Welcome

The old Welcome page, with comments included, can be seen here.

Quick links:

  •  “What Do You See?” Still images from it.
  • Annotated images addressing pants/shoe explanation and showing cylinders, etc in water.
  • “What Do You See? Part Two”   Still images from it. Full sequence of Kawasaki underwater images.
  • Youtube of my 2-hour appearance on “Hagmann & Hagmann”, giving more context. My segment starts at about 1:12:00.
  • ABC’s deliberately-pixelated version of the “Good Morning America” segment.
  • ABC’s deliberately-pixelated version of the “Nightline” segment.
  • Free download of Windows Movie Maker which allows you to slow down the frames.
  • Maui County Fire Department’s Incident Report. Corrected version: MCFD Incident Report Corrected (key information: Crash reported to MCFD at 3:37pm, MCFD observers reported seeing several who had swum to shore, MCFD helicopter arrived on-scene at 4:30pm, Coast Guard helicopters reported as on-scene at 4:44pm. MCFD picked 5 from water; USCG picked 3 from water. At 5:19pm USCG had one in critical condition on helicopter. All CAD communications after that left out of report. MCFD transported 2 to topside Molokai at 5:50 for American Medical Services transport to Molokai General Hospital. Maui Medivac transported 1 to topside Molokai for AMS transport to MGH. All units but Chief Akaka’s dismissed while Maui Medivac went back to pick up 1 dead and transport to topside airport where met by Akaka and the 3 men in his unit, who moved the deceased from helicopter to the undertaker’s vehicle for transport.
  • NTSB Preliminary Report
  • FAA Incident Report
  • Here are some of the major images (click to enlarge) – all taken even before Puentes decided to try to swim to shore.( USCG swimmers wear bright orange) :

newfud92j

Image #17

Image #17

 

2h

Image ZR

Image ZR

Image ZZD

Image ZZD

16-40-13 ANNOTATED

Image I

Image I

 

Image ZB

Image ZB

 

Welcome to my blog. This post will serve as an index post to direct you to more information as I’m able to put it together.

On Dec 11, 2013 the Cessna carrying HI Health Director Loretta Fuddy made a water landing in the ocean off Kalaupapa, HI. It was said the plane had experienced catastrophic engine failure, and eventually it was said that all the souls on board had made it out safely but Fuddy died of cardiac arrhythmia in the water afterwards, as she floated in her life jacket holding the hand of her assistant director, Keith Yamamoto.  About a month after the crash, ABC came out with a highly-edited video taken by one of the passengers on-board, Ferdinand Puentes. That video was supposed to silence all the “crazy conspiracy” talk about what happened to Fuddy that day. Unfortunately, the video footage itself raises VERY serious questions, when the frames are slowed to a speed where what is there can be plainly seen. The news accounts, NTSB Preliminary Report , the Maui County Fire Department incident report (MCFD Incident Report Corrected ), and an FAA Incident Report all refer to there being 9 people on board, including pilot Clyde Kawasaki. The flight took off at about 3:25 pm HST and crashed at 3:27, according to the FAA Report.

Pilot Josh Lang said he and his girlfriend were flying to Maui and called the Molokai Tower, which asked if he heard an Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) in the area. They heard it faintly so flew around and quickly found the plane in the water and reported it to the tower, which received the report at 3:37, according to the MCFD Incident Report. Lang then flew back to the Kalaupapa airport to get help but on seeing nobody there went back to the crash site and made low passes over the victims to assure them that help would be coming. He said a navy helicopter showed up at about 4:30, after which he left the area to get out of the way By the time he left, he saw that one had made it to shore so there were 8 left in the water. (Hollstein estimated that it took him 90 minutes to get to shore, but Lang’s claims suggest an hour IF he left by about 3:30pm)   Six days after the crash and the same day that Kawasaki said he would have a press conference the next day, Lang’s alleged photos of the downed plane were made public.

But Mark Miller, the DOH Administrator for Kalaupapa (which was a leper colony totally under the control of the DOH) said that a navy plane doing “touch-and-goes” at the Kalaupapa Airport first reported the crash. An FAA investigation has the crash occurring at 3:27pm, which is the same time as the USCG says they received report of the crash. That is before Lang was in the area so it could not have been Lang. So there were two reports made – one by Lang to the Molokai Tower  at about 3:37 which alerted the 911 system, and one immediately at the time of the crash, at 3:27, made to the USCG by someone as yet unknown. Miller says it was a navy aircraft. Makani Kai owner Richard Schuman initially said he didn’t know if Kawasaki had made any Mayday calls and it couldn’t be known if any of the passengers did because the reception is bad in that area. According to the LA Times, “officials” said Kawasaki did not make any mayday call. The context suggests it is NTSB officials, who would have had access to radio logs. Later Kawasaki said he did make a mayday call. In any event Miller has a navy plane in the area when the crash occurred, able to report the crash to the USCG right when it happened, and Lang has that navy aircraft gone by the time he found the crash about 5 minutes later – but showing up at 4:30, with USCG pilots saying the Seahawk (of which we have photos) dropped smoke floats to show the location of 2 groups of people in the water. One float must have been right where Fuddy was, because she was the first person the USCG rescue swimmer came to.

The Maui County Fire Department’s helicopter arrived on-scene at about 4:30pm, according to their Incident Report, and saw and picked from the water 5 victims. The Coast Guard, according to the report they gave the media, was informed of the crash at 3:27pm and sent 2 helicopters and a bigger plane to aid in the rescue,. According to the MCFD’s incident report those were confirmed as being on-scene at the crash at 4:44 – 78 minutes later. USCG rescue swimmer PJ Ornott told the press that he saw Fuddy first but because she was unresponsive the protocols said he had to go on to somebody else. He picked out of the water a 73-year-old woman and a man with a clear bump on his head (presumably pilot Kawasaki, who had a cut on his head). Mark Peer, in the 2nd USCG helicopter to arrive said he first rescued a 70-ish-year-old man who was happy to see him and then came upon Fuddy, who had no heartbeat so he called to have her lifted from the water. The rescuers said the hardest part of the rescue was keeping the aircraft from hitting each other, as there were at least 6 in the air at a time during the rescue. (2 USCG helicopters, one USCG plane, 1 MCFD helicopter, a Navy Seahawk, and what else?)

But the official reports contradict each other. Not just the “fog-of-war” preliminary reports, but reports to the media after the rescuers were supposed to have given a written report of each victim they dealt with. The number and condition of the victims, who transported them, and where, and even whether Fuddy was trapped in the fuselage or not, were contradictions in the reports given by official information officers of the rescue crews in the days following the crash.

And what appears in Puentes’ video calls into serious question who was really there in those first few minutes after the plane crashed.  There were only supposed to be 9 people, all taken by surprise when the plane went down, the darkest-skinned among them being Puentes. The “Good Morning America” video can be downloaded at http://ondemand.abcnews.com/playback/abcnews/140110_gma_crash_0731_700.mp4 (corrected link). The “Nightline” video can be downloaded at http://ondemand.abcnews.com/playback/abcnews/140111_ntl_mayday_1240_700.mp4 (corrected link) At  http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/part-two-images/ I give instructions for how anybody can slow down the video so they can see clearly, as I was able to do. The files were pixelated by ABC the same day as I asked my Free Republic ping list to save the files for me before they disappeared, but I had fortunately made Bandicam recordings of the  mp4’s playing on my son’s computer screen before they were pixelated.

On my first youtube video, at www.tinyurl.com/fuddy1  , I made a bandicam recording of my screen while I downloaded the “GMA”  mp4 file directly off the ABC website, imported the file into Windows Movie Maker, slowed down the frames, and showed a slowed-down clip from GMA. I took a screenshot of one of the frames, imported it into Paint and saved it, then opened that image in Microsoft Picture Manager where I could brighten it up for everybody to see clearly what was there. In this way I showed that these images are authentic and that ABC is the source.  I encourage everybody to do the same thing I did, so you can see the images in full context. I posted on that youtube video still images for people to look at, and I also posted the still images at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/extras/ ,

Some said they believed that the shiny black was Fuddy’s black pants bubbling in the water, and the yellow the sole of her shoe, so I posted some more images, annotated with questions, at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/some-more-images/ .

Eventually I posted another youtube video, showing more footage – this time under the water – at www.tinyurl.com/fuddy2 . That segment shows the editing done by ABC to duck away from images they didn’t want seen – including one brief glimpse of Yamamoto, Rosa, and Jacob all watching while something apparently between a black-dressed figure and a white-dressed figure was happening at the location of Fuddy’s yellow life jacket. The still shots from that video are posted at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/part-two-images/ It’s difficult to discern the timeframe of what transpired because ABC chopped up the video so much, but at the time that the black/yellow shape appears close to Fuddy, in the first youtube video, a male voice (probably Puentes, who had a microphone clipped to his life jacket) shouted to everyone to “Head for shore!”.

When someone accused me of copying a frame twice to deceive everyone I posted the full sequence of uncropped, raw screenshots of Kawasaki and somebody with muscular dark arms underwater, including the Windows Movie Maker timestanps, at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/03/08/kawasaki-underwater-images/ .

There is much more to come.

Now I’ll just post a series of bullet points, which will be used as an index, to link to later posts that will flesh out and document these points.

A. The Cessna 208B has a very, very reliable engine. The number of commerical-aircraft NTSB investigations  which showed engine failure – in the nearly 30 years since the plane was first produced in the mid19-80’s –  was 2. Both related to flight and/or fuel conditions that were not present in this engine failure OR the engine failure off Maui on Oct 22, 2013. IOW, within 50 days and less than 25 miles of each other, there were 2 catastrophic engine failures on commercial planes using an engine that had only experienced 2 in commercial planes in a 30-year history. The first engine failure occurred 3 days after Doug Vogt named Loretta Fuddy as a defendant in a lawsuit, and right around the same time as it was publicly noted that AZ  Sheriff Joe Arpaio would be coming forward with “universe-shattering” information regarding criminal investigations spawned from the original investigation which concluded that the long-form birth certificate Obama presented at a White House press conference is confirmed to be a forgery.

B. The National Transportation Safety Board, in incidents where (among other things) there are sparks and/or fatalities associated, is required to treat the wreckage as a crime scene. Yet in both the Oct 22 engine failure off Maui and the Dec 11 engine failure off Kalaupapa, the NTSB allowed the air company access to the wreckage, potentially contaminating it. In the case of the Fuddy crash, NTSB sppokesman Eric Weiss immediately said that the plane was unrecoverable. Richard Schumann, owner of Makani Kai, located the plane and arranged to have it lifted from the water. A week after going down fully intact to a depth of 60-70 feet, according to the salvage crew, the plane was lifted in tatters, with the engine totally separated from the rest of the fuselage. (It should be noted that the photo of the wreckage that appears in WND’s screencap of a KHON2 broadcast shows a broken propeller and the cowling around the engine broken but that contradicts Puentes’ underwater image, so KHON2 apparently used footage from a different Cessna crash in their report of this crash. The damage in the image they used seems similar to the damage implied by Josh Lang’s close-up photo – see K for more about that image.)

C. As I noted earlier, the other passengers watched while all this extra stuff went on in the water. What needs to be known is that nobody could even BE at Kalaupapa without the approval of the  HI Department of Health. Kalaupapa was a leper colony administered by a DOH administrator who is the benevolent “papa” for the whole community. If they want their refrigerators replaced, the DOH takes care of it. If they need a roof fixed, the DOH administrator negotiates and awards the contracts.  The last patients are dying off and when the last is gone the property will be turned over to the National Park Service. Rosa Key is the National Park Service official who is dealing with that transition. She was there in Kalaupapa that day because Fuddy and her assistant were meeting with the residents of Kalaupapa and Rosa needs to handle the community expectations during and after the transition. Tourists have to get approval from the DOH before they can come onto Kalaupapa, and the only ways to get there are a mule trail over the mountains from topside Molokai or by plane. Of the people on that plane, EVERY ONE of them owed their presence there to the DOH, and everybody but the 2 tourists also owed some of their livelihood to the DOH. There were no hostile witnesses.

D. Moreover, the people from Kalaupapa who were witnesses also viewed Fuddy as “family”. The priest gave “conditional last rites” because she could have been dead for two hours. Mark Miller claimed that by 4:30 they had all the people out of the water and Fuddy and another guy were in the USCG helicopter, with the guy being fine but Fuddy not making it. The MCFD incident report (at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/03/05/mcfd-incident-report/ has  the MCFD arriving at 4:30, and the USCG only reported as being on-scene at 4:44 – four minutes AFTER the media reported that one was dead (See here) . The incident report also says that the USCG had one critical in their helicopter at 5:21. If that was Fuddy, then the stories of her being dead in the water are all false. If it was not Fuddy then who was it, when the worst injury reported by the NTSB’s preliminary report was Kawasaki’s injuries? Loretta Fuddy’s step-sister is a chaplain with the Maui County Police Department. Fuddy is/was single but her sister-in-law’s husband, Scotty Schaeffer, is an EMT with American Medical Response, which does EMS services for Molokai General Hospital. The media reported one death before the MCFD primary information officer, Lt William Juan, even knew how many had been pulled from the water – much less their condition. One of the people keeping the media abreast of the situation in the crash piloted by Clyde Kawasaki was Richard Kawasaki…

E.. USCG rescue swimmer PJ Ornott said that when he found Fuddy unresponsive, protocols meant he had to pass over her to go to the others. In reality, the USCG rescue protocol was just within the last year or so changed to allow ANY injured person to be passed over, and the protocol stipulates that it is only allowable when the victim has head, heart, lungs, or liver separated from the rest of their body, shows rigor mortis (stiffening that sets in 2 hours after death at room temperature), or has lividity (pooling of blood in the lowest part of the body, which also sets in at 2 hours after death at room temperature). I have been trying to get the USCG records, but my request, which is over 2 months old now, has been bounced from DC to HI and back, with nobody returning my calls or emails.

F. The USCG has a 5-minute stand-by time to be in the air when an incident is reported, and it’s a 35-minute flight from Honolulu in those helicopters. They should have been there within 45 minutes, not 80.

G. C. Philip Holstein said it took him about an hour to swim to shore and he arrived on shore before rescuers arrived to the area. He said he started swimming for help as soon as he knew everybody was out and doing OK, and according to the times he said that must have been true. In considering who is who in the video, bear in mind that Holstein was there only a short time.

H. Makani Kai was the airline company whose plane crashed. It is own by Richard Schumann. Schumann had put his rival out of business and bought out some of the planes, when Schumann was given a federal subsidey that allowed him to offer much cheaper flights.  Makani Kai is the only air company doing flights in and out of Kalaupapa. In late October of 2013 the federal DOT charged Schumann with 26 violations of his airport license, each violation  costing up to $11,000 in fines. This was right at the same time as Schumann was preparing his bid for a re-compete on the Essential Air Services subsidy which was  supposed to be decided by about 2 months later, in January. Schumann is a democrat who ran for state office, and the DOH administrator publicly supported him in the EAS bid after this crash. Since the crash he has gotten a 5-month extension on the EAS contract while the DOT “evaluates” those who submitted a bid.

I. Clyde Kawasaki was said to have worked full-time for Makani Kai for a year (or two, depending on the article) prior to this crash. But Kawasaki has never been listed as a pilot on their pilots’ page, even though those pages have been updated at least twice during that timeframe, and one pilots’ page was created at the beginning of December, right before the Dec 11th crash. Kawasaki’s LinkedIn page shows him as currently being a pilot for Makani Kai AND for another airline until mid-2014. The FAA Incident Report has him with only enough flight hours on the Cessna 208B for him to have been full-time since June of 2013.

J. Josh Lang, the guy who coincidentally happened to be flying in the area at that precise time, is not your average joe. He graduated from Albert Einstein High School in an area that is rumored to be a bedroom community to DC for NSA families. And his facebook friends show connections that are not “average” – including being friended by

1. Erin Billings, who works for the Podesta Group and headed up its coverage of Obama’s 2008 campaign. Look up a bio of Erin Billings and John Podesta and see how connected this is to Obama.

2. Keith Langley, who has had IT contracts with DHS, Veterans Affairs, and investigations of major banks in bankruptcy.

3. Philippe Furstenburg, who heads up the security details for the Department of State.

4. Tim Conner, who is a contractor for the State Department.

5. Sean Conner, whose girlfriend works at the White House so that she and Sean had their photo taken with Barack and Michelle at the 2013 White House Christmas Party.

There are others too, but you may get the point from just these: Lang is closely connected to the Obama political/bureaucratic machine. For him to just happen to be there at the time is a MIGHTY coincidence indeed. He also does aerial videotaping for movies (giving him access to stunt pilots, etc)  and contract flying for the US government.

K. Lang posted distant photos of a plane in the water off the shore of Kalaupapa, but his photo that shows the plane closely enough to allow analysis of the plane shows signs of photoshopping, including: a lip above the windows where the Puentes plane doesn’t have any, one bump rather than 2 on the roof of the plane, the one bump showing being misplaced for EITHER bump on the Puentes plane as well as crooked to the rest of the plane, “turbulence” that seeps into the strobe light on the plane’s right tailpiece, blurring of the ocean’s colors around the contours of the Lang plane, and a door shadow on its roof that could not happen with the angles on that image.  An image showing the anomalies is at ,http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/a-closer-look-at-langs-photos/  and  the experiment I did showing the shadow anomalous is at   http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/03/02/skip/   Why photoshop a close-up of the plane if the plane you photographed from a distance was the plane in the Fuddy crash, as you claimed publicly? The distant photos show no sign of anybody or anything. No people. No Navy Seahawk that DOH Administrator Mark Miller said was doing touch-and-goes at the airport…

L. Mark Miller said that there was a navy plane doing “touch-and-goes” at the Kalaupapa runway, and that it was good luck that the navy pilot saw the crash and reported it. Presumably he would say that because he saw it going down close to the ground and coming back up.The navy did do practice landings at the Kalaupapa Airport, and had just been denied permission to drastically increase the number of those exercises, so Miller knew what navy aircraft looked like. Lang’s plane is small and has a grinning shark emblem on it – nothing like a navy aircraft.  But Lang said there was nobody there at the airport. Miller is the only source who mentioned “touch—and-goes” but other sources mentioned a navy aircraft dropping smoke flares so that the rescue crews could find the victims. None of the reports said why the navy had an aircraft there, or when it got there.  We know it WAS there because there is a photo of it over the water and another photo of it over the land. Lang’s photos would have us believe there was nobody around, anywhere. But then, Lang’s photos are photoshopped… It is reasonable to suggest that the touch-and-goes that Mark Miller mentioned was actually the Seahawk going close to the water and back up, which is how the Seahawk would do one of its intended functions – telecasting people to and from the ground/water. Maybe THAT’s how some of the extra stuff got in the water. And maybe that’s why Lang needed to photoshop his photos.

M. Ferdinand Puentes had 2 Go Pro cameras and a waterproof microphone with him on this flight. He said he took video of the takeoff and had just turned off his camera (on a stick – not the most convenient for videotaping inside a cabin) when the engine had problems and he turned his camera back on. His footage shows the passengers looking calmly about when the plane’s warning horn (probably stall warning) went off and the passengers then started to  act concerned. Puentes at one point in the cabin covered the camera with his hand making a dark frame. Throughout ABC’s editing dark frames are  used to transition from one part of the video to another. Puentes could easily have covered the camera lens while extra people exited the plane first, and then edited out those dark  frames later. There does appear to be some time missing from the cabin portion of the video because the ABC announcer notes that all the passengers were out of the plane within 2 minutes of the crash – but the footage shows the plane had sunk into the water to the depth of the door’s opening by the time the first passengers exited. The  fuel tanks were likely not full and would have acted as floats like a pontoon, so it would have taken some time for the water to reach the level of the door opening.

N. The MCFD incident report refers to a few people swimming ashore, and at one point somebody typed into the CAD narrative their belief that some who had swum to shore weren’t from the plane – apparently because the numbers weren’t adding up. Once you’ve seen ALL of the video, you may begin to understand the problems they had, accounting for the numbers. It also may help explain why, at the time that the black and yellow appeared close to Fuddy’s life jacket, Puentes told everybody it was time to head to shore… It may also explain the woman and the man that Puentes shows closer to shore than he himself. The man could be Holstein who swam to shore, but who could the woman be – given that Fuddy was found farther OUT to sea?

O. Maui County (including Maui, Molokai, and Lanai) has no coroner. The police chief acts as coroner. The day after the crash the information officer for the Maui County Police Dept, Lt. William Juan, reported to the press that Loretta Fuddy had been retrieved from the wreckage. This is not somebody uninvolved. This is the official spokesperson for the coroner, who is supposed to have the reports from the original witnesses.

P. The NTSB and Police Department took turns telling the media that the autopsy was the other’s responsibility. Nobody wanted to claim responsibility for it.

Q. While the Maui County Police Chief was acting as coroner, trying to come up with a Cause of Death (COD) for Fuddy, Michelle Obama suddenly decided she wanted to stay in Maui with Oprah, rather than go back to DC with her family. Joining the happy party were Valerie Jarrett (the woman who said all who opposed them would pay) and the wife of Eric Holder (the guy who never misses a chance for a political prosecution). The locals complained because the area was so congested because the Maui County Police Dept constantly had people around there, doing security for these gals. Michelle Obama left it a mystery as to when she would leave, but the day after the Police Chief ruled that the COD was “cardiac arrhythmia”, it was made known that she would be going back to DC within a couple days.

R. “Cardiac arrhythmia” cannot be positively diagnosed after death, and according to Fuddy’s brother, Louis, there was no medical history to substantiate such a diagnosis. What that COD tells us is that they couldn’t find any other reason for her death. She did not have a heart attack, or they would have said that the heart attack enzymes were present. “Cardiac arrhythmia” is an admission that they have no idea why she died because there’s no specific evidence to support any cause of death.

