles are going to be driven on the highways around north St. Louis. There’s been zero in the newspaper about it. I read on a blog that the National Guard post in St. Louis is only now getting these vehicles and the guys from MD are coming in to train the guys in MO how to drive them.

It’s worth a lot! Thanks. I thought that I remembered reading somewhere that Michelle admitted giving the notes to Ayers, but didn’t remember the source. Jodi Kantor’s book.

“They didn’t think a person could become president of the Harvard Law Review sans writing ability.”

Now that is a very astute comment. Thank you for the cogent explanation. It makes perfect sense. How were they to know that he wasn’t qualified for the job? They’re as guilty as the media, which also didn’t “vet” Obama.

So it was Bill Ayers to the rescue. Maybe the publisher even hooked them up, but it’s more likely that Obama knew Ayers from their days living in the same ‘hood in New York, when Obama was at Columbia and Ayers was at Bank Street College with Obama’s girlfriend Genevieve Cook.

What did they do with the money Obama got as an advance for the book he didn’t write? They blew it. He and Michelle spent months in Bali and they went to Kenya. He didn’t write the book he was paid to write. That was supposed to be about black/white relations. A book of essays. He ended up stuck. He couldn’t write it so he turned it into a book about himself. Michelle Obama is on record as saying that Ayers “helped” him write the book. Ayers himself admits that he wrote the book. Jack Cashill, of WND, did an exhaustive analysis that found probable cause to believe that Ayers wrote the book or at least heavily edited/rewrote it. This publisher gave him the advance because it’s a progressive company full of “progressives” and they help each other out. Obama, all his life, has been the beneficiary of progressive “help”. Has he ever held a REAL job? No. Did he ever achieve anything on merit and NOT because of his race? No. He was the first affirmative action editor of the Harvard Law Review. He hasn’t even fairly won any of his elections. He always needs a thumb on the scale.

I believe that when Fukino gave that interview, she no longer worked for the Dept. of Health, so anything she said was as a private citizen, giving her opinion, which she’s entitled to do and even be completely wrong with no danger of perjury.

It’s specious how she claimed, considering all the stonewalling they did with AZ Secretary of State Bennett, that she could simply decide that she herself had the authority to examine Obama’s birth records and then make a statement about what they contain, after they’ve gone on and on about how nobody can see them or even comment about them without Obama’s express permission. They also other times claimed that even Obama can’t see them or have them released. (But then he did exactly that!)

Tuchmann didn’t ask any of those pertinent questions because he was acting as a tool instead of as a reporter. He was doing a job but not the one he pretends to do. Why didn’t he question current employees of the Dept. of Health instead of someone who no longer could act or speak in any official capacity? We know, but the average viewer wouldn’t.

Stig Waidelich (and his mother) is just another person aiding and abetting the fantasy.

I apologize for the three posts! I don’t know how that happened.

Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?

Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.

It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.

Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?

Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.

It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.

Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?

Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.

It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.

Good point about the Bernstein signature “stamp”. Although I still can’t read the CNN version, it’s readily apparent that it’s not Obama’s, unless it proves he’s lying. Look at the date accepted. It’s not Aug. 8, 1961. The day looks like 21, not 8. Look at the doctor’s name. It’s not David A. Sinclair. But even if it were, on Obama’s so-called LFCOLB, the doctor’s name does not begin abutting the left side of the box; and the mother’s name does not read: Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, with “Stanley” in parentheses.

What do you make of this? http://www.scribd.com/doc/96289285/Mississippi-Democratic-Party-Motion-v-Taitz Scroll down to page 11 to see another letter of verification, sent to the Democrat Party of Mississippi; but this one claims to be signed by and initialed by Onaka and has an embossed seal. Is it real?

You have better eyes than I do. I believe you, but I can’t read it, although I can see that the names are too long to be his parents’ names. It isn’t his birth certificate, but CNN clearly says “this document” and they call it “the president’s computer-generated certificate.” I call that an outright LIE.

It is arrogance. That’s what’s astounding, in its own way. Why are they so confident? The fix is in? Surely they put it out to preempt Sheriff Arpaio’s next report. Some (like WND) say that the 1961-correct forgery is ready to go. Last year, CNN put out that video and the next day, the “long form” shows up. What’s next? The NEXT forgery but this time a paper document?

This is a retread of a CNN video from the day before they released the long-form birth certificate. In the original version, Tuchman showed the OLD short-form as the “computer generated” document and the narrator said it was made public 3 years ago. Now, a year along, they edited it and added in that fake-looking computer-generated long form copy that looks like the Nordyke versions, but which doesn’t have Obama’s data on it. And then the voice over lies and says it was made public 4 years ago. As usual, they blur the image so you can’t prove that it’s not his. But it’s not. Here’s a link to the YouTube video from last year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spvIlVppRts View it and save it before it’s scrubbed.