S. Fuddy’s role in Obama’s birth certificate controversy was much more critical than simply looking at a piece of paper and saying what she saw. I’ve written on this extensively here, and you can read about it in detail at the “Putting it All Together Series”, Part One,  Part Two,  Part Three,  Part Four,  and Part Five . I’ve held off on posting Part Six, to protect potential witnesses. To summarize, when Neil Abercrombie was elected governor of HI in 2010 he pledged to produce Obama’s long-form BC because it was looking like Arizona would pass a law requiring a long-form BC for placement on the 2012 presidential ballot. When a Star-Advertiser columnist asked how it was going he said there was something “actually written down” – a very curious answer, so Abercrombie’s friend, Mike Evans, called him up and asked him what the deal was. Abercrombie told him – and he reported on his “Hollywood News” blurbs to multiple radio stations – that his investigation was showing there was no BC for Obama, nothing to prove he was born in HI. Mike Evans later retracted that claim by saying he never claimed to have spoken to Abercrombie, but the transcripts show otherwise. The day after that story broke big, Abercrombie forced his own choice for HDOH Director, Neal Palafox, to resign – but tried to hide it. When Palafox was asked why he resigned, he said he had no idea. HDOH communications director Janice Okubo jumped in to say it was for personal reasons but he wouldn’t play along with that, even amid rumors from the HI AG’s office that Palafox had a mighty fine medical practice and there “might” be a Medicaid fraud investigation in the works…

So Fuddy replaced Palafox. The long and the short of it is that it had already been revealed that Obama’s BC# is anomalous. Okubo had reported that BC#’s were assigned by the state registrar’s office on the day that office received them. Obama’s BC was received 3 days before the Nordyke twins’ BC’s but received a BC# 3 later than theirs. By February, a World Net Daily source within the HDOH said a fake long-form was ready but the problem was the BC#. They had to use the BC# that Obama had put on his forged COLB but somehow they had to make it seem like their BC#’s are issued randomly.

And that is  where Fuddy is the CRITICAL piece – willing to do what Palafox apparently wasn’t willing to do – because sometime between March 15th, when at least one long-form was issued (and a year or so earlier a colleague of mine had videotaped a woman at the HDOH office ordering her long-form and being told she’d get it in 2 weeks, no special procedures necessary…) and the end of March, Fuddy changed the request form for BC’s so there was no way to request a long-form (standard) BC. The narrative then began that this had been a years-long policy – even claimed by Bob Bauer at the White House press conference that it had been the policy since the 1980’s, when we have proof that it was instituted LESS THAN A MONTH before Obama’s long-form was made public – instituted by Loretta Fuddy after Neal Palafox had been canned for no reason.

But ultimately the way it’s claimed that they can have this policy without violating UIPA and the Vital Records Statute is by saying that statute ALLOWS the health director to determine what the means for copying certified copies shall be.  And Fuddy says nobody can see anything except an easily-manipulable computer ABSTRACT.  It all falls on her, because if she had obeyed the law, people could request their long-form birth certificates and see how the numbering really was done in 1963. Instead, her office put out BC#’s that made no sense by ANY numbering method – first on Stig Waidelich’s short-form BC which was shown on CNN 2 days before Obama’s long-form was released. Then, when it was noted how easily the BC# could be faked on a computer printout, BC#’s were manipulated on “long-form” documents – first Virginia Sunahara’s death certificate, which has about 5 BLATANT anomalies just on the first line, and then on a long-form BC that they faked as an earlier certified copy (but they botched up Onaka’s signature and the BC# stamp which had 2 digits overlapping – an impossibility with a Bates stamp).

Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio has said all along that the way to know what happened is by looking at the paper documents, the computer transaction logs, and especially the MICROFILM ROLLS FROM1961. That was exactly what Fuddy wanted to keep them from having to forge, because it would be very difficult to forge all those records – because a person could look in other months to determine the numbering method, etc. If those records are subpoenaed in a federal investigation, it is all over for Fuddy and all over for Obama.

With Sheriff Joe closing in on what may be federal crimes that demand Congressional investigation and a special prosecutor, there seemed to be no “out” for either Fuddy or Obama…

And THAT was when this crash happened.

It’s time for the American public to ask – and answer – the question, “What do you see?”

559 Comments

  1. SUSANM
    Posted February 25, 2011 at 5:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    THERE MUST BE SOMEONE WHO WILL PROTECT ”AMERICA”..WE NEED THE TRUTH, NOW! AS ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW IF OBAMA IS LEGAL OR ILLEGAL….ITS IN THE CONSTITUTION? BUT THEN MAYBE OBAMA DESTROYED THAT PART?

    • Jayhg
      Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well it won’t be nutjob butterdezillion…..

    • ron veteran and patriot
      Posted May 21, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      i fear the only way we are going to get at the truth is with we the people taking up arms and doing mass arrests of every politician that has lied to cover up for Obama. its time to arrest every senator and congressman they are all lying to us and our lives and our future is at stake. i for one would rather die fighting to save my family and my nation from the treasonous scum that are in office now. they need to be arrested and held with out bond until we get at the truth. our government has turned on we the people now its time for we the people to turn on our corrupt employees. this goes for the corrupt media too. if they can’t tell us the truth with out injecting their unwanted opinions. America our lives and our futures are in danger its is now time to band together take up our guns and take back our nation. our lives our fortunes our sacred honor we pledge to one another. it is time to stop putting up with the corrupt both politician and media that are gutless cowards. we are Americans we do whats right. its time to fight and let them do the dieing for their evil cause. its time we send them to hell.

      • Posted May 24, 2012 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

        The time may well come when the 2nd amendment is our only protection. The way things are looking for Obama in the election, he may have to draw first blood so he can declare martial law and stop the election. We’ll see what happens, but I think it’s wise for people to be prepared for the worst. The first course of action is the elections; if the elections are allowed to happen and if people seriously realize what a vulnerable, lawless place this country is in, perhaps we can avert the immediate crisis and buy ourselves some more time in which to take the country back without bloodshed. If Soros/Obama think we’d be able to do that they would probably initiate bloodshed as an excuse to take full power through martial law. We mustn’t give them any excuse to do that.

  2. jd
    Posted March 7, 2011 at 7:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    There are several pictures of the scars on Obamas head, but when looking closer at the pictures, it seems as if his ears differ in various photos. This may sound strange, but could Obama have doubles? Everything about this man seems strange, but ears don’t change from day to day. Also, do you have any information about the scars?

    • Posted March 7, 2011 at 10:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Sorry; I don’t have any information about the scars.

      At this point, there is nothing that is impossible. That’s how it is when government agencies lie, which is why it is such a serious state we find ourselves in. Nothing can be counted on when the people telling the story are able to lie and break laws with impunity. It’s just one great big game of Balderdash. Our economy, law enforcement, Constitution, foreign affairs, the lives of our military…. it’s all just one great big high-stakes game of Balderdash – and that’s all it will EVER be until we get laws that allow we the peons to hold government officials accountable to the rule of law.

      • Tom
        Posted March 31, 2011 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

        jd, butterd, and all,
        This is the first I have seen of others asking the question about doubles. An original long form birth certificate would determine whether Obama is one of a pair of twins (or even a set of triplets). It may seem strange to our ears, but doubles for heads of state has a long history and a recent example (Saddam Hussein).

      • s
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

        hello, i feel its important to question events like these but are you not being somewhat reckless trying to suggest blurs on photos are something nefarious? i mean you cant seriously put up all these photos with blurred sections and then put an arrow to it going ‘whats that’? if we could answer what it was you wouldnt be asking, this bothers me as it will discredit any real attempt at investigating, maybe im lost in the volume of stuff you say about this but would it not be better to find one single damming and conclusive shot of something and use that instead of carpet bombing us with a whole load of nothing. maybe you have got too caught up in all this and if you took a step back and looked at what you put on this with a critical eye you might see what i mean, also to use peoples actions and statements while under stress to try and discredit them is unresponsible and reckless. i heard you on john b and found you quite genuine and passionate about truth but again after listening to you expecting bombshell evidence i was left confused and bewildered by some of your claims and what you consider as evidence, i aplaud what you do and wer on the same side but really have you something solid that if you could hold a press conference to the world and say one thing to make the world sit up and pay attention what would that be? 2 hours of circumstancial speculation and blurred images just doesnt cut it. please stand back and temporarily distance yourself from all this and with a fresh critical eye see if indeed you have become too emotionally attached and it has clouded your judgement, i wish you well in all your future endeavors

      • Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

        Thank you for your comments. What is frustrating is that I have clearer video but I can’t show it to the public because ABC would sue me if I did. When you see the clear images within the context of the whole video – the movement that was going on at the time – it makes a lot more sense.

        What I’ve found is that there is always another explanation for anything you bring forward. Divers have told me that there is no question that the guy in black and yellow is a diver with equipment. But there are people who are just sure it’s the sole of a shoe. I posted additional images so people could evaluate the shoe theory but nobody would. So then I showed the person underwater with white goggles and yellow scuba mask. So then the argument was that it was one of the other passengers – even though none of them was supposed to be expecting to be in the water. And I showed the guy with muscular arms, apparently some kind of rebreather on his chest, and a tube leading down to the rebreather. I got argument that the muscular dark-skinned arm was really Kawasaki’s arm. I showed the dark face in the water, with black eyewear – whose arm Jacob was holding onto. Nobody would address it.

        The images are not as clear as I would like, even with the unpixelated video I’ve got, but there is stuff there that cannot be debris or any of the 9 passengers who were supposed to be in the plane. But – as others have said – we could have video of Obama shooting handicapped children and their puppies in the head on the White House lawn, and people could still say there was nothing to see. I’m not saying that you’re doing that. You haven’t seen the unpixelated videos, because ABC won’t let you.

        And the official reports are so full of contradictions there is hardly one claim that I could tell you from those reports that isn’t contradicted by at least one other official report. Can’t have the final story on those until the remaining government entities stop obfuscating and actually keep their FOIA obligation. And the trouble with analyzing the reports is that it is detailed information and most people don’t have the patience for it. Which is probably why ABC thought they could make this problem go away by pixelating the videos. And it looks like they’re getting away with it because they have the money to sue me into bankruptcy if I make public the same thing they made public for a month before they found out somebody was actually looking at what was there.

        Anyway, thanks for your comments.

  3. lightyourcandle12
    Posted March 10, 2011 at 5:59 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butterdezillion, Hi, On the newspaper announcements of BO birth, another blog has done extensive work on the announcements.

    http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth/#comment-135

    This lady is good. She has gone to Library of Congress and gotten the newspaper off microfiche and you need to read her, if you haven’t. Maybe you already know about her.

    • Posted March 10, 2011 at 6:12 am | Permalink | Reply

      Ladysforest is the one who sent genuine copies to me, at her own expense. She is very thorough and has invested greatly in finding out the truth. She’s a gem, and the so-called “news media” could learn a lot just from watching how she conducts a real investigation. Ladysforest should get a Medal of Honor by the time this is all over.

  4. neconservative
    Posted March 10, 2011 at 10:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter,

    It was so very nice to briefly meet you folllowing today’s hearing, on LB654!! YOU DID FANTASTIC, and I kept thinking during your testimony, WOW, this woman knows her stuff!! God Bless You for ALL of your work. I spoke with the staffer after the hearing, and he didn’t think it had much of a chance this session, but might, moreso in the next. Gregg

    • Posted March 11, 2011 at 6:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I was hoping you’d make contact so I could know who you were. Thanks for your kind words. I did my best; that’s about all I can say. Looks like the testimony didn’t convince anybody who needed convincing, or at least not enough of them. I’d like to see how they each voted.

      I’m going to need to find out what networking I can do, to see about a ballot initiative. I know it requires signatures from all over the state, and the signing has to be observed by a signature gatherer so the project would involve finding people to try to get signatures from all over the state.

      Right now my computer only works in safe mode and at least some of my e-mails in and out are being intercepted so they’re not received even though the person who sent them thinks they have been received. That started up again in earnest a few days ago. It’s a way of isolating me. Psychological operations to make me feel alone and to keep me from being able to network with critical people.

      Like I said at the hearing, this is about the rule of law. The laws and rules being broken are beyond most people’s wildest imagination.

      If you (or anybody else who reads this) have any ideas for how I can network for a ballot initiative project, post here but tell me if you want the information private; if so I won’t approve it to post publicly. Also, let me know if you are willing to let me contact you by e-mail through a secure server, which is how I’m going to have to do things from now on, I think.

  5. ladysforest
    Posted March 11, 2011 at 3:34 am | Permalink | Reply

    You make me blush.

    You may want to see this though ;)

    http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/its-a-date

    Enjoy!

    • Posted March 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I love making people blush. lol. Just wish I could see it; I bet it looks really good on you. =)

  6. Carmen
    Posted March 12, 2011 at 12:12 am | Permalink | Reply

    NONE of the birther bills have survived. The latest is THe Nebraska bill which is doomed. My wife is a legislator there and says there’s no chance for success at all. Another one bites the dust…

    • Posted March 12, 2011 at 12:23 am | Permalink | Reply

      Is your wife supportive of the need for an eligibility bill? The more accurate of a sense I can get as to what we’re dealing with, the better I can know how to proceed. Would she be willing to converse with me privately about what the prevalent sentiments are and why, and maybe who might be good resources for me?

  7. Mary
    Posted March 12, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hey Butterbutt, I mean Nellie Ristvedt of Crete, thanks for testifying and providing your batshit crazy manifesto of hate, I mean your booklet, to the Nebraska Legislators.

    You really showed ‘em! Showed them that birfers are NUTZ!

    You single handedly killed the bill!

    Once again, THANKS!

    • Posted March 12, 2011 at 1:02 am | Permalink | Reply

      What a lovely comment, Mary. You’re certainly welcome. =)

    • neconservative
      Posted March 12, 2011 at 2:06 am | Permalink | Reply

      Again, the crazy liberal spews hate, and acuses others of it. No hate in the booklet Mary, just the facts-the truth sure makes the crazies angry.

  8. Mary
    Posted March 12, 2011 at 1:44 am | Permalink | Reply

    BTW, Butterbutt, a certified copy of an amended birth certificate is just as valid as an unamended one.

    Your fantasies about amended BCs are just as stupid as the rest of your screed.

    My son’s was amended TWICE and it was accepted without problems for DL, passport, jobs and school.

    I look forward to your utter dismay when President Obama is on every single ballot in 1012 with only having to submit a copy of his Hawaiian BC.

    And guess what? Hawaii DOH REVISED their BC again and it is now titled “Certificate of Live Birth”.

    Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

    • Posted March 12, 2011 at 2:24 am | Permalink | Reply

      Hawaii Revised Statute §338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence. The probative value of a “late” or “altered” certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]

      They are not prima facie evidence. They have no probative value on their own; the judicial or administrative person or body needs to see if the alteration calls the trustworthiness of the claims into question. Changing a name , misspelling, etc would not raise red flags. Other changes would, and the longer between the date of the birth and the amendment, the more problematic it is.

      At the bottom of the form for the Certification of Live Birth on the Factcheck image it says “ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE”.

      • neconservative
        Posted March 12, 2011 at 2:38 am | Permalink

        Never mud-wrestle with a pig, the pig likes it, and you just get muddy.

        Don’t bother crazies with facts. Facts mean nothing to them.

      • Posted March 12, 2011 at 3:20 am | Permalink

        lol. This farm girl hears ya.

        My trouble is I sometimes misjudge which ones will listen to facts and which won’t.

        The thing about the amended BC is that it has no probative value unless and until it is presented as evidence; then it might have probative value, depending on how fishy or un-fishy the amendment is. Right now there is not a process for Obama to present his BC as evidence, and without that he can’t know whether his claim of a Hawaii birth has any legal merit. If it was a non-fishy amendment then he should be THRILLED that these court cases gave him a chance to have it finally legally cleared up that the amended BC is legally probative and he could in good conscience say he was born in Hawaii, for instance.

        But the HDOH confirmed that he paid a fee to amend his BC in 2006. An amendment at 45 years of age doesn’t sound good at all. And the HDOH Administrative Rules say there isn’t a fee if it’s to correct an error or omission that is not the fault of the registrant or his/her parents. So it’s not likely to be something small, but something big, and that probably explains why he doesn’t WANT it presented as evidence so the probative value can be determined.

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 22, 2011 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

        But YOU DON’T HAVE ANY PROOF THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE WAS ALTERED OR AMENDED. You just do a lot of supposing and guessing and speculating and by the end of your fevered sentence structure, you’ve convinced yourself that VIOLA, it’s amended.

        Then you go all over the internet (well, mostly free republic) spouting that lie about Hawaii has confirmed INDIRECTLY that the birth certificate is amended. Notice that no one ask you for proof of this. It’s because they don’t want to embarass you. But I don’t care. TELL ME SPECIFICALLY WHERE HAWAII OFFICIALS SAID THAT THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS AMENDED. No deduction……I want actual words to that affect.

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 6:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      I look forward to your utter dismay when we bust his ass for forgery and treason!!! He’ll look good in an orange jumpsuit
      dont’ you think?

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

        If Obama wears orange, I’m positive that he’ll start a fashion trend – a LOT of people will be dressing exactly like him.

  9. thinkwell
    Posted March 14, 2011 at 5:22 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hello bdz,

    I haven’t surfaced for a while because I haven’t had anything useful to add to your work, but I have never quit following your blog and your postings over on Free Republic (so sorry I am still unable to join in there with support). I just wanted to thank for your courage in going public in order to be the “mother hen” for the Nebraska eligibility bill.

    Butterdezillion, I salute you. Your dedication to the Constitution and rule of law and your unwavering perseverance in the face of stupefying adversity is awesome in the truest sense of the word. You invigorate my belief in the indomitable American spirit and give me renewed hope. You are a true patriot. And for that I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

    I cannot begin to fathom why most every judge, politician and government official is so willing to ignore, bend and break the very law and system they have take a solemn oath to uphold, simply to protect that worthless, two-bit fraud currently squatting in We The People’s house. For what all he has done to bring ruination upon our great country, he really is a piece human garbage who should be kicked to the curb alongside the many other sacks of trash cluttering up Washington, DC. I am sure most of them must know in their hearts that something is very wrong and that their precious Pied Piper is actuality an ineligible usurper. Why do they continue tolerate it, many willingly so? May the whole lot of them be given due process and be judiciously trash-compacted into the smallest, dankest, darkest prison cell.

    If it is race riots they fear, I say “bring it” for it’s long past time to cleanse ourselves of those who support divisive, thuggish race-based tribalism over melting-pot America’s belief in equal opportunity for all (I say this as a true “Heinz 57″ main-stream American mutt who feels not even the slightest twinge of bogus, so-called white guilt).

    If it is utter destruction of the dollar by the Soros-Saudi cabal that holds them hostage in fearful inaction, then I say I would rather live (or die) as a free sovereign Citizen in abject poverty than squirm under the oppressive thumb of new world order socialism.

    Is there not one freshman Tea Party Senator or Representative who loves his or her country enough to brave the derision of the regime-stream media and defend the Constitution by demanding and/or instigating investigations of Obama and his enablers? What unbelievable depths of depravity has our once great country fallen to.

    Thank God for patriots like you, Pamela Barnett, Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, Theresa Cao and many, many more. You, the brave few, bring hope to and inspire the sleeping giant that is the silent majority. Because of you, America will weather this storm.

    And regarding your wonderful eligibility bill work, your readers should understand that a properly written state eligibility law (one that requires release of legal records directly proving birth in-country to citizen parents in order to be listed on the state ballot) would force the SCOTUS to step up to the plate (they couldn’t very well deny standing to an entire state). In fact, that probably is its prime destiny.

    Also, it should be noted that there is a subtle, but important difference between a state universally defining the legal meaning of natural born Citizen and a state simply setting state requirements that allow a candidate to get listed on its state ballot. While the former is not the business of one state to impose on the other states, a state could make a good case that is it has every right to do the latter. Then it would be up to the SCOTUS to actively prove that the state had trampled upon the meaning and intent of the Constitution’s natural born eligibility requirement.

    In Obama’s case, either he backs off and does not get on the ballot for that state (probably could still have write-ins counted, a la Alaska) or he has to ask for the SCOTUS to rule on the meaning of nbC. As long as we have an iota of respect for the Constitution left in this country, either outcome would be a disaster for the Obama-fraud. Even his regime-stream media would have to admit that the usurper’s finely woven cloak of eligibility was completely transparent and bogus. The ruse would lose all credibility and the obots themselves would proclaim that the emperor truly has no clothes.

    • thinkwell
      Posted March 14, 2011 at 5:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      PS: I forgot to mention — your new blog format is great! And the way you have reorganized the facts and information (which can be mind numbing in their detail and spaghetti-like interrelationships) should make your work accessible to more readers (which is a very good thing).

      There is so much to this story, that I wonder if purposefully presenting it in intriguing bits in pieces like a mystery novel might not hook in an otherwise uninvested casual visitor who you could then “reel in” over a series of linked pages (maybe sort of wiki-like). You seem to be headed in that direction already, it seems. Doesn’t WordPress support wiki pages?

      • Posted March 14, 2011 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

        Thank you. This quest for the rule of law has definitely pushed me beyond my comfort zone. I am a complete and utter techno-moron. But information that nobody can find does no good, so the blog housecleaning stuff is a necessity. I still need to index so much; hard to know how best to prioritize time.

        If anybody has expertise in this kind of thing and is interested or willing to help me improve the blog I would love to be helped. =)

    • Posted March 14, 2011 at 11:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      Well-stated, and thank you.

      After seeing the ruling by Judge Leon in Strunk’s case yesterday, I was thinking it might be a death knell to give a case to any judge. I think the main thing as far as the voters being able to do their job right is the ability to have discovery. If we can come up with a state law that grants legal standing to any registered voter to challenge eligibility as long as it is filed before the elective term starts, the people would have the ability to see the records before that person was sworn into office. It would be too late for proof of ineligibility to keep voters from voting in an impostor, but it should give time for people to demand that their Congressman challenge any electoral votes for somebody proven to be ineligible – even in 2012 because if a ballot initiative passed in November in Nebraska the law would go into effect in mid-December.

      Perhaps what we need to work for is a ballot initiative to cover 2012 so the records can be seen, perhaps dropping the case before a judge can rule on NBC, since the courts are compromised as long as Obama is emperor. In 2012 we will perhaps have to work through electoral means to have the Constitution followed. Once Obama is out, Soros will not want to keep the eligibility issue unconstitutional because it would pave the way for people like Rubio and Jindal. So if we can just uphold the Constitution in 2012 we may have an easier time of getting the Constitutional issue resolved when it is Republican politicians who would possibly be ruled ineligible.

      So once Obama is no longer emperor we may have a better shot at the Constitution being upheld in court. At that point a bill like Nebraska’s could be effective.

      I’m thinking that wherever possible we should try for a ballot initiative giving registered voters legal standing to challenge eligibility. I think it should say something like this:

      “Any registered Nebraska voter shall have legal standing to challenge in expedited state court proceedings the legal eligibility of any candidate on the Nebraska ballot, provided that the legal challenge is filed before the beginning of the term of office the candidate is seeking through placement on that ballot. Such standing shall allow discovery of birth and citizenship records where applicable, as well as transaction logs and complete vital records history to verify genuineness of records.”

      I’m with you if Soros is threatening economic collapse. What state is it whose motto is “Live free or die”? That’s where I’m at.

      And what’s going on in Wisconsin is actually preparing the US citizenry for what is to come, because we are seeing that there is no way to appease the people who want this country destroyed. If it’s not race riots it will be union riots. Thugs are thugs, and the only way to be free of their power is to meet them head-on. If we don’t meet the Mexican drug cartel thugs head on we will be destroyed by them. Holder won’t let us meet them head-on. If we don’t meet the communist and Islamist thugs head-on we will be destroyed by them. Obama bows to them and kisses them.

      When the Islamist called off his rally to demand sharia in the US, I think it was because the Islamists recognized that it was too soon; people here are still resistive and if the Islamists reveal their end game now it will jeopardize the whole project. But we can be sure that this would be the end game of the Soros-Obama alliance. They are both deeply connected to both the communists and the Islamists. Once that alliance takes over America absolutely, they will have to duke it out over whether it is to be a Stalinist regime or a Taliban regime, but the American people at this point should have no doubts that America will become one or the other (or some super-hybrid) if we don’t step up to the plate right now.

      Our process and the people within that process may be hostages right now, but the tiger that any regime fears to ride is the actual people – millions of us who can’t all be bribed or threatened, and who can see past the media’s lies to know that the emperor is naked. It’s time now for the people to step up in a powerful, powerful way, through ballot initiatives. I think it’s our only route with any hope of success at this point.

  10. goodgravy
    Posted March 16, 2011 at 9:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hey…Look whom it is….BUTTERD-NELLIE RISTVEDT!

    Hi Nellie!

  11. neconservative
    Posted March 17, 2011 at 6:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

    lb 654 shows as held by committee

    • Posted March 17, 2011 at 8:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m on the way out the door for some errands. Does it give the way the senators each voted? Thanks!

      • neconservative
        Posted March 17, 2011 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

        That’s just it, I think ‘held by committee’ is a status, but not sure what. I have a message in to Senator Price. Will see if he replies.

      • Posted March 22, 2011 at 2:37 am | Permalink

        Hmm. This won’t let me reply to you, NEconservative. Have you heard anything back from Price? Did you receive an email from me via hushmail?

        I’ve looked, and Nebraska is the hardest state of all for ballot initiatives, thanks to Dianna Schimek. But did you see the WND poll showing that 85% of the public supports having a state bill that would require documentation of eligibility? I think our main issue is manpower. We need to network and find out who would be in our corner, to do some signature gathering.

        Am I OK to contact you via hushmail?

  12. Jayhg
    Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

    butterdezillion, you haven’t actually documented anything. You have speculated, supposed and guessed and deduced all kinds of wrong shit. You are one of those nuts who think absense of proof is proof of absence. This is also how paranoid’s think. Everything is a big old conspiracy and when my computer breaks, somebody in Washington is upset that my “research” is getting too close. These types of folks also have a heightened sense of importance.

    Hear this, butter, and I know you won’t believe it, but President Obama and all tholse folks in Washington, including the republicans, DO NOT HAVE ANY IDEA WHO YOU ARE AND HAVE NO IDEA OF YOUR BLOG.

    My favorite thing you say is Hawaii has admitted in two, three, 10,000 different indirect ways that President Obama’s COLB is forged. NOT TRUE. You just read what they said and then in your on fevered mind DEDUCED THAT AHA!!!!!! THIS IS WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN!! You’re lying, of course, but mostly you are lying to yourself.

    President Obama is a natural born citizen. He was born in Hawaii and he is under no obligation to prove that to you, butterdezillion, or any other nutjob birther here on this blog or on free republic or on storm front or any other wackjob place you birthers go to talk to each other and lament the error of Issa’s ways for not seeing all this “research” that you have done. You will be equally frustrated when President Obama runs in 2012 and wins.

    I am going to definitely come back to your blog so I can see the epic meltdown you have when he wins in Nov. 2012 and I promise to suggest some medication for you.

    • Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Blah blah blah. Wake me up when you’ve got something besides ad hominems to contribute.

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 22, 2011 at 8:40 pm | Permalink

        You wake me up when you get President Obama out of office with your batshit crazy “research” and INDIRECT proof from Hawaii officials and Tim Adams.

  13. Tommy Thompson
    Posted March 24, 2011 at 4:00 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I think Jayhg must be a little concerned about his man in OUR office…and rightfully so. I appreciate the work you’ve done. Frankly I don’t think Barry will be able to run in 2012. He will either resign, with no reasonable explanation or he will be impeached or put in jail or George Soros will fire him. His administration is crumbling as we speak.

    • Posted March 24, 2011 at 5:03 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, I think he doth protest too much. I could say what he’s said, in 11 letters: “You’re stupid”. lol. That’s apparently the only argument he has. I feel bad about people having to wade through it, but I think it is important for people to see first-hand that this is all the argument the Alinsky-ites have.

      I hope you’re right that this administration is falling apart. That would be a huge relief for the well-being of the country. Interesting times, for sure.

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 25, 2011 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, well, keep hoping Tommy is right. Cause hope and guesswork and speculation and fevered wild theories are all you have.

    • Jayhg
      Posted March 25, 2011 at 10:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Not gonna happen, Tommy, and I am not afraid of anything. Whatever I think will happen to President Obama, believe me when I tell you and you and butterdezillion are not even remotely a concern of mine….and of anyone else’s I suspect. Obama will run…..and win.

      If you want him to lose, you should break ranks with kooks like butternutdezillion. Because I guarantee you that whatever “research” she comes up with WILL NOT be the thing that gets him out of office.

      • What A Hoot
        Posted July 13, 2012 at 10:57 am | Permalink

        I know this conversation is over a year old but just have to ask in reference to, “…..believe me when I tell you and you and butterdezillion are not even remotely a concern of mine” — If not remotely a concern, why even bother reading or commenting? It was very gracious of Buttered to even let your comments appear. I would not entertain anyone that walked into my home or life and started calling me names. You, Young One, were way out of line insisting on twisting the hosts name to a derogatoty term. Such audacity and feigned confidence. And then you expect the grownups to take you seriously?

  14. stormyweather
    Posted March 24, 2011 at 6:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    In his own words!

    • Posted March 24, 2011 at 6:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Wow. Good catch! When was that from?

      “If that wasn’t so, then Barack Hussein Obama, from Kenya, from Africa, could not become President of the United States.”

      That’s a totally different thing than saying his father was from Kenya, and it’s a totally different thing than saying a black man can become President. He’s talking about a person from Kenya being able to become US President.

      Nowhere, no how, does the US Constitution allow that.

      • Posted March 25, 2011 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

        OK. Never mind. The words “from Kenya, from Africa” were inserted from some other speech. I wonder what other speech he gave where he used those words. Do you know where that was from?

        Someone at FR gave the link to the speech in question, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/video/The-President-Talks-with-Students-in-Turkey , with the segment in question beginning at the 5:00 mark.

        Obviously I didn’t check this out adequately. My apologies. I’m glad somebody pointed out the real footage.

        That’s all any of us have wanted somebody to do with Obama’s records. If we are wrong, show us. That’s all we are asking.

    • Jayhg
      Posted March 25, 2011 at 10:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You embarass yourself with this clearly doctored video. You birthers are so embarassing.

      See, if you can’t get the goods, the REAL goods, don’t post stuff like this. It shows how desparate you are……….and you guys ARE desparate.

      • What A Hoot
        Posted July 13, 2012 at 11:04 am | Permalink

        Uh, oh, the real goods, a year later, are for SIXTEEN YEARS Obama approved his publicist to sell his author bio as from — oops —- Kenya. Of course that does not prove Barry IS from there since that could have just been his false narrative to sell books and distance himself from the American Black which he despises. Could just mean he is a liar. Or a con artist. Or even really from Kenya. But you, young one, don’t know anymore than the next person (no matter how much you pretend or believe you know) which of Barry’s life stories, that he himself has told, is/are true. (Admins: I know, don’t feed/engage, ….I will refrain after this post :)

  15. Kenny Bunk
    Posted March 25, 2011 at 3:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Cassandra foresaw the destruction of Troy. She was unable to do anything to forestall these tragedies since no one believed her.

    Laocoön warned his fellow Trojans against the wooden horse presented to the city by the Greeks. “Do not trust the Horse, Trojans / Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even bearing gifts.”

    This is the way I felt after the latest turn down by the SCOTUS of what I had thought wa a rather reasonable request by Lawyer Hemenway in Hollister v Soetoro.

    <regards,

    KB

    • Posted March 25, 2011 at 4:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Kenny, have you seen the evidence that Judge Surick’s decision against Berg was actually a fax he received from somebody else and that he then forwarded as if it was his own decision? The date/time stamp from the original fax Surick received remained on every page of what he forwarded to Berg. You can see that at http://james4america.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/judge-surrick-received-the-decision-he-issued/ .

      The only way I could even imagine a judge allowing somebody else to make his decision for him is if there was some kind of threat involved.

      I remember Leo giving up on the eligibility battle after seeing what happened to his case and to Wrotnowski’s case – particularly with the shenanigans by the SCOTUS stay clerk, Danny Bickel. Leo concluded that SCOTUS must be in on the fraud as well.

      I think Leo had it pegged right then and there. But I think it is because the judges have been threatened.

      Specifically, I believe Soros threatened that unless Obama was given a free pass, Soros would make another run on the bank, even bigger than the one he and his communist-Islamist alliance had made in September 2008, that would destroy the entire world economy. I believe that is the threat that got Judge Surick to allow somebody else to write a decision dismissing Berg’s case for lack of standing, when Surick had been treating the issue with earnestness before that. We know that is right around the same time as Soros’ goons threatened the media heads if they reported on the eligibility issue, so it is not some crazy speculation that Soros would make illegal threats.

      We have evidence that both the judiciary and media have been threatened by Soros into compliance on the eligibility issue. We also have evidence of multiple government agencies, at both state and federal levels, committing forgery, perjury, and breaking laws and rules in order to cover for Obama.

      In short, I believe our entire infrastructure has been taken over by Soros because he has united communists and Islamists against their common enemy – the United States – and that alliance has the power to throw our economy into the abyss.

      We will not get justice from the courts. We will not get anything from Congress or the states that substantially opposes Soros’ agenda. We will not get anything from either the MSM or conservative media that exposes the criminality. The last force standing against this enemy is the actual people of America.

      These are much, much more serious times than most people have any clue about.

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 25, 2011 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

        All of this is just speculation and gobble-de-gook!!! Not a speck of PROOF of any kind of “threat” to anyone is in your mile long post.

        Media is in on it, judiciary is in on it, George Soros run on the bank – YOU JUST MADE THIS UP IN YOUR OWN FEVERED MIND AND HAVE BEEN POSTING IT EVER SINCE!! This is how people who are unbalanced behave.

        Do you have any idea what would happen is anyone threatened the heads of ABC, CNN, Fox of any other news outlet!? They would be badgered all overTV, indeed around teh world, and everywhere else by EVERYONE. It would never happen, but in butterdezillion’s mind, THIS IS FACT!

        GET SOME PROOF OF SOMETHING, lady. Then and only then will folks start to think you are not nuts!!

  16. Tommy Thompson
    Posted March 27, 2011 at 3:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, you hit the nail on the head. I was part of Phil Berg’s obamacrimes before it was hacked so many times we had to set up our own private group. I don’t know many who knew that the judges decision was written by Obama’s team. The same thing happened in another case. I’ve also read the transcripts of most of Berg’s cases and what has been going on with the supreme court and it’s clerks is ridiculous. It’s been a rigged system from the get go. Also the threats to 4 top TV and or radio announcer hosts was real. And if Jayhg doesn’t think George Soros is running things he’s wishing and hoping…

    • Posted March 27, 2011 at 12:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

      But… but… but only CRAZY people would say that websites were actually “hacked” – even though lots of people saw it first-hand with Berg’s site, Donofrio’s site, Orly’s site, etc…. That would be just way too “extreme” to think that kind of thing actually happens. It’s clearly all in your head and you need to go back to taking your meds.

      lol.

      That’s all they can say. They are telling us we are crazy for believing what we and countless others have seen with our own eyes.

      And one of the things that is really terrible is that there could be all this evidence of serious corruption and threats – such as Surick’s decision being faxed to him from somebody else – and nobody in the conservative media will address the law-breaking. They want to keep “credibility” by fashioning a narrative that ignores all this lawlessness, because suggesting that there is lawlessness would be too “extreme”. The truth is what it is, and the truth is that there is massive lawlessness that has allowed this issue to be unresolved to this day. To me, the crimes by government officials are even worse than Obama himself being an illegal usurper, because Obama will eventually be gone but if our system is this corrupt we will NEVER have any real protection.

      We need to know what threat Obama’s people were able to use, to get a federal judge to pass off somebody else’s “decision” as if it was his own. That didn’t happen without some very serious monkey business. Nor did the media heads just roll over and die without some very serious monkey business. The public deserves to know what threats have been holding this nation hostage for over 2 years.

      • zanesbil
        Posted March 27, 2011 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

        What about Judge Carter in Orley’s case in California. He was extremely interested in doing the right thing. His comments before his ruling indicated that he was going to allow discovery and get to the bottom of it. Then–bang! After a period of time went by and he was coerced–or changed his mind?–he did a 180 and denied discovery.
        Note: Butter: It appears that you are doing something right, judging from negative, childish remarks coming from a few; they are worried. Zerobama is on his way out and they know it. Why should they take the time to hazzle you–to discredit you–you scare them, and all they can put forth is name-calling. You got the facts, Baby

      • Posted March 27, 2011 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

        Judge David Carter is another story. Like Surick, he was acting as if he was very earnest about doing the right thing. And then all of a sudden he did a 180, like you said. BUT HE ALSO, right at the same time as his 180, hired as his clerk somebody from the company that represented Obama in the current Obama case that he was judging – BIG ETHICS NO-NO. Almost as if he purposely created an ethics violation as a red flag – to say that his turnaround was under duress.

        Chief Justice Roberts did a similar thing. On the VERY SAME DAY as the Supreme Court decided not to hear Leo Donofrio’s case, he invited Obama and Biden – who he knew would have more cases come before his court, such as Berg’s – to visit the Supreme Court. IOW, he invited them to visit in what he knew would be ex parte communications, which is against the judicial code of conduct. If he had been on a lower court that action could cause big, big troubles. But he did it deliberately on the very same day that SCOTUS decided not to hear Donofrio’s case, but before the result of that conference was publicly known. So the same day as SCOTUS was deciding what to do about a case involving Obama, the Chief Justice invited Obama for an ex parte meeting. HUGE RED FLAG.

        I’ve said elsewhere that I believe almost every eligibility judge has put up some kind of deliberate red flag, as if to show that their action was under duress. The deniers predictably say I’m seeing connections where there are none and my talk was sheer inventive speculation. Well…. it seems like my suspicion is validated, now that it is clear that Judge Surick forwarded to Berg a “decision” that somebody else sent to him. You cannot tell me that he did that without some kind of threat. And if he was threatened so he would give Obama a pass, then what other judges were threatened? One lie is never enough, and if they will do the first threat they will have to keep doing more and more to keep the lie going. So how many judges have they had to threaten, like they threatened the media companies and Judge Surick?

        What I’d really like to know is whether the date/time stamp on the decision that was forwarded to Berg was an automatic feature of the faxing mechanism, or if that feature was “turned on” by Surick. If that feature was specifically enabled by Surick, then that would be the first of our red flags by judges showing they were acting under duress. If not, it was an “accidental” revelation of the truth.

        Just to make sure anybody reading this knows what I’m talking about regarding Surick’s decision, the documentation of this is at http://james4america.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/judge-surrick-received-the-decision-he-issued/

        Who else have they threatened besides the media and the judges? On Sept 13, (IIRC), Bush suddenly decided after a week of silence to give a national speech saying that the world was going to fall apart if we didn’t immediately pass TARP (a drop in the bucket, which no serious financial expert believed would do anything to correct the toxic assets situation, and which didn’t get passed for another 5 months, IIRC, without the economy falling apart as a result). AND that very same day John McCain decided to suspend his campaign and wanted the debates (his only hope of winning) canceled after receiving a phone call from Obama that morning.

        Somebody in a single day lit a fire beneath both Bush and McCain resulting in 180 -degree changes in both of them. A month before an 180-degree change by a judge was presumably caused by some kind of threat. And right around the same time that media companies passed on to their on-air personalities the threat that people could be killed if the eligibility issue was mentioned. This is not piddles. Federal judges threatened and death threats to media personalities if they mentioned the eligibility issue. We’re talking serious crimes. This is NOT the action of political strategists trying to egg on the “birthers” in order to paint republicans as crazies. These are the actions of criminals whose backs are against the wall.

        And THAT is the story that nobody in the media is willing to tell, and that nobody in law enforcement or Congress is willing to investigate. But the story is slowly being revealed, and more and more people are realizing just how bad this whole situation really is. What we need to find out in order to fully understand how we got here is what kind of threat was able to accomplish all this with all these different people. Is the mafia that powerful that simple death threats can hold our country hostage to this degree, or is there some threat even more powerful than death threats? I imagine SCOTUS justices get death threats, and even death threats from very powerful people when stuff like Obamacare or border defense is on the line. Is SCOTUS for sale to the highest-bidding threat?

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 29, 2011 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

        Yes, exactly, crazy people…….

  17. drkate
    Posted March 27, 2011 at 4:58 am | Permalink | Reply

    Thank you always for this immensely informative and quality blog and the cross posting of much work done by other fine authors.

    I note that the obutts here–Mary, for example, have nothing to say but profanity. It reeks of desperation. They have nothing to say.

    Keep up the excellent work!

    drkatesview

    • Posted March 27, 2011 at 12:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I hate to even post the responses that are just profanity and ad hominems because they bring down the quality of the blog, but they do show how pathetic the responses are to the actual evidence. And that is a big part of the story, unfortunately.

      One thing that really bothers me is that so many pieces of really important information have shown up on blogs but not in any large-scale media. We know that 4 media companies were threatened if they reported on the issue. But what of Drudge? What of World Net Daily?

      I have proof that somebody deceived us about where the online birth announcement images came from. I have done the work and have it in a form that can easily be used and have offered it freely to anybody who will take it. Nobody will. The Poynter Institute first tried to say it would cost too much money to research. When I said I’ve already done the research and it is easily verified, then the excuse changed to the eligibility issue already being beaten to death. When I asked where the fact that the stories about the birth announcements’ discoveries not being accurate was reported that was the end of the discussion.

      World Net Daily wasn’t interested because it didn’t fit their narrative.

      Another conservative source just hasn’t bothered to get back to me.

      The story is slowly coming out because of the blogs, and because people eventually find the places that have the credible evidence. I couldn’t believe it was only by accident that I found the story (with documentation) of how Judge Surick received his “decision” as a fax from somebody else! That should be plastered all over every newspaper but even I who have invested so much time on this issue only stumbled upon it by accident.

      We have no visible outlet that is willing to publish information about crimes being committed surrounding this issue. And that really, really bugs me.

      • Jayhg
        Posted March 29, 2011 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

        The day you get some ACTUAL EVIDENCE, butterdezellion, I will eat my hat!!! And your hat and the rest of the nuts on this so called blog’s hats.

        But I won’t save my apetite. You won’t get any actual evidence because if you had, you’d not have folks calling you crazy……

  18. Tommy Thompson
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 1:46 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, at Obama-Soetoro-Exposed (formerly obamacrimes) we were asked who would be a good person for Donald Trump to contact for accurate information about the birther issue…some of his comments are completely accurate but some are very much dead on which leads me to believe he really is doing the research on this topic…or his investigative team is. I suggested that Donald check you or your site out because the information you have posted is fantastic and I like the way you laid out the different issues in summary form. I hope that was ok. Tommy

    • Posted March 31, 2011 at 2:19 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s more than OK, Tommy; that’s FANTASTIC! I actually was just wondering if he would be interested in information regarding those birth announcements. I’ve been looking for a megaphone to expose the deceptions regarding where those images came from. A wise person counseled me to dream big and ask God to provide in a way that is so big it couldn’t have been provided by anybody but Him. I used to be really good at dreaming big but since working on this stuff I’ve definitely become more of a “realist”. lol.

      It would be so like the Lord to hit me between the eyeballs with something bigger than I could even imagine. I was just looking for a way to try to contact Trump to see if he would be interested (and not finding anything specific) when your message was waiting for me.

      Sometimes it’s so neat to know that there are forces at work beyond what I can see. We’ll see what happens, but just that reminder is so good – that I’m really not in charge of much at all, least of all results. But it’s OK because Somebody much wiser and better than me is. And I can trust that. =)

  19. Tommy Thompson
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 1:48 am | Permalink | Reply

    I meant to say that some of his comments AREN’T completely accurate…sorry.

  20. Tommy Thompson
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 11:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, this from “just plain Linda” If you want to contact Trump, don’t bother with email or phone. FED EX, to his NY office is probably the only way the info might get to him. ALL of butter’s docs, most important (most legal-looking on top). Orly’s Selective Service info might be a really good way to start off the packet, with a highlight for the unverifiable SSN. Or maybe Jerome Corsi might know a way to contact Trump, too. Contact WND for Corsi? Joint effort w/ WND, Corsi & butter?

  21. Posted April 1, 2011 at 1:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, Obama’s birth record was not amended in 2006, but between 10/31/08 and 07/29/09. Your basis for saying 2006 is the date, June 6, 2007, on a nonexistent document. There is no COLB for Obama, period. That date came from someone else’s COLB – namely Janice Okubo’s.

    Yes, the COLB in the Factcheck photos and the COLB in the “scan image” is a forgery and a fake, but not because of what Terri K said or did, but because I proved that it was fabricated.

    The change in Fukino’s statements, from October 31, 2008 to July 27, 2009, clearly indicate that if Hawaii did have an “original birth certificate” from somewhere (Fukino DID NOT SAY it was from Hawaii when she made her Halloween PR), one or more amendments were attached to it in or after October 2008. It was then sealed away and Obama was issued the new version of the COLB issued in October 2008, the “Certificate” of Live Birth – the word, “Certification,” was removed but the biggest changes made it it – SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF OBAMA – were adding the places of birth for both parents.

    As for the DATE FILED vs. DATE ACCEPTED, every COLB produced since 2006 (I don’t have samples from 2004 or 2005, but the rule change occurred in 2005) has DATE FILED on it, irrespective of when the child was born. I have a 2006 COLB of someone born in 1940. It says, DATE FILED.

    I’ve gone over the reason for the change a hundred times before. Check FR or my blog.

    The Cert # on Obama’s COLB HAS to be wrong because it did not appear on the COLB scan and we know, for sure, that he was never issued a long-form, hospital-submitted certificate of birth.

    I think we can all agree on that.

    The CERT # came after the Nordykes because it does not belong to Obama. It belongs to the infant who was born on August 4, 1961 and died on August 5, 1961. The hospital had 10 days to register the birth but it also had to register her death – which could not be done before registering her birth – if that is not logically obvious. There would be no need for a death registration if it was not a live birth.

    Her birth announcement (in which her first name was replaced by her father’s) appeared after Obama’s forged birth announcement – a splice job for those who don’t know it yet – and after the Nordykes announcement because it was filed after theirs for obvious reasons.

    Again, Obama’s birth record was amended in or after October 2008, and, IMO, it was done before the end of 2008.

    This is not to say that it was the first time it was amended or from where it came.

    • Posted April 1, 2011 at 4:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think we’re having some differences because of the underlying bases of our individual investigations. You’re investigating from a forensics standpoint. I’m investigating from the standpoint of what is in official written documents. I started blogging because it was clear to me that there were huge discrepancies coming out of the government officials and their documents. People were saying that we have to take the government officials at their word so I set out to show that “their word” is conflicted and false.

      So the things that I have concluded here are on the basis of the official laws and rules, as well as the official, legal statements of government officials. They could all by lying, in which case my conclusions are also false. But my point is that if these people are lying to us and contradicting themselves, then the ONLY way we will ever know what is true is through a LEGAL investigation, where nobody has to guess or speculate because they have the embedded records and paper documents to look at, as well as depositions they can take and lie detector tests they can give.

      People have said that both you and I are merely speculating and that they don’t agree with our analysis. What I want is for people to recognize that everything coming out of Hawaii contradicts itself and the story they have tried to pass off on the general public. I don’t care what anybody thinks about me or my analysis, but when a government worker is talking out of all 10 sides of her mouth on something this important, it warrants an investigation.

      So take the Oct 2008 revision of the Certificate/Certification of Live Birth. There is supposed to be documentation for changes in protocols, forms, etc. The HDOH claims to have no documentation for any rule or protocol changes in their office since 1976. The rules for “date filed v date accepted” issue SHOULD be documented somewhere. It’s not. The rule saying they supposedly won’t print out a long-form is not posted anywhere; the Administrative Rules still say that a person can get a certified standard or abbreviated BC, and the law still requires a standard BC to have everything that’s on the CDC’s recommended BC. There is video footage showing that they are still following the Administrative Rules and issuing certified copies of long-forms IN THEIR OFFICE IN HAWAII, but they are still acting like the CIA on anybody who asks for the same via snail mail. So the HDOH is breaking laws that require records to be kept; because of that they are able to manipulate their rules and procedures however they want without having to answer any questions. That means that all we CAN DO is speculate.

      We don’t even know what the 10/08 revision was TO. Was it a revision to a birth certificate (since it now says “Certificate” rather than “Certification”? If so, then they deleted everything from the long-form except what is usually on a COLB, plus the birth location of the parents – which would be a violation of Hawaii law, since it doesn’t include AT MINIMUM what is required on the CDC’s standard birth certificate. Is it a revision to the Certification of Live Birth? If so, it added 2 pieces of information and a misleading title of “Certificate”.

      So we can speculate either thing, but can’t prove anything because the HDOH is breaking laws in order to hide what they are doing and why. The one thing we can KNOW is that regardless of what change they made in October of 2008, the HDOH is breaking laws.

      I can’t know whether Obama amended his BC in 2008, except to say that if he did, then the HDOH once again broke the rules by telling me in Jan of 2010 that there were no invoices or receipts for him having done so – because those records are required to be kept for 3 years. The basis for me saying the BC was amended in 2006 had nothing to do with the online COLB but only with the HDOH’s claim to Terri K that the amendment records existed in August of 2009 and their claim to me that they no longer existed by January of 2010. This is where our investigative approach differs. I’m simply going by what the HDOH itself has said. As much as possible I am trying to avoid speculation and stick simply to what I can document with official records. You may be right or I may be right; we can’t prove either way unless there is a legal investigation, and my sticking tight to only what I can document is to show that I’m TRYING to just take them at their word but their word contradicts itself and the law on a regular basis.

      Regarding Fukino’s statements, given what Abercrombie has said about there not being a long-form BC for Obama, either he is lying, or she is lying, or she is calling anything in the world an “original birth certificate”, or they are both lying. And there would probably be about an equal chance for each of those options, except that Tim Adams has sworn that his supervisors told him on multiple times that there is no long-form BC for Obama in Hawaii. So it’s Tim Adams’ supervisors and Abercrombie contradicting Fukino. Since Abercrombie had a big incentive to claim there was a long-form but didn’t, I suspect that Fukino was being “creative” with her terminology when she made her Halloween announcement. But even without doing any other analysis, those contradictory statements show that SOMETHING doesn’t line up, that what Fukino wanted us to all believe she was saying is not actually true.

      The fact that we have copies of the 1960-64 birth index and death index which have the name of the little girl you referenced who was born on Aug 4, 1961 and died on Aug 5, 1961…. and the UIPA response of the HDOH saying that they have no birth records for this little girl….. tells us that either somebody is lying to me about there not being records for her, or they have done something to that record so that it no longer shows HER name. Both instances are serious reasons for a legal investigation – particularly since the HDOH has also made official communications which reveal that the “date filed” and BC# are incompatible on the COLB Obama showed Factcheck.

      That little girl didn’t have a birth announcement in either paper, though her death was announced in both papers. Of the handful of infant deaths reported in the newspapers in Aug 1961, one also had a birth announcement (Teresa Prive, IIRC. So where there was both a birth and a death, the death got reported but the birth sometimes was reported and sometimes not. That makes problems for those who try to say that the birth and death lists in the newspapers were straight print-outs of what came from the Vital Records Office lists. The death listings are consistent with that view, but the birth listings aren’t.

      • Mifouf
        Posted April 4, 2011 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

        Interesting that there are some data about the identity of children who died in infancy and whose numbers could have been seized for fraudulent use. Keep in mind how difficult it would be to retrofit two hospital medical records for the birth of the infant and for the corresponding delivery for the mother. Multiple shifts of workers at every level including signatures every time, drug orders, anesthesiologist, pediatrician, obstetrician, pharmacy data, all sorts of medical identifiers, prior medical history, other medical care and physicians, lab tests with their numbers, plus the usual addresses, ages, SS numbers, etc etc. It has been my suspicion that one of the reasons that a shiny new long-form birth certificate hasn’t been miraculously “found” so far is that there would then have to be those medical records from the corresponding hospital, and those do seem to me to be much much more challenging to manufacture. Keep in mind that the forgers have been surprisingly awkward so far, and left a lot of material behind to show their lack of skill, so this apparently isn’t as easy as it looks in WW II movies. And, we have Ambercrombie’s word that he was unable to find hospital records of either Obama or his mother. So, the hospital medical records, and the difficulties in forging them now, may be a gigantic barrier to the manufacture of new documents regarding a Hawaiian birth.

      • Posted April 5, 2011 at 2:21 am | Permalink

        I wonder if Abercrombie’s people looked for the medical log which would have showed Obama’s mother as a patient, or if they just looked for a long-form. What I’ve been told by an OB doctor is that the hospital would not keep a copy of the birth certificate once the record was in the care of the registrar. But someone who trains people in medical records said they would keep maternity ward patient logs in the hospital archives, which would only be discloseable according to HIPAA. But if an investigative committee had a legal subpoena they could see those records, I would think.

      • Jayhg
        Posted April 5, 2011 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

        ….you are a nut…….all this is BULLSHIT……ALL DAY, ALL THE TIME. You have NOTHING, lady. If you did, someone normal would pay attention to you. Instead, you have other crazies conversing with you and people like me making fun of all of you.

    • zanesbil
      Posted April 1, 2011 at 5:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      In order to receive a social security number you have to present a U.S. birth certificate. The fact that Obama uses a fake SS number indicates he never had a U.S. birth certificate. If, in the future he comes up with a U.S. birth certificate, it will be a forgery. Some folks speculate that he has birth certificate and is playing a game to get re-elected. When everyone is primed to see his birth certificate–wahla–hear it is. By making the birth cetificate the main reason for his being eligible to be POTUS, the fact that he is not a natural born citizen, the stronger of reasons why he is not eligible, gets kicked into the background and is not even considered because most people don’t know (including some of our congressmen)the difference between a native born citizen and a natural born citizen.
      If he comes up with a U.S. birth certificate it will be a forgery.

      • Posted April 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

        I agree, and I think it is significant that Trump has honed in somewhat on both Abercrombie AND on how easy it is to manipulate records. If Obama comes up with a long-form, Abercrombie will have a lot of explaining to do, or Obama, or (preferably) both.

        What really needs to happen is either a full legal/criminal investigation – most probably by a state AG – or a court case in which the plaintiff is allowed discovery and actually subpoenas the embedded transaction logs for all Obama’s birth and citizenship records.

        I’ve been really busy this past week so I’ve only seen the headlines but it looks like there may be some movement in a couple different appeals courts on eligibility cases. I don’t know if that will result in discovery being allowed, but I think that if discovery is allowed it will be critical to get at the embedded transaction logs and comprehensive vital records history.

        I haven’t said much about it before, but as the time comes closer when Obama might present a forged long-form I think it will be important for people to realize the level of records manipulation already visibly going on at the HDOH. Ladysforest has posted on the absence of the date range header on what the HDOH presents as the 1960-64 birth index. There is more manipulation that could be revealed as well. The HDOH knows it, and they have been refusing to acknowledge any of my requests or communications for the past month, except for one obfuscating request for clarification of something my request made abundantly clear (a stall tactic).

        But anyway, there is a little girl who was born on Aug 4, 1961 and died the next day. Ron alluded to her in his post just before yours. She would be a prime candidate to hold the BC# that is on the Factcheck COLB. Remember that the HDOH has indicated there is a problem with the Factcheck COLB’s BC#, date filed, or both. So the BC# is a big deal. It is supposed to be discloseable according to law (grandfathered into disclosure when UIPA was passed because the law REQUIRED the BC# to be disclosed as index data at the time UIPA was passed) but the HDOH is disobeying the law on that.

        Well, what do we find? This little girl’s name is listed on both Hawaii’s birth and death index for 1960-1964, but the HDOH claimed in a legal response to me that they have no birth record for her. Either they are lying to me, or they have manipulated her record somehow so that her name no longer shows up in a search for her name. On a record that is a prime candidate for manipulation in order to forge a record for Obama.

        Serious business here. Everything that is visible at this point suggests there is serious monkey business going on in the HDOH office. The fact that they are shutting off any way for people to communicate with them (and have proof of the communication) is also revealing. The OIP seems to be joining them too. As of the end of the day today the OIP will have missed their 10-day deadline to respond to my request for help in getting records that are REQUIRED to be disclosed.

        For all the talk about Obama’s birth certificate, NOBODY is willing to address the lawlessness in the Hawaii government that has created this mess in the first place. And that is the more serious issue. There will always be some crook wanting to rob a bank. What matters is the security measures to protect against that crook, and at this point we have NO security. Instead, it very much seems that the crooks are running the bank, deciding who can get in and out of the building and making sure that nobody can count the money to know if anything has been stolen.

        EVERY AGENCY where Obama supposedly has records has been exposed as either ignoring problems, specifically disabling security protocols so breaches could be made, or downright forging documents on Obama’s behalf – all while refusing to obey disclosure laws, documentation laws, etc. That includes the HDOH, Social Security Administration, Selective Service Administration, and the Department of State/Passport Office. One state and 3 federal offices.

        In addition, we know that a federal judge (Judge Surick) has passed off a “decision” faxed to him from somebody else as if it was his own. That’s the federal judiciary – presumably threatened into letting the defendant decide his own case.

        All this going on while the heads of the media companies have been threatened with annihilation if they reported on the eligibility issue – and now that the FCC is under close scrutiny a Soros organization (Media Matters) has openly stated that they are trying to pressure “regulators” into “turning against” Fox News Channel. IOW, they are blatantly saying they are trying to get “regulators” in both the US and UK to be Obama’s hit-men to totally silence Fox. If that is what they do openly now, does anybody have any doubts that the threats that Doug Hagmann has documented actually happened?

        So look at that. One state and 3 federal government agencies engaged in forgeries and law-breaking, the federal judiciary threatened so the defendant makes the ruling, and the entire media threatened if they reported anything.

        That’s what is documented so far, even with all the lawlessness and obfuscation.

        I think Trump gets it. I think he realizes the utter lawlessness we’re talking about – all this to get into place the communist coup that has since turned ALL our government functions into lawlessness. The refusal to enforce laws and the border. The ignoring of court rulings. The decision by the executive not to defend DOMA since the executive has already decided what the judiciary should decide (sound at all like the Surick decision being faxed to him? These people couldn’t hide their methods if their lives depended on it.) Breaking bankruptcy law by taking the money from secured investors and giving it to the unions instead. Going to war without even consulting Congress. EVERYTHING is lawless – but it was only allowed to get to this point because of the absolute lawlessness surrounding Obama’s illegal ascent to the White House.

    • Jayhg
      Posted April 5, 2011 at 9:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Ron Polland, you are a nut and so if butternutdezillion. You don’t have any PROOF OF ANY AMENDMENT on President Obama’s birth certificate. You two sound positively mad….I actually enjoy reading your stuff because it is so obviously crazy that it’s like a train wreck…..you know it’s going to be bad, but you can’t look away.

      But you two keep at it. I am going to keep coming over here as President Obama’s runs for re-election…..and wins. I can’t wait for your comments then!!!??? I’m getting popcorn….lots of it!!!

  22. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 1, 2011 at 6:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter and Ron, in anticipation of the coming fake long form birth certificate for Barry, I created my own fake long form for Barry just to show how easy it is…I don’t know exactly what to do with this image:

    • ladysforest
      Posted April 2, 2011 at 3:40 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s pretty wild Tommy!

      You mentioned the newspaper birth announcements a few comments back. Butter – you should know about this already, since I sent these to you a year ago – I did a little post today with some of the microfilm copies of the film that has obama’s announcement. It shows clearly how there is significant damage on the film right up to the page before obama’s announcement is printed. And that page before obama’s announcement ? It’s imaged twice on the microfilm. I didn’t put that extra page up today – but it is included in my original work from a year ago. I wanted to keep today’s post short and sweet. Butter should still have all the copies that I sent to her – so she can confirm these.

      http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2011/04/01/its-a-page-turner

      The printer prints the date the copy is made on the bottom of the paper. Only in the Library of Congress though. The two Honolulu libraries don’t print any identifying info.

      • Posted April 2, 2011 at 4:20 am | Permalink

        Yes, I will definitely vouch for what you said. I just looked at those images again and it is really clearly damage to the microfilm. Between the pages there is the black space, and especially at the very beginning of the microfilm roll the scratch is so deep and wide that the actual blackness of the negative is scratched off. I’m going to see if this particular image can copy here because it can be seen how the black is actually scratched off both in the space between pages and on the actual page. Shoot. This won’t copy. I’ll post the page and link to it in this post.
        Here’s the link: http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/example-of-microfilm-damage-in-library-of-congress-star.pdf

    • Posted April 2, 2011 at 9:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, very true to form. Total 100% fraud and can pass the test. But remember that this effort is the 1961 REAL COLB effort, true form, but O & thugs used the revised type 2001-2002 format with the laser print and 8 x 10 (UNSIGNED, NON-SIGNED)
      format. Totally misleading and not stamped properly
      as REVISION. No laser print existed in 1961! And if
      his COLB was amended in 2006, 2008, 2009–it is now
      basically invalid. Am I missing something?

      • Posted April 2, 2011 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

        I think the word “Certification” in the “Certification of Live Birth” is what shows that it is not the standard (long-form) birth certificate. They’ve since changed that, though, so that even the certification (abstract of only selected information from the long-form) has the word “Certificate” in its label. So the Hawaii Dept of Health is totally screwing with the terminology AND THEIR LAWS. Even Dr Conspiracy has agreed that they are totally BS-ing if they try to claim that their standard long-form birth certificate doesn’t have validating signatures, date filed, birth weight, etc. He and I don’t see eye to eye on a lot, but that is his field of work and he knows – as I do – that Hawaii is required to collect a heckuva lot more birth information than is on their short-form BC.

        When it comes to the amendment, you are correct. The pre-printed COLB form itself says, “ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE”. That is based on HRS 338-17, which says that the probative (legal evidentiary) value of an amended birth certificate has to be determined when it is presented to a judicial or administrative person or body. In other words, it is NOT prima facie (“on its face”) evidence. By itself it means nothing, just like Monopoly money means nothing on its face. It is not self-authenticating if it has been altered. It is legally invalid. A judge could still decide that there is enough evidence for the alteration that the document can be considered proof – but until a judge says that, the document has NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE.

        And the reason we’re all going “Huh?” over it is because it seems like that is something that HDOH Director Fukino should have mentioned in her 2 announcements. If you carefully parse her words – as her own representative said had to be done, because they could not stray from that wording at all or even attempt to explain what those words were supposed to mean; those words had to be exactly as they were because if they were changed even in the least it would make problems, according to HDOH Communications Director Janice Okubo – the actual words don’t ever claim that they have records that are legally valid or that Fukino herself vouches for any fact regarding Obama’s birth. It just seems inconceivable to us that a government spokesman would so blatantly deceive. But when you take all the statements from the HDOH, that’s exactly what had to have happened, because there are mutually-exclusive claims.

        And Tim Adams signed a sworn affidavit saying that it seemed apparent to him that Fukino had engaged in huge deception. At this point Fukino’s statement that they have an “original birth certificate” for Obama and both Tim Adams’ and Neil Abercrombie’s statements that they don’t have a long-form BC for Obama are mutually exclusive, unless Fukino is screwing around with her use of the word “original birth certificate”.

        And the deception, law-breaking, and screwing around with words by government officials is exactly why this issue needs to be subject to a legal, criminal investigation.

        So no, J, you’re not missing something. It doesn’t all add up because the Hawaii officials have been screwing around with us all. I for one am not amused.

  23. zanesbil
    Posted April 1, 2011 at 7:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

    In reading over my last post, it should have read: here it is, instead of hear it is. Sorry.
    About the case in California with Judge Carter, I just read that the 9th circuit will hear the case on May 2, about 2 years since Carter’s ruling. Has it been 2 years? Also, Orly Taitz just filed concerning Obama’s social security fraud and appears to have pretty good proof from the SC administration, no less, to back up her brief. If she doesn’t run into the “no standing” wall, we might see some positive action.
    By-the-way, Butter, I wanted to and forgot to thank you for all of your hard work and the way you go about doing it: fearlessly and with dignity.

  24. Gianni
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 2:26 am | Permalink | Reply

    Have you seen the article at the link below? What do you think? Sounds like it could be true.

    http://beforeitsnews.com/story/530/173/FINAL_REPORT:_Obamas_Birth_Announcements_Fail_To_Indicate_Natural_Born_Status.html

    • Posted April 3, 2011 at 3:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      I did a quick read-through of it a little bit ago, and most of it agrees with what I’ve found. I have a few questions and have asked if the researcher could contact me so we could compare notes privately.

      It’s sort of a “what-if” type question, though, because I don’t believe Obama’s birth was announced in the papers in 1961. If it had been, there would have been no reason for anybody to lie about where the online birth announcement images came from. I’ve documented that none of those images came from the Hawaii State Library microfilms, as we were told. And the images were presented as if they were acquired independently by 4 different people, but they appear to have been very well-orchestrated. All of them, most likely all created and disseminated by the work of one person – somebody working at the Advertiser office.

      You will most probably hear more about this very soon, Lord willing.

  25. RTM999
    Posted April 4, 2011 at 7:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I found this article and wondered if this had any veracity in regards to the newspaper announcements
    and what they actually demonstrate concerning the background of what can be shown by their
    publication and the why the placement, etc. is
    important ! :

    http://beforeitsnews.com/story/530/1…rn_Status.html

    “Did anyone notice the announcements are not in any alphabetic order, or in order of birthdate? This is because, in 1961, birth registration numbers were issued based on the location of the local Vital Records office in which the registration was recorded. The hospital does not assign these numbers, the DOH does. It appears that Obama’s birth was registered in an office not used by any of the birth registrations offices who received birth certification from either Kapi-olani Medical Center, or Queens Medical Center which use two local offices near those facilities,” said Crosby.

    He continued, “It appears Obama’s birth was registered with the satellite office near his grandparent’s home some distance from the offices nearest to and most used by the hospitals. This particular office was commonly used by indigenous people of Hawaii wanting to record births of children outside of the city. This is why the U.S. Department of Health created the Certificate of Live Birth template in 1959 with a check box indicating whether or not the child was born in the city limits and if the residence of the mother was a farm or not. It appears Obama’s birth at least did not occur in the city of Honolulu and, at most, did not even occur in the state of Hawaii.”

    In 1956, the National Vital Statistics Division of the U.S. Department of Health issued a revised template version of the “Certificate of Live Birth” form to be used by state municipalities to record and medically verify births. Since Hawaii had not yet become a state, these revisions to the template would not be used in Hawaii until 1959. Therefore, birth records created after 1959 were subject to demographic clarifications and metrics prescribed by the federal authority of the U.S. Department of Health, not the state of Hawaii.

    “This also explains why Obama’s birth announcements appear in the succession of announcements where and when they do. His alleged “Certification of Live Birth” is not approved by any federal authority as an official source of demographic data or medical verification of his birth. It is merely a record of birth registration. Therefore, the order of printing of announcements in the local papers comes directly from the list which is ordered based on the birth registration office location, not the chronological or alphabetical order of the medically verified birth.”

    If true this is very damaging to the Barry Hawaiian birth myth !

    • Posted April 4, 2011 at 9:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I had hoped that researcher would contact me so we could discuss the issue privately, but I haven’t heard anything back. The short version is that I agree with his assessment that Obama’s BC# indicates he was not born at Kapiolani, but that isn’t something that can be known by the order that the birth announcements came in. The most vital claim the researcher makes is that he has found birth announcements for people he can prove were foreign-born. If he could show the proof of that claim he would have a real smoking gun to make his point.

      For the long version (why I say what I’m saying) I’ll C&P from a post I made over at Free Republic. A lot of detail so I hope I don’t bore your pants off. =) I’ll just add one other thing to this, and that is the possibility that the newspapers truncated lists because of space limitations and didn’t start the next day’s list from where they left off the day before. I’ve spoken to a guy I work with who was in his hey-day back in the linotype days and he says he doesn’t think that would have happened, but he’s always worked with smaller weekly newspapers and the dynamics could be way different. In any event, we know that the order of the announcements showing up in the papers is not reliable, for whatever reason. And though I haven’t detailed it in the post, the story (of how the announcements got to the newspapers) that Starfelt says she got from the HDOH differs from the story Will Hoover says he got from a “copy boy”. So none of the stories match up.

      Anyway, here’s my post from FR:

      A person really needs to closely compare the 2 newspapers to see that there is no apparent rhyme or reason to the order that the birth announcements show up in the papers. If the order of the birth announcements in the papers was according to BC# how would you get somebody being listed 3 weeks later in one newspaper than in the other? Or – like the Nordykes – listed 3 days later than the other kids who were supposedly born at Kapiolani on Aug 4-5 but only in one paper and not listed at all in the other paper?

      It sounds like this guy’s source is trying to say that there was one list that the HDOH put out – a list of names in the order of their BC#’s. And the newspapers just printed that list verbatim so that when you look at the announcements in the papers you could number off the kids’ BC#’s based on the order that they appear in the announcements. That’s just not true. It is observably not true, and it makes me wonder what source would have told him that and why.

      There are blocks of names. I’ve analyzed the specific names in the lists for a couple weeks in August 1961. I have a colleague who has done that for all of August and half of September of 1961 so as to catch all the straggling announcements for August births. Ladysforest has done a stretch of 10 days (?) as well (correct me on that if I’ve remembered incorrectly, LF)

      What we see is that you might have 5 names that show up in the Star-Bulletin on the 6th that show up in the same order in the Advertiser a couple days, a week, or 3 weeks later. Right below that block of names in the Star-Bulletin for the 6th you might have a couple names that don’t ever show up in the Advertiser. Then right below that you’ll have another chunk of names that show up in the same order in the Advertiser a couple days, a week, or 3 weeks later. Followed by a couple names that don’t ever show up in the Advertiser. And so on.

      And in the Advertiser you’ll have the same pattern: blocks of names that show up sometime in the Star-Bulletin (anywhere from a day to 3 weeks apart), interspersed with a few straggling names that never show up in the Star-Bulletin. The Nordyke name is one of the stragglers in the Advertiser; it never shows up in the Star-Bulletin.

      It is true that BC#’s are given by the HDOH office and that the local registrars were supposed to collect BC’s for a week and then deliver that entire week’s BC’s at the end of that week. For Kapiolani, there is a pattern of the BC’s being delivered to the HDOH on Fridays. For the Wahiawa Hospital, which largely serviced military families, they seem to have been delivered on Tuesday. It would make sense that the hospitals/local registrars would deliver their BC’s on different days, so there was a steady stream of BC’s coming in rather than a deluge of BC’s all on the same day. All BC’s outside Oahu were to be mailed out to the HDOH on the 4th day of the month.

      It is true that Obama’s “date filed” doesn’t work for it to be a Kapiolani birth, because it was “filed” at the HDOH on a Tuesday, whereas other Kapiolani BC’s for that week (such as the Nordykes’) were filed on Friday. So I agree with that author that Obama’s BC# doesn’t jive with his claim that he was born at Kapiolani. But the birth announcements could not tell a person any of that, because the order of the birth announcements is different in the different papers – so the order in the papers cannot be reflective of the BC#’s.

      Right now I don’t know what explains what is seen in the newspapers. If there were lists put out by either the hospitals or the HDOH it doesn’t make sense that some names would appear 3 weeks later in one paper than in the other.

      The stragglers strongly suggest that the hospitals asked parents whether to put the announcement in one or both paper, OR that the announcements actually just came from the parents putting the announcement in the paper of their choice.

      But right now it seems that we have claims from 3 different “knowledgeable sources” in Hawaii (what Starfelt says the HDOH told her, what Will Hoover told me a “copy boy” told him, and what this researcher says his source told him) that all contradict each other, and none of them explains what can actually be seen in the newspapers. In addition, we’ve got WND’s source and what Starfelt claims the HDOH told her both saying that people could not put announcements in the paper voluntarily, and we’ve got Polarik saying that he contacted the sales manager at the Star-Bulletin classifieds, who said that parents have called or mailed in their own birth announcements all the time. If so, you’d expect to see lots of duplicates in the papers if the HDOH automatically gave the list to the newspapers and then the parents also sent in their announcement on their own. Yet I only remember seeing one duplicate in all of August 1961.

      IOW, it seems an awful lot like we’ve got some disinformation going on. Who’s telling the truth and who’s not, I don’t know. But none of this adds up.

      In 1976 the HDOH Administrative Rules were changed so that not only were lists of vital events supposed to be posted at the HDOH office (as they had always been posted), but lists were to be made and sent to the newspapers for publication – leaving out illegitimate births. The retention schedule shows that these lists piled up quickly, because in 1980 it was decided that those should be kept for a year but in 1981 they changed their minds to say they would only be kept for a month. The first mention of those lists was in 1980. There had been no retention period for those documents before that because they only started creating those documents in 1976.

      The HDOH had a delicate situation trying to deal with illegitimate births, because they were not allowed to release embarrassing information such as an illegitimate birth. By 1993 the Star-Bulletin included under their heading of “Vital Records – Births” a clarifying statement, that information released by the Department of Health would include the father’s name and the mother’s maiden name. That way there was no way of knowing whether or not the mother and father were married to each other. That also would make it so that an announcement that showed only the mother’s name, for instance, would be known to be a submission from the mother herself and was not the HDOH violating the rule of not disclosing illegitimate births. And there were announcements that were obviously put in by the mother because they didn’t follow that format.

      There could also have been people who submitted their own announcements using the HDOH format, which for that reason would appear to be HDOH-validated BC’s but which could actually just be a parent reporting a birth that had happened anywhere in the world. There would be no way to tell which had been reported by the HDOH and which hadn’t, but the HDOH was definitely saying that illegitimate births were NOT reported by them.

      The same situation was true in 1961. There is no way of knowing which of the birth announcements came from the HDOH (if any) and which came from self-reporting by the parents. In 1961 a person probably wouldn’t self-report an illegitimate birth and the HDOH was not allowed to publicly post information about an illegitimate birth. That is why the announcements all say “Mr. and Mrs.”. The HDOH had no reason to want to clarify which announcements were from them at that time because there weren’t any illegitimate births self-reported so the HDOH was not in danger of being accused of breaking the rule forbidding disclosure of illegitimate births. By 1993 that had changed.

      But the “Vital Records” heading in 1993 clearly does not mean that all the births listed were reported by the HDOH. And there is no reason to assume that the “Vital Records” heading in 1961 meant that either.

      Long story short, some or all of the sources are lying to us about how birth announcements were placed in the papers in 1961. The stories don’t match each other OR what is observable in the papers.

      Sorry this is so long.

      • Posted April 4, 2011 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

        One other thing too. Starfelt referred to paid birth announcements that were separate from the lists in the Classifieds section. I asked Ladysforest if, in all her looking in the microfilms, she had come across anything like that – birth announcements on any page besides the classifieds. At least at that point she had said no. Starfelt also referred to one-year birthday celebrations that were sometimes reported in the paper, and Ladysforest had not seen any of those either. It seems like Starfelt knew that birth announcements could be submitted by the public – as Polarik says the sales manager for the classifieds told him has always been the case – but wanted to say that there was a way to tell which were from the HDOH and which were self-submitted. As far as I know, based on what Ladysforest had seen when I asked her about it, there is no hard evidence of those claims.

        And a Star-Bulletin copy from 1993 shows that self-submitted and HDOH-submitted announcements were interspersed with each other in a single list under the heading “Vital Records – Births”.

      • RTM999
        Posted April 5, 2011 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

        There is a poster at a forum that I post at that claims to have the names of children who were foreign born that if I remember correctly relates to the newspaper announcements …

        I’ll attempt to get his list for you .

      • Posted April 6, 2011 at 2:56 am | Permalink

        That would be way cool. If there is a way to prove that their announcements were in the papers even though they were foreign-born, that would totally blow away the claims that Obama’s announcement has anything to do with where he was born.

  26. Jayhg
    Posted April 5, 2011 at 9:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This blog is the biggest piece of shit I’ve ever seen…….ALL KINDS OF SPECULATION, GUESSING, DEDUCING, CRAZY THEORIES, but not one thing has ever been proven. That’s why, butternutdezillion, you are laughed at by folks like me. But please, don’t take your meds. You’re slightly entertaining……

    • Tommy Thompson
      Posted April 6, 2011 at 4:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      Jayhg, were did you get that response…did you copy and paste that from the book of Cloward and Piven or did you get it from Saul Alinsky? Just showing up here at Butter’s site tells me you must be worried about something.

      • Jayhg
        Posted April 12, 2011 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

        tommy, of course my showing up here would make you think I’m worried. That’s all birfers do is speculate/guess/make shit up. I come here sometimes because I want to. No more, no less. I live in this free country you people are fond of talking about, but have no idea what that freedom really means. It’s means that I can look at and comments on any websites I want, dipshit.

        So stay in birfer fantansy land and tell butternut that she’s brilliant. She will believe you and when President Obama is re-elected, you can all go out and get drunk, then come to this page and whine. I will come over to see it and make fun of you…..because I can.

      • What A Hoot
        Posted July 13, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

        Jay, Jay, Jay……..”It’s means that I can look at and comments on any websites I want, dipshit.” and, “I will come over to see it and make fun of you…..because I can.”

        Who has told you, and what makes you believe them, that you can comment on any websites you want? Or make fun of a blogger on their blog because you can? Sweetheart, young one, free speech does not entitle you to the liberties your statement imply you believe you have. You don’t get it, do you? In your naive attempt to play with the grownup, you think you are making fun of birfers (no one, Honey, is offended when you use that term. It is endearing.) Anyways, have you considered WHY Miss Butter has not blocked your “free speech”, which she CAN do and so can any other website or blog? It may hurt, but try to think this through…..why are your comments put through? The posters here are making fun of you. Lauging at your misguided zeal. Laughing and not caring that you say all are crazy. You are the butt of the buttered jokes. You know, sort of like the twerp who wears really, really dorky shoes and the hottest girl in school says, “Ooooh, I liiiiike your shoes.” The twerp blushes and believes her and wears them the next day. This time the biggest jock in the school asks Twerp (while everyone is watching waiting for the big laugh), “Wow, niiiice shoes. Where did you get some. They are perfect for my date Friday night?” Twerp stands taller and tells him where they were bought. Everyone giggles. Twerp is so encouraged he gets the nerve up to ask Most Popular Girl out to a movie Friday night. She agrees to meet him for the show. Twerp puts on his new shoes because she liked them….and waits for her to show up at the show. She does — with Jock. So, why do your comments get posted? And elsewhere?

        Admins: I know, I backtracked on my committment not to respond to this poster………

  27. ladysforest
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 3:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter-I did the *detailed* comparison for just a ten day span. That was solely to determine if if was the usual thing for the papers to print the announcements in exact order only a day or so apart. In that ten day time frame it only occurred on the dates where obama was announced.
    I later did a less controlled comparison on the full two month range of announcements.
    I never found that pattern to have occurred on any other dates in that two months.

    Yes, there were blocks that matched, just not in the exact same place in each paper. And every few weeks or so a big list would come out that had dates, for example, from July 27 through Aug. 10. So that would reflect the batches of cert. apps. that came from the other islands. Any of those that had given permission has their announcements run in the paper. I just CAN’T imagine a whole group of islanders all calling in their three week old babies all at the same time. So, that DOES indicate that at least a good portion of the announcements would be generated from lists provided by the DOH. But not – in my opinion – without the parents express permission.

    Perhaps the “blocks” were names supplied by the DOH, and the oddballs were the family supplied names. It could be that some of them were undecided if they wanted the announcement, then decided “yes” and phoned it in. Thing we have to keep foremost in mind is that it was in 1961. Birth announcements were not considered “legal” announcements, like a death announcement would have been. Newspapers weren’t in the business of looking over birth records before they would print an simple announcement. I know the “guidelines for the Star Advertiser say that now, but I’m betting that is just in response to this whole obama thing.

    My opinion of that article is that it reads like the Lori Starfelt version of the announcements on steroids. He spent two months to come up with this? Sounds like that Baro guy.

    Did he get an address of this satellite office? Did they have dozens of “Local Registrars” all over the islands? Were the “Local Registrars” different than a notary public?
    “””This is because, in 1961, birth registration numbers were issued based on the location of the local Vital Records office in which the registration was recorded”” ???? No they weren’t. They came from the DOH at Honolulu, which is why it could take up to six weeks for a parent on a different island to get the BC.

    What was the shocking fact that was exposed from the tell-tale order the newspaper birth announcements was in?

    • Posted April 6, 2011 at 4:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Sounds like you’re thinking the same thing I’m thinking on where they came from. There are too many blocks of names that are in the same order for it to just be coincidence, and the births from the outlying islands appearing shortly after the 4th of the month (which was when state law said they were to be mailed to the HDOH) suggest HDOH involvement of some kind. But the stragglers defy the HDOH as the only source. I think it must have been a combination.

      The BC numbers would sort of depend on where the birth took place, because the local registrars would submit their BC’s for the week at one time. So a week’s worth of BC’s from Kapiolani, for instance, would be in numerical order. A week’s worth of BC’s from Queens would be in numerical order. That’s presuming that the hospitals had deputized “local registrars” – based on notations I’ve seen on BC’s where the local registrar signed with the note “Deputy” beside the word “Registrar”. That researcher talked about a local registrar servicing both Kapiolani and Queens. IIRC from the territorial state law, the HDOH itself was the registration district for Oahu and any “local registrars” would be deputized by the HDOH Director.

      The BC#’s would be tied to the “date filed”, which would be different for different hospitals. From the BC#’s I’ve been able to find online, there is a pattern of Kapiolani’s being delivered to the HDOH Office on Fridays. Obama’s Factcheck COLB has a Tuesday “date filed”, which doesn’t fit that pattern. So there is something to the BC#’s being sorted somewhat by what hospital. But the announcements wouldn’t necessarily reflect the BC#.

      I’d love to see the sources and what they said, and if there are birth announcements for people who can be proven to have been born abroad that is a slam dunk for showing the announcements don’t prove a HI birth.

  28. jleinf
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 7:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

    You can tell the libs hate this site. It makes them very nervous.

    • Posted April 6, 2011 at 7:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      lol. I think you’re right. =)

    • Jayhg
      Posted April 12, 2011 at 11:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

      you dreaming. I’m a liberal and I come over to this site to make fun of butternut and try to dispell the pack of lies she tells you guys cause it’s what you want to hear.

      And because she’s clearly not stable.

      • whosebone
        Posted April 26, 2011 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

        so what have you offered to “dispell” the “pack of lies” jay?

  29. ladysforest
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 8:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    WHOOPS! May have spoken too soon on the other island thing. I had thought some of the addresses had a diff island, but it may just be that the spelling of some of the towns are really close in spelling to a couple of islands. All those multiple i’s and l’s and w’s…..erf. I only did a quick check over one date today from a good sized list, and that didn’t appear to have any from a diff island.
    I’ll have to do more on this as I have time.

    That was never a criteria back when I did the main perusal, but it was one of those things that has been kicked around. The only pattern I see is that every few weeks one paper or the other runs a really big list. Say 100-150ish. The rest of the time it’s really pattern free.

  30. Posted April 11, 2011 at 12:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    How are you gonna spin Chiyome Fukino’s statement on NBC over the weekend? You’re on record as saying Hawaiian officials indirectly confirmed the fraudulency of the document Obama’s campaign posted on line. Tell me what in Fukino’s statement is indirect conformation that doc is fraudulent?

    • Posted April 12, 2011 at 12:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Show me where she ever called it a birth certificate.

      And show me where she ever said it was legally valid.

      For that matter, from the article show me where she specifically said anything. Show me her quotes.

      The quotes of the Howard Dean campaign manager who now represents the HI AG are patently false. HRS 338-13 authorizes the HDOH to make their certified copies by photocopy. And on page 19 of the PDF of HDOH Administrative Rules, at
      http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/ , it says that the registrant can get a copy of even the confidential medical portion of their long-form (standard birth certificate) if they specifically ask for it.

      In spite of the HDOH’s lies to the contrary, they are still following that law and those rules today (when it’s not about Obama; they are treating Obama’s records differently – 2 different people at the HDOH have said so off the record on the phone). Miki Booth received her son’s certified long-form birth certificate less than a month ago, which she has posted at http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/205497_1646821495774_1394022018_31363733_2189254_n.jpg

      Video of a woman ordering her certified long-form BC and being told she would receive it in 2 weeks is at http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/some-tropical-truth/

      IOW, everybody in Hawaii who has ordered and received their long-form knows that both the HDOH and the AG’s office are blatantly lying. Why do you think they are lying about this? And if they will so blatantly lie about something so easily proven wrong, what makes you think they will tell the truth on records they think they can keep hidden forever?

    • Jayhg
      Posted April 12, 2011 at 11:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Jerry Reed, butternut made it up. She deduced that in her own fevered mentally challenged head.

  31. Posted April 12, 2011 at 3:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butterzillion, the Obama COLB has printed on it in two places the word “certificate.” It says “certificate number” and “this certificate” shall be prima facie evidence in courts of law. You’re playing word games; certificate and certification are synonyms. I’m looking at a 1985 Roget’s Thesaurus, page 66.
    It starts off “certificate, n. certification …”
    Maybe we should consider verbs rather than nouns. All right, what does a certificate do? It certifies. What does a certification do? Well, my guess … it certifies!
    What does a certificate certify? It certifies the information contained in the document. Ditto, a certification.
    You say that Dr. Fukino didn’t confirm that the COLB was legally valid. Well, since you’re into indirect confirmation, she said that:
    (1) The Hawaii Dept. of Health has the valid original record in a bound volume on the first floor of the state Dept. of Health.
    (2) That the certification that the Obama campaign received back was based on the content of the original document in state files.

    A little Aristotilian logic here: If the COLB was based on a valid document in Dept. of Health files, then the COLB itself is legit.

    Here’s the bottom line: If current State Dept. of Health officials agree with Dr. Fukino on the validity of the COLB, then ANY birther bill that might be signed into law in any state will be a dead letter, because under the “Full Faith and Credit” of the Constitution, the other 49 states and D.C. will have to accept the COLB and forget about the long form. Any information on the long form that is not on the COLB is not constitutionally required to establish qualifications for the president, which are natural born citizenship, age, and 14 years (they don’t have to be consecutive) residency in the United States.
    Your whole conspiracy theory rests on the assumption that multitudes of people, living and dead, have participated, over a half century, in a vast cover-up What wound be the reason for people such as Dr. Fukino and former Gov. Lingle to do so?

    The absolutely lamest line I ever read in a novel, or heard in a film, is this from Love Story: “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.”

    Still, it sparked in me this thought:

    “Being a conspiracy theorist means never having to admit you’re wrong. Whenever confronted with an unwelcome fact, all you need do is observe how deucedly clever the conspirators have been in hiding the truth.”

  32. Posted April 12, 2011 at 4:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Whoever put something on my WordPress page so that the page froze up and wouldn’t close because it was waiting for a response from me – you’re a jerk. Knock it off.

    Now,Jerry, here is the relevant portion of that article:
    _________________________________
    Contacted by NBC, Fukino expanded on previous public statements and made two key points when asked about Trump’s recent comments.

    The first is that the original so-called “long form” birth certificate — described by Hawaiian officials as a “record of live birth” — absolutely exists, located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health. Fukimo said she has personally inspected it — twice. The first time was in late October 2008, during the closing days of the presidential campaign, when the communications director for the state’s then Republican governor, Linda Lingle (who appointed Fukino) asked if she could make a public statement in response to claims then circulating on the Internet that Obama was actually born in Kenya.

    Before she would do so, Fukino said, she wanted to inspect the files — and did so, taking with her the state official in charge of vital records. She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files. She then put out a public statement asserting to the document’s validity. She later put out another public statement in July 2009 — after reviewing the original birth record a second time.

    “It is real, and no amount of saying it is not, is going to change that,” Fukino said.
    ___________________________

    This won’t allow me to highlight, but the term used is “original birth record”. The actual long-form birth certificate is not called a “birth record”; it is called a “Certificate of Live Birth”; the explanation of the long-form being described as a “record of birth” is clearly Issikov’s way of translating Fukino’s actual words to him – “record of birth” – into a claim that she said that SPECIFICALLY A LONG-FORM exists. If she had said “long form” that explanation about “record of birth” would not be necessary. Fukino did not use the word “birth certificate”, and this fudging of terms by Issikov actually clarifies that when Fukino originally said “original birth certificate” she meant that as “record of birth”, which Issikov is saying they use interchangeably.

    So is she claiming an actual “Certificate of Live Birth”? Nobody knows. That lack of clarity gives her plausible deniability if the truth is ever found out; she could claim that what she said means either thing.

    Now, did Fukino ever say it was legally valid? The only place in the article that talks about it says, “then put out a public statement asserting to the document’s validity.” But if you look at Fukino’s two public statements, neither one asserted that what they have is legally valid. All she asserted was the EXISTENCE of the record, and that it is “on record in accordance with state policies and procedures” – policies and procedures stated in the HDOH Administrative Rules, which she was at the time (and until a year after the election) illegally hiding. Policies which include how to handle legally invalid records, so her statement about policies and procedures says nothing about the legal validity of what they have.

    Nowhere has Fukino ever said, on the record, that they have a legally valid birth certificate for Obama. Nowhere.

    However, in official communications her office has indirectly confirmed that Obama paid a fee to amend his birth certificate in 2006 – which makes it legally invalid.

    One other thing about that segment I copied here: Lingle says she told Fukino to look at the BC. Fukino says they never handled the record differently. And now Fukino says it was JANICE OKUBO who, not legally being able to see any of Obama’s actual records, asked Fukino to put out a public statement to refute the Kenyan birth claims. IOW, the story is changing and now Fukino is saying that somebody in her office – the dragon who has been sitting on the treasure all along to keep anybody from getting the truth – who never even knew what was on Obama’s records had an agenda of covering for Obama.

    The finger keeps pointing back to Janice Okubo. The same person who documentably lied about Neal Palafox resigning for “personal reasons”, when Palafox himself said that he didn’t know why he was resigning. The same person who everybody in that HDOH office will tell you is guarding Obama’s records, treating them differently. The same person who views all requests for index data as “about Obama”. The same Janice Okubo who told me they don’t have a birth record for somebody who is on their birth index list. The same Janice Okubo who said they could not report to law enforcement a known forgery. The same Janice Okubo who falsely stated that the HDOH won’t issue copies of long-form birth certificates (see http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:762ei1HnFdYJ:nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/born-identity-star-bulletin-interviews-janice-okubo/+Janice+Okubo+bio&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com), when it’s documented that they do upon request. How many documented lies has this gal already been caught reporting to the public? And all of them cover for Obama.

    I think Janice Okubo needs a visit from the FBI.

  33. Posted April 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I think a reasonably intelligent, open-minded person who hasn’t been following this issue would conclude that Fuknino was saying the original birth certificate is on file, and that the COLB was made from information on the original — hence is valid under any law.
    I won’t take this debate further, but I will predict:
    1. Any “birther bill” that requires more info than is on the COLB will be shot down by the courts before it reaches the Supreme Court, which will then decline to review the ruling.
    2. If a state requires a birth certificate, Hawaii will provide a copy of the COLB, and that state will be required to accept it as proving the natural born citizenship and age requirements of the constitution.
    3. Obama will be listed on the ballots of 50 states and D.C. in November 2012.
    I won’t predict the election itself; if I could, I’d be tempted to make an “investment” in the outcome.

    I will say, however, if the birth issue is decisive, it will be a national tragedy, doing lasting harm. This is not because Obama and his policies are indispensible — some Republicans such as Romney could potentially do a fine job — but because the election process will have been degraded to a new low.

    • Posted April 12, 2011 at 5:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      All disinformation is made to appear to say what the person wishes they could truthfully say. That’s why courts require people to testify UNDER OATH. Otherwise it depends on what the definition of is is.

      If obeying the rule of law on eligibility will bring the election process to a new low in your estimation, then I think you’re on the side of lawlessness. Unsealing divorce records so that young children will have to hear all about mommy and daddy’s kinky sex is about as low as a person can go to get elected – that’s how Obama got elected in his IL race. Following the rule of law is alien to Chicago, I know, but in some parts of the world it is viewed as a good and proper thing – much better and more proper than using children as political human shields.

      And that is why this issue resonates with so many people. It is corrupt Chicago lawlessness being rejected by the meat-and-potatoes people of middle America, who know that civil, free society depends on the rule of law rather than rule by corrupt, conniving, men of lawlessness.

    • Posted April 12, 2011 at 5:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      One other point about your comment: a state is not required to accept a COLB as a claim of proof of any of the birth facts on it. A valid, non-manipulated COLB is to be considered proof that a birth occurred, period. In my booklet at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/why-lb-654-is-needed-revised1.pdf I explain why it is not a violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution when a state requires very specific proofs for very specific claims.

      Specifically, the IG for the Department of Health and Human Services RECOMMENDS that no state allow a single piece of paper – especially based on an electronic record that can be hacked and manipulated remotely – as proof of anything. See http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf and http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=122427 .

      I have no doubts that the courts would be used to try to undo any law that is passed. Courts are a weapon. In fact, are you aware that the law that Obama said would protect infants born alive after a failed abortion has officially been prevented from ever being implemented or enforced because there were so many lawsuits against it that the state agreed (in the Herbst-O’Malley Agreement) to not ever enforce it in return for an end to the lawsuits?

      That gets right back to what I mentioned before – the rule of law. People who have money at their disposal can prevent any law from actually taking effect, simply by legally harassing anybody who tries to enforce it. That is the game plan similar to Cloward-Piven: overwhelm the opponent. In this case, by lawsuits that states can’t afford to defend. When you’ve got the resources of the abortion industry, the political slush funds from democrats and their unions (as well as the payoffs such as TARP and the stimulus, Obamacare waivers, etc), world communist money, and (in the case of Obama) foreign Muslim money, you can do a lot of legal harassment that the good, meat-and-potatoes taxpayers of the world who are raising their families and minding their own business can’t afford to do.

      Obama thinks he can buy the presidency for $1 billion. You know that’s not for advertising; anybody who advertised that much would be so oversold the people would be disgusted. That huge amount of campaign money – at a time when individuals can’t afford to give and his approval numbers are so low that normal voters wouldn’t even WANT to give – is coming from somewhere besides the US taxpayers, and that money will almost certainly be used to buy silence on this issue or stonewalling on state laws.

      That’s the Chicago way that so many of us bread-and-butter Americans are disgusted with.

    • Chester
      Posted April 14, 2011 at 8:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      RE: (Jerry Reed) “Any “birther bill” that requires more info than is on the COLB will be shot down by the courts before it reaches the Supreme Court, which will then decline to review the ruling.”

      Unfortunately, you would be right based on the history of the past two years. However, the game is changing. The Donald is now in the picture. This is the first time the media is talking about it.

      There will be a point when Congress will not be able to ignore it any longer. SCOTUS will have to define “natural born citizen” sometimes in the next two years. They can not continue forever what Alen Keyes calls “dereliction of duty”.

      RE: “… the birth issue is decisive, it will be a national tragedy, doing lasting harm. ”

      The harm to the constitution is committed by the regime and its supporters.

      RE:”….— the election process will have been degraded to a new low. “

      Yes, that is what Nancy Pelosi did when she certified that O is eligible – a new low.

  34. Posted April 12, 2011 at 5:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I kinda take exception to being placed in the side of lawlessness. You and I just disagree on what the law of presidential eligibility entails. It entails being a natural born citizen, being 35 years of age, and being 14 years a resident of this county. If Hawaii proffers a copy of the COLB as proof of Obama’s birth there, sorry to say it, but I take it as superior evidence to anything the “birthers” have offered. And I believe the courts will do so as well. Just remember my predoctions. Nothing else can I add.

    • Posted April 12, 2011 at 5:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If it is credible evidence then show me that it hasn’t been manipulated. I’ve seen too many laws and too much lawlessness from the very people you’re trusting. Show me the proof. If showing the proof after all that lawlessness and all the conflicting claims from government officials is too much to ask, then I call that lawlessness.

      Why would you trust people who have documentably lied on so many things? How do you trust a person who tells you they have no birth record for a specific person who is listed in their birth index? Doesn’t that tell you that something is very, very screwed up in that office?

      Hawaii law says that if a government official “informs the public” they have to disclose the records on which they based their public statements. The law recognizes that officials need to be held accountable to document what they say. Hawaii is breaking that law. If these people are trustworthy and credible why are they breaking their own law which says they must be able to document what they publicly state? The cover-up is the story. I don’t understand why the cover-up doesn’t bother you, or why you would trust people who have so blatantly both lied and broken laws in order to not be accountable for speaking the truth.

      • Jayhg
        Posted April 12, 2011 at 11:39 pm | Permalink

        butternutdezillion, YOU have to PROVE that it has been manipulated. You can’t say THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN MANIPULATED and then want the Hawaii DOH, of all people, to prove TO YOU, butternut, that it has not!!!

        Damn, dealing with you birfers sometimes is maddening!

        Jerry Reed has tried to deal with you like you are normal, but I see he is not having any luck. Like he said: for a conspiracy to work, any information to the contrary of the conspiracy is just proof of how clever they are in hiding the truth, of which only butter is privy, apparently.

        Dumb ass birfer…..wackadoodle nutjob.

  35. Posted April 12, 2011 at 5:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Sorry, meant country, not county

  36. neconservative
    Posted April 12, 2011 at 6:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter,

    Maybe you’ve seen this already, but, can a FOIA request (or whatever Hawaii calls it) be made about this potential ‘secret meeting’?

    http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/01/o-con-had-legal-help-from-non-partisan.html

    In order to avoid the destructive political consequences, Obama had to engage a private meeting away from the media. Such a private meeting would also have to be justifiable under Hawaii Revised Statutes Adminstrative Rules 91, 92-4, 92-5, and 3-170-11. Specifically, any correspondence or meeting between any candidate or representative of the candidate and members of the Hawaiian Election commission would have to be held in accord with these rules. However, it is HRS 92-5-8 which affords the permission to hold a secret meeting between members of the Elections Commission and Obama. The rules states:

    92-5 Exceptions (a) A board may hold a meeting closed to the public pursuant to section 92-4 for one or more of the following reason(s):
    .

    (8) To deliberate or make a decision upon a matter that requires the consideration of information that must be kept confidential pursuant to a state or federal law, or a court order.

    • Posted April 13, 2011 at 2:46 am | Permalink | Reply

      I’m not sure if a secret meeting would have records associated with it that would be public. But something that could be requested would be any communications between the Dept of Elections and Obama or his representative. At the very least there should be a notification of whether or not his name qualified to be placed on the ballot. If there was a secret meeting it would have to start with Obama being notified that he didn’t qualify.

      From what Deputy AG Schulaner told me, there wouldn’t be a problem with the HDP and DNC disagreeing about eligibility, because they don’t say that the “appropriate official” has to be from the HDP specifically, or from the DNC specifically. As long as one of those parties (national or state) certifies Constitutional eligibility, that requirement is taken care of. But the law also requires that both the DNC and HDP specifically state that the nominated person is their candidate – the candidate of the HDP specifically and the candidate of the DNC specifically. The HDP didn’t ever do that. That could potentially cause problems because the HDP hadn’t declared their specific candidate and thus didn’t fulfill the law. That should have kept Obama off the ballot. Maybe Cronin had a secret meeting because of that. Hard to tell. The first step, though, would be to try to get a copy of the communications from Cronin to Obama. And that should be a public record.

      • jscovitch
        Posted April 14, 2011 at 12:56 am | Permalink

        Possible problem: Remind all that Jack
        Gilhardy, ESQUIRE, LLC, of the Hawaii DNC
        allegedly objected to the Obama placement
        on the ballot in Hawaii. Pelosi overrode
        all objections and proceeded anyway. Gilhardy was the private attorney for Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham, in the 1964 divorce proceedings, from about circa,
        Jan-June 1964. He saw data on O. as non-
        citizen, p. 11 in the 20 p. document. As
        noted, the BC copy is missing (now). Need
        someone to find, FOIA, and subpoena Attorney Gilhardy. This is a crisis. Need
        data of Gilhardy, Schatz, and Hawaii DNC.
        Can someone contact Gilhardy in Hawaii? J.

      • Posted April 14, 2011 at 1:14 am | Permalink

        It would be interesting to know what Gilardy knows. The name I’ve seen was actually William H Gilardy Jr. I believe he is still practicing in HI.

        Ultimately, we need somebody in law enforcement to actually launch a legal investigation so that depositions can be taken from a bunch of people.

  37. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 6:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, fortunately Phil Berg copied and pasted the instructions from the DHHL (dept of Home Lands in Hawaii)in 2008 requiring the “long form” certificate of live birth for their purposes. Those instructions were changed in 2009 when the DOH changed their policy on providing long forms…or at least they SAID the changed the policy. evidently that was another lie. Here’s the instructions from DHHL in 2008:
    ““In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”
    “When requesting a certified copy of your birth certificate from the Vital Records Section of DOH, let the clerk know you are requesting it “For DHHL Purposes,” and that you need a copy of the original Certificate of Live Birth and not the computer-generated Certification. If mailing in your request form, please fill in “For DHHL Purposes” in the “Reason for Requesting a Certified Copy” section

    • Posted April 14, 2011 at 1:20 am | Permalink | Reply

      Just heard from somebody who spoke to a worker at the Vital Records Office TODAY. The worker is claiming that this policy has been in effect since 2001. She said the only times a person could get a long-form is if they have a “weird-sounding name”, or with non-American letters. I guess “Alan Booth” is a pretty weird name, huh?

      Unbelievable.

      But there the evidence is, right there on the archived DHHL page – that if you ask specifically for a long-form you can get it. The HDOH Administrative Rules go even farther; they say you can’t get the confidential, medical portion of the standard BC (long-form) UNLESS YOU SPECIFICALLY REQUEST IT. lol.

      These people are violating HRS 338-13 and UIPA. Blatantly. I hope somebody sues the crap out of them. Then maybe they’ll stop stinking up the place. lol. Actually, as long as the suit is heard in Hawaii, the judges will stink up the place just as badly as this new HDOH director. That’s how a place can become as lawless as Hawaii is. The enforcers of the law have to look the other way. The lawlessness we’re seeing is an indictment of the entire Hawaii government, IMHO.

      • gorefan
        Posted April 19, 2011 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

        What do you think about Danae’s COLB, it says “Certification of Live Birth” and “Date Filed”?

        Also Alan Booth’s COLB says “Date Filed”, but his says “Certificate of Live Birth”?

        Any ideas?

      • gorefan
        Posted April 20, 2011 at 2:01 am | Permalink

        Both Alan’s and danae’s long forms have the same “date accepted” as the short form’s “date filed”. So is it resonable to assume that the President’s long form has a date accepted as 8/8/61 since that is what is on his COLB under date filed?

  38. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 3:25 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, have you heard this interview with investigator Susan Daniels on the SS#? There are three videos of this interview and there are some extremely interesting parts including Judge Carter’s use of an employee from Perkins Coie…very interestin.

    • Posted April 14, 2011 at 4:28 am | Permalink | Reply

      Right now I can only use the internet when my computer is in safe mode. So I don’t have the use of my speakers or printer at the same time as I have the use of internet. It’s a big pain. We’ll start over on this computer just as we’ve had to start over on every computer I’ve used for the last 3 years, but I’ve always felt that too many critical things were going on for me to take the time to do it yet. So I actually end up missing quite a bit – anything that’s on Youtube, for instance.

      I wonder if there’s something written that has the same content.

    • Chester
      Posted April 15, 2011 at 5:19 am | Permalink | Reply

      RE:”…Judge Carter’s use of an employee from Perkins Coie…very interestin…”

      Carter’s law clerk who drafted the papers for Carter was an ex-employee of Perkinks Coie.

      Or is there more to the story?

  39. Chester
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 7:48 am | Permalink | Reply

    Dear Butter,

    I have just discovered your excellent site, based on drkate’s recommendation. I am interested in finding facts and links related to the following issues. Can you or any of your readers help me?

    RE:
    “Hospital Letter” hand carried by Abercrombie to Kapi’olani and allegedly signed by O.

    The White House never confirmed the authenticity of it. Correct?

    Has anyone sued the hospital for false advertising?

    How long was the letter on the hospital’s website?

    As far as you know anyone is planning to sue the hospital?

    Do we know who gave it to Abercrombie?

    If the hospital is sued, Abercrombie could be called as witness to testify who gave him the letter.

    Anything else – relevant?

    RE:
    Relatives’ right to access the HI-DOH birth records. Relatives are exempted from the secrecy rule.

    How to find the link to that HI code?

    Has that changed, or still valid?

    There was one person who claimed to be O’s relative and requested the records. He was told to wait. Did he ever received anything?

    What is his name?

    Any guess why no other interested relative surfaced?

    Has this avenue been tried?

    Anything else – relevant?

    Thanks.

    • Posted April 14, 2011 at 11:47 am | Permalink | Reply

      Welcome aboard, Chester! The more, the merrier! =)

      As far as I know, Worldnetdaily has been the main source carrying the story about Kapiolani’s fundraising letter. Miss Tickly at http://www.obamasgarden.wordpress.com has noticed some discrepancies with the image on the WND article and was trying to clarify with them where they got the inset (close-up) image of the seal.

      Last I knew, she hadn’t been able to get answers regarding that. And as far as I know there haven’t been any lawsuits for false advertising – probably for two reasons: there is no DIRECT proof that he wasn’t born there that can be presented in court because we aren’t allowed access to it, and the suit would have to happen in Hawaii and no judge there is going to give justice on anything surrounding Obama. That’s the difficulty with everything. The highest I’ve gone is to the Ombudsman’s Office, which has been more than willing to wink at every illegal activity they are alerted to, saying that they can’t report crimes unless they uncover it themselves. If a citizen uncovers crime they have to go to the Dept of Public Safety themselves- which I also did, but they only have a web form so I reported what I knew and nothing ever happened with it. I was never contacted for more information or anything and don’t even have any evidence that I contacted them to hold them accountable with. (And the HDOH has gone to a web form that creates the same problem; anything I’ve sent to them via web form has been totally ignored. Same thing with snail-mail requests sent without delivery confirmation. Without proof that you sent something, you may as well not have sent it because it gets sent to the circular file.)

      That’s why this is really a failure of the SYSTEM. Utter lawlessness on the part of the Hawaii government.

      I’m not familiar with the relative who was going to request records, but unless they are a parent or sibling the HDOH will say they don’t have a direct, tangible interest. Heck, the HDOH has now gone to where they are saying the PERSON HIM/HERSELF does not have a direct, tangible interest to get a certified copy of their long-form. That’s what was in the article by Michael Isikkov, quoting the representative for the HI Attorney General. Said even Obama himself could not get a copy of his long-form. Totally violates HRS 338-13, 338-18, and UIPA – but as long as the Hawaii judges will overlook it the government bureaucrats can do whatever they want. And that’s exactly what they’ve been doing for the last 3 years. Lawlessness.

      • Chester
        Posted April 15, 2011 at 7:11 am | Permalink

        Thank you for your thoughtful answers.

        RE: Hospital letter

        The chances of such lawsuit were discussed two years ago on Leo’s site. The problem was: who would be the plaintiff in order to obtain Standing. The answer was, patients of the hospital or contributor to the hospital’s funds.

        The issue that it can not be conclusively proven that he was not born there, did not come up. Now there are even more circumstantial evidence: The statement by Abercomie that he can not find the bc, perhaps the evidence (if exists) that it is a forgery, the White House’s refusal to confirm authenticity.

        Probably enough circumstantial evidence to obtain discovery by an unbiased judge. In general, people have been received stiff sentences based on less circumstantial evidence. However, you are right that finding such judge would be difficult. Nevertheless, that goes for all the eligibility lawsuits, as the Judiciary Branch is operating in “dereliction of duty” mode.

        RE: Relatives right to access

        Yes, the bureaucrats are violating the law and getting away with it. I distinctly remember that a man who proved that he was O’s relative filed a request and he was told to wait. He was not outright refused.

        Also, I read the rule in 2008 and it did not say anything about how close relative you have to be. (However, I can not find it now.)

        Again, you are right, the bureaucrats will probably enact their own rules to ignore the law, if it is still unchanged, and restrict access to zero. But eventually, if someone has the ability and the means to fight them it would probably be worthwhile on these two fronts. The bureaucrats are taking a risk that someday they will be accused of sabotaging the law – they probably know that. So keeping the heat on would be helpful.

  40. multisigma
    Posted April 22, 2011 at 9:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Stumbled on your blog from a link from a link, etc. Congratulations on maintaining an informative and civil site, and for discussing evidence intelligently; I will certainly bookmark for further attention.
    Didn’t search in all the corners, but have you pursued the angle of interviewing constitutional law scholars about the exact provisions of Article II, Section 1 in the context of hypothetical candidacy? While the enormous intrigue surrounding the birth documentation certainly deserves unrelenting study, it would seem that the most simple of facts – i.e., Barky admits that his father was never a US citizen – should seal the deal once the American public becomes “educated” on the precise requirements and the Founders’ logic in creating them. Granted, it would require locating not only qualified academics but also ones with a conservative bent so as to avoid the temptation to assist with a personal agenda, and additionally those with the personal courage to risk their credentials and livelihood (if not more) in the quest for truth. Clearly, now that the issue has been elevated somewhat by Trump’s actions there would seem to be a hot iron just begging for some impacts.
    Also, there remains the historical reference of the Chester Arthur case that might provide an appealing entre to the subject- aside from a few musing online and the odd footnote on history websites (and, of course, an incomplete treatment on Wikipedia) this might be an opportunity for attention.
    There is another issue that has been bothering recently- given the rejection of the birth issue that prominent media conservatives have made their policy, are they simply trying to protect their incomes by avoiding areas that could result in intense pressure for their dismissal, or do they perhaps know something that they are reluctant to disclose, such as that Barky’s real father was actually American (perhaps Frank Marshall Davis?), making the b.c. point somewhat moot?
    As mentioned, perhaps these comments are repetitious of previous discussions that I overlooked, but thought they might be stimulating.

    • Posted April 22, 2011 at 11:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The Constitutional issue definitely needs resolving. And there have been a lot of people who have researched the Founders’ intent. The trouble is that the only people who matter are the judges, and they are “evading that issue”, according to Justice Clarence Thomas. As long as they can say that nobody has standing, the issue will never be decided. And they’ve already decided that neither electors, nor opposing candidates, nor military officers who have sworn to defend the US Constitution from foreign and domestic enemies have standing. IOW, they have effectively said that it is NOBODY’s business. There is nobody that they could not stonewall by denying “standing”.

      And that’s one reason why this situation is so intolerable. We’ve all had a big middle finger flipped at us, by the courts, by the media, by the politicians, by government bureaucrats, by law enforcement, and by folks like George Soros who has said that he doesn’t want the US to win the “war on terror” because the US is the world’s great evil that must be destroyed. If you believe the arguments set forth by all these people, the Constitution CANNOT EVER be upheld, because it is nobody’s business whether the President is eligible and until it is finally somebody’s business the courts can’t decide anything. If a state makes it their business, Obama will spend taxpayer money to argue that it’s none of our business. But it will never reach that point because Obama will first threaten to take away all federal aid from any state that attempts to require Constitutional eligibility to be documented.

      I think we’re in a situation where the “experts” are telling us all that the Constitution cannot be followed and we should just shut up about it and go back to sleep. If we try to do anything to fix the situation we will be fought with our own tax dollars. Like a flesh-eating bacteria that causes a body to devour itself. The federal government is already trying to do that by telling Arizona that not only will the feds not protect them from foreign invasion, but the feds will use their own tax money to fight in court to keep them from defending THEMSELVES from foreign invasion. The end result is that as long as we have a treasonous foreigner in the White House, with his thug/fox Attorney General guarding the henhouse, this nation is totally vulnerable to whatever buddy “foxes” want to raid the place.

      And that’s what is happening. With the blessing of the courts, media, law enforcement, Congress, government bureaucrats, and “conservative” leaders.

      The Arizona eligibility bill would have allowed any legal resident – including AZ House and Senate members who have subpoena power – to challenge eligibility, which would have provided the avenue for ALL this to be resolved. The definition of NBC, and the specific circumstances of Obama’s birth and citizenship – including the manipulation of government records and/or document fraud, which we already know has happened with every government document Obama supposedly has. Passport, SSN, selective service registration, and birth certificate.

      But that was vetoed by Gov Jan Brewer because she was embarrassed by the word “circumcision” (tee-hee) Gag. Or, alternatively, she thought the SOS would be too “powerful” if a law was passed allowing him/her to no longer be the sole gatekeeper but to be held accountable to the law by vigilant citizens like you and me. God knows that allowing people to have legal standing to challenge an SOS’s decision in court is a measure that would make the SOS too powerful. And as you can probably tell, I’m being sarcastic on that; Brewer’s reasoning is absolutely bass-ackwards. The bill would have ensured that the SOS was held accountable to the rule of law; vetoing the bill ensures that the SOS remains the sole gate-keeper – which is what Brewer claimed she was against.

      At this point the only way that the definition of “natural born citizen” will ever make any difference, and the only way that the rampant crime and fraud to cover up Obama’s documentation problem will ever be subjected to justice is if we the people act as if the nation’s survival depends on us alone – because at this point it does. The politicians, bureaucracy, courts, media, and law enforcement are altogether worthless. They are worse than gravel in our shoes; they are actively trying to keep the Constitution from being obeyed.

      We need voters to pass a ballot initiative in their state giving any legal resident legal standing to challenge Presidential/Vice-Presidential eligibility in court. That’s the only way the US Constitution will ever be followed.

      Most of the politicians are scared of being ridiculed by the media. And the media was threatened with annihilation if they reported on the eligibility issue – once in October of 2008 and at least once after the election. See http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13373 . The media heads passed on the threat to on-air personalities by saying that if they or anybody on their show mentioned the eligibility issue their career, life, and family could be jeopardized. It was not a vain threat, and the personalities apparently knew it because they were fearful for their lives when Hagmann talked to them.

      Basically the same threat was given publicly a couple days after Sean Hannity publicly supported Trump’s questions, when Media Matters said through a Ben Smith Politico article that they were conducting “guerilla warfare” against Fox reporters and were trying to influence “regulators” in the US (FCC?) and Britain to get them to destroy Fox’s parent company.

      It was very interesting that around the same time, Fox contributor Michelle Malkin was very concerned for her niece who was missing and whose whereabouts were unknown, and a Muslim guest on NPR made a “joke” about Malkin’s family. Although the “joke” was pretending that a Malkin family member “came out” as a Muslim, Malkin responded by noting it was uncalled-for especially because she had spoken against “birthers”. Whether it was intended that the “joke” was supposed to make her think about her family and what could happen to them if she didn’t renounce “birthers” adamantly enough, that was the connection that she seems to have made. And given the situation – the previous threats and her niece being missing – I see why she did and suspect that was exactly how she was supposed to take it. And how Sean Hannity was supposed to take it – that if he didn’t back off the “birther” thing then his friends – even those who denounced the eligibility issue – could be hit. We don’t get cable so I don’t know much about it, but I’ve heard others talk about Hannity backing off the eligibility issue since then.

      So anyway, this country is in a terrible, terrible mess, like a boa constrictor tightening around our neck while we seem powerless to stop it. I think most people sense that something is very, very wrong but don’t know what to do about it. My belief is that we need to unite to pass ballot initiatives granting legal standing to challenge eligibility so that all this lawlessness and the useless, crumbling foundations (politicians, media, law enforcement, courts, and pundits) will not be able to destroy us from within.

      • multisigma
        Posted April 23, 2011 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

        All of your points are very well taken, but I fear that they do not go far enough; over the past couple of decades we have seen not just a coarsening of dialogue but what can only be interpreted as the rise of a criminal element within politics that far overshadows all we have seen in past centuries- and that would be saying a lot. The distinction would involve techniques that we have come to jokingly call “The Chicago Way”, but are rather the bare-knuckles methods of organization and control that are common in primitive societies but had been largely overcome in what we were calling the Developed World. Ultimately, the issue is not just power but also justification- the hardest foe to oppose is one who is convinced that his actions are “for your own good”, and that seems to be the morality of those currently seeking to establish a global government. They see overpopulation as a proximate and urgent threat and fear for the continuation of their authority once resources dwindle and the masses are rioting in the streets, so these self-annointed elites have determined that the only feasible answer is a centralized world government with absolute power to control distribution, population, and behavior. Truly dystopian, but an attractive scenario if you fancy yourself one of their number. Unfortunately, freedom can clearly not be allowed in such a scheme and national boundaries must be erased- hence the efforts to break down all trade barriers and to encourage regional alliances. (sending manufacturing to countries willing to sacrifice their workers and environment, intertwining financial institutions, redistributing US wealth, etc. And remember the uproar over the Trans-Texas Corridor?)
        Based on reading their editorial output I used to think that all this stuff was far into the future, but instead it appears they do not intend to wait.
        It is against that backdrop of large-scale and ruthless “progress” that I see current events, especially matters related to the latest sock-puppet to occupy the top office. Yes, the Constitution is now considered not just irrelevant but actually an impediment to changes that are intended to achieve sustainability by decreasing the overall living standards of Americans toward that of the rest of the (third) world while attempting to homogenize cultures into something that provides strong-arm control of masses, like maybe Islam.
        So, how does the bc controversy fit in when we know a priori that it has been excluded from consideration? It becomes an example of how you find a very large loophole – in this case, the lack of statute law to provide enforcement of the NB clause, rendering it toothless – and then drive not just a truck but the entire nation through it. Subsequently, using the issue to divert attention from the fundamental facts (that pesky parental citizenship thingee) avoids any real dissent from those in the media or academia who might have the temerity to broach the subject at any level, even theoretically.
        The degree to which the corrosion of the Republic has progressed can be inferred by the increasing numbers of supposedly-responsible people such as you enumerate who are now intimidated into silence. Previously, it might have been possible to assemble enough responsible and credentialed legal experts to frame things intelligently and to counsel the public on the basic civics on which they were denied instruction in school, but that point seems long gone. Instead, it would now be necessary to interview any who might participate cloaked in disguise and with altered voice. Or might that be an effective way to make the case after all?
        Hanging around the various forums has been frustrating at best, since most animosity has been directed at the most obvious targets, the prime instigators. Instead, perhaps it is time to turn attention to those who purport to oppose them but seem to be undercutting the pursuit of truth. Hearing applause for folks like Trump (known friend and confidant of Hillary) or some of the firebrand speakers like Coulter (known friend and confidant of Romney) or the current pantheon of RINOs might be a reasonable place to start since they are presumably more accessible and, in fact, dependent on conservatives for their livelihood.

      • Posted April 23, 2011 at 11:52 pm | Permalink

        Big Distraction : All must read the current propaganda for O. by Mark Niesse. What a bold Orwellian liar!!! Boo to Mark Niesse, total disgrace. Even inserts the false natal address as the true TOOTS DUNHAM Hawaiian address in the article. As far as Mark N. is concerned, we have nothing to worry about.
        The MSM has provided all the data we will
        ever need. Somebody help us!!! Are we all
        living in a parallel world? Huh?

  41. Posted April 27, 2011 at 3:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

    BZ, I promised to return only when birth legislation finally fails everywhere it has been tried. But the release of President Obama’s long form gives me enough reason to say “I told you so.” Only deep-dyed conspiracy theorists can keep harping on Obama’s supposed foreign birth now. I know a lot of people have already blogged that the released document is a fake, as some had signalled in advance they would do. But I expect that the disblievers in Obama’s NBC stautus will dwindle, along with state lawmakers’ appetitite to continue to pursue birther legislation.
    Cheers!

    • What A Hoot
      Posted July 16, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Over a year later from this “I told you so” and the issuance of the bc has not dwindled. In fact, look around an it can be noted that many of the first screaming, “Forgery!” were Barry followers. They looked to discredit the naysayers and are ……now…….seeing fraud……….The I-told-you-so’s were short-lived, that is for sure…

  42. thinkwell
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 4:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Obama just “released” a purported copy of his long form Hawaiian BC.

    The document posted here is a pathetically obvious forgery:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

    This appears to be an official government website so that by approving the release of this clearly digitally forged PDF Obama has inescapably painted himself into a prison cell corner.

    One can see that most of the print was layered on top of the scanned document by panning or zooming the view in or out slightly while viewing the document at a high zoom level. The bottom layer (background, most of the witness signatures and some of the form text that is still original) clearly pops up and is displayed as a complete layer in its entirety before any of the forged upper layer(s?) begin to display. Check this out for yourself by viewing the document linked above (and be sure to save a copy before it gets fixed). Also, note that all the original document text, original signatures and other document features exhibit multiple levels of intensity and hue when viewed under high zoom. All of the forged upper layer text appears as an even, single dark intensity level. This clean digital characteristic of the upper layer is completely unnatural, even to my untrained eye.

    Others on the web with advanced graphics editors report that the forger of this document left in layered format and did not bother to flatten it, thereby eliminating the most damning and amateurish sign of digital forgery. Could they be that stupid or arrogant?

    Why would Obama release such an obvious forgery? The evidence is so undeniably incriminating. Why is he not worried about going to prison. Is he laughing our faces? Is he that secure in his usurpation?

    • Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      My guess is that he wants to milk the “birthers will never believe anything anyway” line in preparation for whatever is in Corsi’s book and/or whatever Trump will push next. With the media pushing this thing as authentic and ignoring all the problems with it, the media will run with that idea. Whether most people will buy into that or not remains to be seen. If we as a nation can be suckered that easily then we deserve what we get.

      I also think that the recent claims by the HDOH that they CAN’T issue a certified long-form even to Obama and that Obama couldn’t even make a copy of it himself (blah blah blah) backed them into a corner. If you look at that document, it is pretending to be a copy from the HDOH with the security paper but it doesn’t have a border or seal. They’re trying to make it look like it’s a photocopy that they could say Obama’s representative made him/herself, since they’ve already claimed they can’t make a photocopy of it…

      It’s just a great big mess because they have changed their story so many times and are trying to mesh all the lies into one document. How does this fit Fukino’s “half-typed, half-written” comment?

      And they had to have the information match the forged COLB, so they were stuck with the incompatible BC# and “date filed”. The doctor they came up with appears to be a geriatrics doctor. lol

      The trick now is to get the truth out before the lie makes it all the way around the world twice. I had to turn my radio off as I was working this morning because I can’t stand listening to the stupid comments people make before they’ve had a chance to even check on genuineness.

      And I shouldn’t utter the words that came to mind when I heard it said that Obama was “amused” by this – as he watched a decorated military surgeon go to jail for 6 months and lose probably about $3 million in personal savings, income, and benefits rather than take 2 minutes to set the minds of all our military personnel at ease. Some of our wounded soldiers in Afghanistan had a less-prepared doctor attend to them because Obama was too “amused” to release a long-form that supposedly has NOTHING WHATSOEVER ON IT that would be “embarrassing”. He’s also spent taxpayer money defending and forced others to spend their hard-earned money in order to supposedly just be “amused” over people wanting to see a BC that there was supposedly NO REASON to hide.

      Ugh. I get sick just thinking about anybody that vile. There is nothing “likable” about a man who would do this. Nothing. Either Obama is a crook who is hiding something, or he’s the biggest jerk this world has ever seen. Or both. And at this point I’m leaning towards both.

      • Gregg Shonka
        Posted April 27, 2011 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

        If we take this new document at face value, Obama’s just given us proof he’s not natural born. His dad is who he has said he is, and Obama senior was never a U.S. citizen, so Barack’s not a natural born citizen. These facts continue to escape the talking heads.

    • Jayhg
      Posted May 3, 2011 at 9:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

      President Obama is not worried about going to prison because he, like everyone else, knows that you birthers, especially this butternut person, are a bunch of loons who would say everything is fake if it is in favor of President Obama.

      So no, President Obama is not laughing at you or anything. He treats you birthers as you should be treated……LIKE THE LOONIES THAT YOU ARE!!!!!!!!

      • Jayhg
        Posted May 3, 2011 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

        You’re crazy……..

      • What A Hoot
        Posted July 13, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

        I get your “job” description, Jay. You are here for one very important reason, and you may even be on goverment payroll to be here. The more you say the host of this blog is crazy or birthers are crazy, a google search of Miss B’s name will bring up only links that she is c.ra.zee and then people may not click any of them. Lame attempt to discredit. But at least you get paid.

  43. Wojtek
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 4:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    The “birth certificate” copy relaeased April 27, 2011 by the White House is likely a forgery.

    From the PDF file:

    http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/27/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

    you can extract individual images using Adobe Acrobat Professional 8:
    Menu > Advanced > Document Processing > Export All Images

    then view the images individually

    Kind regards,

    • Jayhg
      Posted May 3, 2011 at 9:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You’re crazy…….

  44. ksdb
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 8:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    butter, what do we think about the new Obama COLB being signed by a different local registrar than the Nordyke twins’ certificates?? If this was filed in the same registrar’s office by the hospital, Obama’s should bear the same signature as the Nordykes’ certificates.

    • Posted May 7, 2011 at 10:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Globe Tabloid now says that the sequence number
      ending in “41” in top upper NE of BC document is
      pure fraud, never assigned. Not a true sequence
      number. That is why it follows the Nordyke twins’
      own document BC numbers. Fraud!
      PS/ Also note the false natal address on K-Highway
      (the real 1961 address of the Lefforge family) is still present all over these documents. Someone,
      anyone, anybody, please, please try to sub-
      poena Daniel Lefforge in Honolulu before he dies.
      Ditto, Senator Inouye of Hawaii who knows better! We need the TRUTH!!! J.

  45. kent Jenkins
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 10:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Please go to devvy.com , She claims they even got the hospital wrong

  46. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 28, 2011 at 4:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    you know we’ve been expecting the release of a long form certificate for two years now…we had imagined the amount of technical work they would have to do to age the paper and the ink and to create the perfect forgery. With this release I am shocked at the poor qualitiy of this forgery. With all the resources available to Obama surely they could have done much better. The green rattan background incorporated into the image of the document is strange beyond belief…why would they do such a dumb thing? Since when has any copy of a document been released as a picture of it in a bound book? And then there’s the ability to seperate the layers in their image. That would be impossible if this were a true image of the document in the book…..just unbelievable!!

  47. Starbeau
    Posted May 7, 2011 at 2:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    THE BIG LIE

    If you Google “The Big Lie” (put it in with the quotes) you will get from Wikipedia:

    “The Big Lie is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”
    Hitler’s use of the expression
    The source of Big Lie technique is this passage, taken from Chapter 10 of James Murphy’s translation of Mein Kampf:
    All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
    —Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

    Goebbels’s use of the expression

    Later, Joseph Goebbels put forth a slightly different theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the expression “big lie.” Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler’s first use of the phrase “big lie,” titled “Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik” and translated “From Churchill’s Lie Factory.” It was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.

    “The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

    When you ponder on the above for some time, you will realize that Obama has used this propaganda technique to advance to the Presidency of the United States and all that goes with it.
    The very first birth certificate put on the web was challenged as to authenticity.
    The document did/did not show a fold
    The document did/did not have a raised seal
    The race defined Obama as African instead of Negro
    Then other information and/or birth certificates of different origin began to appear:
    He was born in Kenya but his mother was too young to convey citizenship.
    Birth certificates from Kenya
    His grandmother was present at his birth in Kenya

    Since early March, 2011 there have been two. The first one came from a source named “Aloha Reporter” or perhaps Attorney Phillip Berg, the first attorney to file suit that Obama was not born in Hawaii, and the second one from Obama himself.

    The one most identifiable as a “big lie” came from Obama on April 27, 2011!

    Why has the big lie gone on for so long? I believe that Goebbels stated it exactly when he stated, “it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness.”
    And now that thick-headedness is clearly in our Federal Courts, our media and our uninformed population.

    Who defends the Constitution?

    The Federal courts have shoved aside all cases of constitutionality by the doctrine of “standing.” The doctrine says you must be injured to file a case. They are neglecting the words of Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison, where Justice Marshall brings up:

    “It behooves us then to inquire whether there be in its composition any ingredient which shall exempt from legal investigation, or exclude the injured party from legal redress. In pursuing this inquiry the first question which presents itself, is, whether this can be arranged [5 U.S. 137, 164] with that class of cases which come under the description of damnum absque injuria-a loss without an injury.”

    “If some acts be examinable, and others not, there must be some rule of law to guide the court in the exercise of its jurisdiction.”

    “But where a specific duty is assigned by law, and individual rights depend upon the performance of that duty, it seems equally clear that the individual who considers himself injured has a right to resort to the laws of his country for a remedy.”

    The Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

    Words such as “Mandamus” have entered our vocabulary. This was introduced to prevent disorders from a failure of justice; therefore it ought to be used upon all occasions where the law has established no specific remedy, and where in justice and good government there ought to be one.
    Think on this, ” Mandamus is not a writ of right.” Hurts my head.

    Every Federal official, Judge, soldier, Congressman (meaning Senators as well) have taken an oath to “protect and defend the constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign or domestic, so help me God.

    They have not done that! I believe it trumps any legal doctrine!

    Starbeau

    • Posted May 7, 2011 at 4:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well-said, and exactly!

      Interesting that this comes up right now too. My family and I watched “Valkyrie” last night and we had a good discussion of how it could happen that a whole country could smell burning human flesh and go along with it. How so few evil men could so enstrangle everybody else that they would all turn on anybody who resisted the insanity they all tacitly consented to.

      What I kept coming back to was that Hitler had complete power over the media, government, courts, education, and law enforcement. Those all enabled him to tell “the big lie” and have it seem to be the accepted wisdom or fact of the day.

      I’ve talked over and over again about how this issue is not really about Obama at all, but about a system which gives us big lies and which ostracizes anybody who resists the big lie. The analogies to Nazis and Hitler get so overused that they don’t mean anything more. But we have only to look at the unbelievable dilemma that faced folks such as Dietrich Bonhoefer and the patriots in “Valkyrie” to see what is possible when evil deceivers have control of the entire infrastructure of a nation.

      It should not be lost on us, either, that the Nazis wanted to get rid of what they called the “defectives” (such as Jews , handicapped, elderly, resistors, etc) because they thought that would be best for “Mother Earth”. They were evolutionists who saw no sanctity in individual human lives but believed that the “defectives” had to be sacrificed for the good of the whole earth, to make the earth prosper – to make it “sustainable” (using today’s terminology).

      Look at everybody in Obama’s cabinet and you will see the exact same philosophy. Look at who he has as his regulators and “czars”, realize that these are unaccountable to the law and subject to no checks and balances, and consider what, if anything, stands in the way of them doing exactly what was done in Germany under a different guise.

      As Americans we think we are protected from that; it could never happen here. That is the biggest lie of all. Wake up, America! Wake up! Your critical infrastructure is being stolen by lawless deceivers, right underneath your noses.

  48. Tommy Thompson
    Posted May 8, 2011 at 3:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, at obama-soetoro-exposed the question came up asking: “Since Chairman Soetoro has chosen to release what he claims to be a vital record relative to his birth does that make his vital records on file relative to his birth subject to a FOIA request?”
    and here’s the answer from our learned attorney who we all believe is an Obot:

    “No.

    Additionally, there’s already been a suit and the court has ruled on it. Allen v Soetoro.

    If you were thinking of a FOIA request to the State of Hawaii, they are not subject to FOIA.”
    Butter, since I know you have dealt with and are familiar with FOIA requests, is this true? or is our attorney friend peeing on our leg and telling us it’s raining. LOL Thomas T. Obama aka TTO

    • Posted May 8, 2011 at 3:49 am | Permalink | Reply

      My understanding is that since it’s a state record it wouldn’t be subject to FOIA but it WOULD be subject to UIPA (the Hawaii open records law).

      The difficulty is that this whole time, UIPA has REQUIRED the disclosure (upon request) of all the records that Fukino relied upon to make her statements about Obama’s records – but Hawaii is breaking all their laws at this point. The HDOH, OIP, and ombudsman’s offices all pretty much say if you don’t like their answers, sue them. And at various points different people were considering lawsuits but chose not to go that route because the entire Hawaii government would not have so easily become this corrupt if Hawaii’s judiciary had any integrity. There’s been one lawsuit to see Obama’s records, based on UIPA’s standard of a “scintilla of public interest” outweighing the privacy exemption for disclosure – and the judge totally blew off what UIPA actually says. Total abortion of justice.

      So if Hawaii was following their laws the records would (ever since Fukino’s July 2009 announcement) be REQUIRED to be disclosed. That’s what UIPA requires.

      Unfortunately, Hawaii is lawless. And that’s why we’re in such a pickle. None of any of this would be happening if we had the rule of law because the laws actually protect against just such a thing as this from happening. The battle we’re fighting is really and truly a battle for the rule of law.

  49. gorefan
    Posted May 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butterdezillion,

    Here is something from Savannah Guthrie a NBC Whitehouse correspondent.

    “I saw the certified copy of long-form POTUS birth certificate today, felt the raised seal, snapped this pic”

    http://lockerz.com/s/96540721

  50. gorefan
    Posted May 12, 2011 at 5:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I copied the picture from Savannah Guthrie and opened ininto MS Paint. Then zoomed on it and the seal is very visible. No need to even adjust the contrast.

  51. gorefan
    Posted May 12, 2011 at 8:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butterdezillion,

    I don’t know it you were able to get a clearer image of the Stig Waidelich COLB from Hawaii. Here is slightly better image.

    Again just using Microsoft Paint and zooming in on the cert #. It is pretty clearly 151 1961 010920.

    • MissTickly
      Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:12 am | Permalink | Reply

      Excuse me, but I don’t believe that’s authentic for one second. No folds. How was it mailed and frankly that cert number is too high…

      …And those who planted that COLB online know this. They want it to look like Hawaii’s cert numbers are all over the place and…well..no, I don’t believe they are, personally.

      • Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:47 am | Permalink

        Exactly. CNN asked Waidelich to request a copy of his BC – supposedly to prove that a COLB is the default when you ask for a copy of a BC. We all know that’s the default; that was never in question. The question was whether you could get a long-form ON SPECIFIC REQUEST. But the real point of it was to deal with the issue of the BC# on Obama’s being out of sequence. They want it to appear like they bounce all over the place with their numbers, but that makes no sense at all.

        Instead what it suggests is that they play fast and loose with changing their records back and forth to suit their purposes. Before long I will post a post that shows they have done this with their 1960-64 birth index, with the paramenters for their 1960-64 birth index, and with a specific person’s record that was in the 1960-64 birth index.

        The more these people do, the more it is apparent that they are lawless, which is why it is imperative that the HDOH be investigated and their records for Obama, Waidelich, Virginia Sunahara, Norman Asing, and Mae Obado all be audited. All those records have anomalies associated with them and some connection to the Obama cover-up.

  52. MissTickly
    Posted May 15, 2011 at 5:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    “http://nativeborncitizen.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/img_0035-small.jpg

    Again just using Microsoft Paint and zooming in on the cert #. It is pretty clearly 151 1961 010920.”

    Where are the folds on this colb? It doesn’t appear to have ever been folded…

    • Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:12 am | Permalink | Reply

      This was one he got at the HDOH while he waited so it wasn’t mailed to him.

      There is no way that Waidelich’s BC was filed on Aug 8th and was given 920 for a number when Obama’s was supposedly given 841 the same day and the Nordykes given 836 and 837 3 days later. What this suggests to me is that CNN planned this Waidelich request with the HDOH, who then temporarily switched the numbers around just for Waidelich’s request for this CNN special. If so, that manipulation is recorded in the transaction logs, and before this is all over those logs will have to be audited and the truth will come out.

      • MissTickly
        Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:20 am | Permalink

        Ok, the person walked in and obtained it. What was the written documentation indicating there was a need for urgency.

        I mean forgive me for being skeptical and all, but this came from a pro-Obma site, no?

        “Certified copies are usually not issued on the day the application is made. Same-Day service may be provided upon presentation of written documentation establishing the need for urgency. Certified copies will normally be available for pick-up about 10 working days after the request is approved.”

        http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/vital_records.html

      • MissTickly
        Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:25 am | Permalink

        Ack! this was on CNN????

      • Posted May 16, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink

        Error: Obama had suffix 641. Nordykes 636 & 637 suffix respectively. No way did they get near the 800’s or 900’s. Please correct data. Sorry.
        J.

      • Posted May 18, 2011 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

        Given 10641 that same day. Sunahara died and
        also had the number 10641. Possibly stolen by Fukino (a relative!!!) and given to the obots.
        Nordyke twins had 10637 and 10638. Per Globe.
        The Sunahara scandal story is now featured by
        Jerome Corsi on WND. Big Scandal! Treason!!!
        J

      • Posted May 19, 2011 at 8:40 am | Permalink

        We have no way of knowing for sure what Sunahara’s BC# is. That can only be known if we’re able to audit the records and see the computer transaction logs. That’s what we need to be pushing for.

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 6:36 am | Permalink

        Why would the DOH do that? They could have assigned him a number much closer to the President’s and made the President’s look even more genuine. For example, they could have given Waidelich the 010645.

        Consider this for a moment. The President was born on August 4th. The 4th of the month is also when the outer islands air mail their leftover BCs to the DOH. Suppose that the DOH had a large batch of BCs arriving the week of August 6th. If they processed them all at the end of that week (August 11th) and they were put in alphabetic order then Nordyke’s would be first, Obama’s would be next and Waidelich’s would be third. The gap between the Nordyke’s and Obama’s would be smaller then the gap between Obama’s and Waidelich’s.

        Someone should take all the names from the newspaper birth announcements for July and August along with date of birth and then alphabeize them to see where the four known name/numbers fall.

      • Posted May 19, 2011 at 8:29 am | Permalink

        You’re still not incorporating what both Okubo and now a letter by an HDOH official in 1959 have said – that they numbered the BC on the “date filed”. There weren’t any stacks lying around for 3 days.

        And the idea of alphabetizing makes no sense and is contradicted by the fact that Susan Nordyke’s BC# comes before Gretchen’s. IOW they were not numbered in alphabetical order.

        The HDOH knows that their only hope of getting around the BC# discrepancy is if the numbers were issued randomly. And that’s precisely what it would have to mean, for Waidelich to have the number that is about 40 higher than BC’s numbered 3 days later. Do you believe that numbers were issued randomly?

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

        How would they assign numbers randomly, isn’t the number based on the the number of children born that year? Doesn’t that number belong to some else? Did they also fake his “file by date”?

        When faced with contradictory facts, you seem to be widening the conspiracy. Now CNN is directly involved and so is Stig Waidelich and his mother, who was also interviewed. Is Danae from the Freereublic involved, since her COLB lent credence to the President’s?

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

        How do you see that dead baby number working out? Did they give it to the President in 1961? If not, is it a coincidence that every document that has been found confirms the August 4th birthdate? And if he got it 1961, who
        gave it to them? And why? And what about the newspaper announcements?

        Did he get it 2007? Then how did he get all the other documents to say 1961 and those birth announcements?

        When people use dead baby BCs to create a new id, they take the entire id not just the cert. number. So for example, if Joe Smith is 50 years old and he wants a new id, he looks up in newspapers from the early 1960’s until he finds a male child that died early in life (call him Ben Jones). And then sends away for the Ben Jones’ BC and then Joe Smith becomes “Ben Jones”.

        So unless you can find proof that a child named Barack Obama was born August 4th, 1961 and died shortly thereafter, your theory doesn’t make much sense and I suspect will turn out to be another big disappointment for you.

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

        When you say a 1959 letter, do you mean this 1955 article?

        http://www.wnd.com/files/CHARLESBENNETT.pdf

        Here is what the article says,

        “A nurse or clerk in the hospital fills in the certificate form and gets the mother to sign it. Then the attending physician enters certain medical data and affixes his signature. Finally, the hospital sends the completed certificate to the local registrar.”

        “If any question arises relative to items in the certificate, the registrar usually asks the hospital about it rather than the attending physician. Nevertheless the legal responsibility for reporting a birth remains with the physician.”

        It really doesn’t say what happened when the BC arrived at the local registrars office. Or when the number is added.

      • Posted May 19, 2011 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

        Do you really think that was the whole article?

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 11:01 pm | Permalink

        Yes, that was the entire article. The article starts on page 127 and ends on page 130 of the Hawaiian Medical Journal. Is there another article? Because the part I quoted is the only part that talks about how BCs are processed.

        Can you direct me to the part that you say talks about adding certification numbers?

  53. MissTickly
    Posted May 15, 2011 at 6:23 am | Permalink | Reply

    Actually , upon reflection, it’s plausible that the person ordered it and then picked it up ten days later.=)

    So I am wrong to dismiss it. But, please can we at least get a legible photo? I swear these people give us one crappy image and I think that’s what bugs me most.

    I notice you took multiple of your daughters seal…would love to see ANYONE do the same from Hawaii.

  54. MissTickly
    Posted May 15, 2011 at 7:09 am | Permalink | Reply

    “We all know that’s the default; that was never in question. The question was whether you could get a long-form ON SPECIFIC REQUEST. But the real point of it was to deal with the issue of the BC# on Obama’s being out of sequence. ”

    Yes. I’ve noticed the theme to this game before. Let’s pretend we are proving ‘X’ so we can post stuff that corroborates something super-hinky.

  55. Starbeau
    Posted May 15, 2011 at 3:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    The entire matter of the Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) hinges around whether there is a legitimate COLB for Obama in Hawaii.

    The document on WhiteHouse.gov of Obama’s long form COLB was certified by Loretta Fuddy by her statement in her letter, “I have witnessed the copying of the certificate and attest to the authenticity of these copies.”

    Loretta Fuddy is telling the absolute truth as she knows it.

    The fundamental problem is Loretta Fuddy certified a forged document that was not what Obama had requested if what she enclosed to Judith Corley, Obama’s attorney, is in fact what Obama placed on WhiteHouse.gov. So did Dr. Onaka. The typo error in the stamp is a mystery since it is so obvious.

    Obama requested a certified copy of his original long form COLB. That is not what was placed on WhiteHouse.gov!

    Could be part of the “big lie” operation of the Obama alliance.

    Miss Tickly identified some errors on Donofrio’s site, but has gone private. I see her here and am glad, but wish I had some way to get on her private list.

    The kerning problem, which caught Dan Rather, Mary Mapes and the entire CBS News organization in 2004 is prevalent in the April 27 release by Obama. I don’t believe that Obama will be able to claim, “fake, but accurate” as a defense.

    The media has been mute since the document has been identified as a certification of a forgery. Trump has also, but I do not believe he will stay that way. Most information on the web came on the day of the release, before the document had been analyzed and you have to be very careful to check the date of that information.

    I do not believe that a legitimate long form Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama exists in Hawaii.

    • Posted May 20, 2011 at 12:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      Made my blog public again, hope this helps some of you frustrated folks…

      • Posted May 28, 2011 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

        Thanks, and my apologies that this is so late being approved. I just saw it now. I should contact WordPress and find out whether they are refusing to send notifications of only your posts. If they’re still sending me notifications for your comments then somebody is swiping the notis – just for your messages – from my inbox.

  56. Katrina
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If the conservative media has been threatened, isn’t the best antidote sunshine? Come right out on the air saying they have been told of threats for the ineligibilty issue discussion and therefore are coming out to report the threats – on air. Do we really believe they or their families would be taken out AFTER doing that??

    Courageously is the only way to live.

    • Posted May 19, 2011 at 8:39 am | Permalink | Reply

      One of the best ways to protect my family is to get the information out into the public. As long as I keep it to myself I make myself a target because by stopping me they can stop the truth. Once the truth is out there “accidents” will be immediately seen as suspect, like you say.

      I believe there was something more besides threats of retaliation to the CEO’s of the media companies because the media company had only to report the threats and then Obama wouldn’t have been elected and couldn’t get the FCC to attack the media company. I believe there had to be a threat that wasn’t dependent on the outcome of the election – something so terrible that not only conservative media but leaders like the conservative justices (and all the judges), Cheney, Bush, McCain and Palin, law enforcement at every level, government agencies at both state and federal levels, etc just rolled over and died (or actually broke laws to cover for Obama) rather than simply doing their jobs.

      We need to know the sticks and carrots, if only to know which 30 pieces of silver this nation was sold for.

      • gorefan
        Posted May 19, 2011 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

        So why are they no longer afraid? If the threats still exist, why aren’t the media, politicians, the courts giving the President everything he wants? And if the threats don’t exist any more why not talk about the President being inelibible? Everyone looked at the LFBC and said case closed, so are they still being threatened?

      • Posted May 19, 2011 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

        Yes. For him to post something so blatantly a forgery that even Obama voters are rising up to make Youtube videos pointing out this fraud… and still have the “conservative media” and commentators calling us crazy for calling this forgery what it is….is definitely a sign that something more is going on here than meets the eye.

      • Posted May 28, 2011 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

        Why will Sean Hannity not have Jerome Corsi on his show as he promised earlier? The media is even more closed now than they were before. Obama presented what very prominent experts in computer document analysis have called a 100% forgery, and not one “conservative” on Fox (for instance) will even allow the allegation to be aired.

        I rest my case.

  57. Posted May 28, 2011 at 6:43 am | Permalink | Reply

    Re: your March 27, 2011 12:03 pm

    The mention of Judge David O. Carter being (apparently) threatened or coerced into changing horses in midstream reminds me of U.S. District Judge Clay Land on July 12, 2009, in Columbus, Georgia.

    http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-137238-days0-orderasc-1513.html

    Not long before the court hearing for Maj. Stefan Cook, putative A.G. Eric Holder was spotted in the coffee shop across the street. Four people at one table agreed that the man they saw was Mr. Holder, and one submitted a sworn affidavit thereunto. There were less than 20 spectators in the courtroom; to my knowledge, Mr. Holder was not there.

    http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-137238-days0-orderasc-3439.html

    The trial was brief, an hour and some minutes. Judge Land’s recess before the verdict was brief, 15 minutes at most.

    But he had time to “prepare” a typed opinion which took a few minutes to read. He could not have written that opinion during a 15 minute recess.

    Now, who do you suppose might have given U.S. District Judge Clay Land that opinion in advance? And even before he first entered the court room that morning, who do you suppose might have read Judge Land the riot act about supporting the usurper?

  58. Posted May 28, 2011 at 6:45 am | Permalink | Reply

    Not July 12, but July 16, 2009.

  59. RTM999
    Posted May 30, 2011 at 2:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I found this YT video that the author does an incredible job of dismatling the LFBC as the forgery that it is !


    In this video the author demonstrates that even the PDF on the WH website has been altered using Adobe illustrator …
    He peels back the layers to show what was added to an already existing document !

    The stupid criminals have made a very big boo boo
    if this type of info can be made public !

  60. Posted June 8, 2011 at 2:03 am | Permalink | Reply

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=308397

  61. Tommy Thompson
    Posted June 14, 2011 at 3:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, We have our resident attorney who I have problems with. I asked him or her point blank if he thought the released image of the long form in pdf format was a real and true image of a ligitimate birth certificate. The answer was “yes” it is real because of evidence and provenance. In other words since the Obama administration has shown letters requesting the BC and their statements that they actually went to Hawaii and picked it up and brought it back to DC and Obama claims it’s real then IT MUST BE REAL.
    I have one real serious problem with that. I don’t know if anybody has really thought about it but physically picking this document up is IMPOSSIBLE. Since this supposed document displayed in pdf format can be seperated layer by layer it points to the fact that this image only exists in cyberspace. (where it was created) Any printed out version cannot be seperated… it would be in one layer only.

  62. Posted August 4, 2011 at 7:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    I did recent interviews with Jerome Corsi, Orly Taitz, Susan Daniels, and Major General Paul Vallely U.S. Army Retired.

    A host of computer experts from a variety of backgrounds were also interviewed: Mara Zebest, Karl Denninger, Albert Renshaw, Tom Harrison, and Joseph Newcomer.

    I have no doubts that Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent.

    Here is the link:

    http://www.birtherspecial.com

    • Posted August 4, 2011 at 3:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

      At this point the only question is whether we can find any judge who is willing to let the rule of law apply. If it is true that Vallely had CIA people check out the BC situaton and found that there wasn’t a BC in HI, then our intelligence people know we have had a full-out coup and yet neither they nor anybody in law enforcement, Congress, or the courts are willing to do anything about it. That’s what terrible shape we are in as a nation. The people we count on to protect us have totally abandoned that role. We have no protectors. That’s a scary situation that the entire nation needs to comprehend and digest. At this point we are totally vulnerable to even a full-out coup that everybody in government, intelligence, the courts, and law enforcement knows is a coup.

      Right now, I’m not mad at Obama or Soros. Crooks are crooks; we expect that. They are as constant and predictable as germs. What hurts is the entire system and every person within that system that took our pay and betrayed us all. And I include almost the entire “conservative” punditry in that. They are the worst of all; I can’t even stand to hear their voices any more.

      They suffer the same problem as the politicians: power corrupts, and the “ring of power” is every bit as treacherous as the ring that enticed and enslaved everyone who held it in “The Lord of the Rings”. Our system was supposed to reduce that risk by making the people holding the ring of power accountable to those who have no such “ring”, including law enforcement. But the chief law enforcers are agents/appointees of those holding the ring (or people dependent on the favor of the ring-holders to become ring-holders themselves) so the system is totally broken. The people who have no power and are thus not seduced and enslaved by power…. also have no power to hold anybody accountable between elections. Elections only decide who gets to hold (and be corrupted by) the ring of power next. Until we pay serious attention to the fallenness of human nature and our vulnerability to the corrupting influence of power, we are on a treadmill that keeps spinning round: We elect them; they go bad. We elect a replacement; they go bad… Rinse and repeat ad infinitum.

      When common people – not players within the power system – are able to charge politicians and media entities with crimes including the crimes of forgery, perjury, misprision of felony, and treason, we will see change – but not one second before that. The Constitution enshrines that whole concept in one statement which is in the First Amendment along with the guarantees of freedom of religion, association, and the press: “Congress shall make no laws respecting… the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” That is the most important part of that whole amendment, because unless the people have legal recourse for the violation of their rights, none of the other guarantees or anything in the laws or Constitution mean a thing; they are practically unenforceable unless the people who are wronged have a way of getting legal enforcement of the Constitution and laws.

      This whole claim by the courts that nobody has “standing” to challenge a coup (or any of the crimes that allowed the coup) means, in effect, that the courts have made all the Constitution’s provisions unenforceable by denying EVERYBODY the right to petition the government (and actually get due process legal procedures – “standing” to have a trial) for a redress of grievances. As long as that is the situation, we don’t have the rule of law now and never will have the rule of law again.

      • Posted August 7, 2011 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

        The last shred of law will come with Judge Lamberth’s ruling
        in First District Court DC. That is the case of Taitz vs. Astrue &
        SSA. This will be the giant-killer, if Lamberth is honest and
        sincere on the BC and the SSN. Otherwise, Lamberth will end his career in disgrace, knowing what he knows about the Obots. May truth and justice prevail, otherwise anarchy and fraud will win. This country is on the edge of a steep cliff. IMO.

        PS/ DOJ, Justice may appeal any ruling by Royce Lamberth. But Lamberth has “standing.” Ha!!! Ha!!!

  63. Tommy Thompson
    Posted August 5, 2011 at 4:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    Mr. Gillar, I want to thank you for your show. I listened to the entire program the other day and it was extremely encouraging to hear the experts. There are so many people out there that know the long form is fake yet nothing seems to be happening. I created a much better long form bc for Obama months before he released his…Jerome Corsi has seen it and says he may want to use it for the fun of it. thanks again.

    • Posted August 11, 2011 at 2:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

      LOL I’m sure it has to be better. Let’s be honest, unless you did it with Crayons, it couldn’t be worse….LOL

      • Posted August 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        That’s the part that bugs me. Why did they release such an obvious forgery?

      • gorefan
        Posted August 11, 2011 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

        Hi Mark, I listen to your show with the experts. You talked to Susan Daniels. You read to her the section of the SSA website that says the geographic locator is not that meaningful. Her response was that this was a recent change to the website.

        I went to the wayback machine and found this 2001 screenshot of the SSA’s site.

        http://web.archive.org/web/20010302160247/http:/www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/geocard.html

        It still shows the same note. Was she mistaken?

      • gorefan
        Posted August 17, 2011 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

        Hi Mark,

        In your interview with Foggy, you mentioned the statement by Dr. Fukino about the BC being half typed and half handwritten. This is not so mysterious if you know one thing. All birth cerificates given to the parents are abstracts of the information that is included on the original BC. In other words, the bound volume BC has more information on it then the LFBC and the COLB.

        Think of it this way, there is the short form BC (the COLB), the long form BC ( the President’s and the Nordykes’s) and there is the longer form BC (in the bound volume).

        Dr. Fukino was looking at the bound volume document.

  64. SteveP
    Posted August 10, 2011 at 9:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If the state of Hawaii certifies that it is real, it is real. There is legally no way to get around that. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

    • Posted August 11, 2011 at 11:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      Two points:

      First, I have not seen anything that the State of Hawaii has certified. Look in the DOH Administrative Rules and see what the form of certification for certified copies of birth certificates is. Even if the seal remnants are actually from the registrar’s seal, the posted document doesn’t meet the requirements for certification laid out in the Administrative Rules because that seal is not 2 1/4 inches and thus cannot be the official DOH seal, which means that neither the official DOH seal nor the State of Hawaii seal are displayed on the document, which is required for it to be a LEGALLY certified copy of a birth certificate. And the HDOH’s refusal to obey a SUBPOENA for the record shows that the record Obama disclosed is not the same as the record they have, because if it was then all privacy rights would have been waived by Obama when he disclosed it publicly. So what Obama showed is not legally certified and the HDOH has admitted that the genuine record has never been disclosed, since they claim TO A COURT that Obama has never waived his privacy rights through publicly disclosing the genuine record.

      Second, after all the law-breaking and lying by the HDOH, why would you assume that anything they certify is actually true? You’ve heard of perjury, right? They’ve already basically done that, in the same degree that Rod Blagojevich did it and is sitting in jail, when they deliberately deceived Congress into thinking that the forged COLB that Obama posted online was actually genuine. They also committed misprision of forgery when they failed to report that forgery to law enforcement. And Fukino perjured herself in testimony before the HI legislature as well. They’ve altered their own records, as I’ve shown here. There are SO many instances of law-breaking on their part, including criminal law-breaking. That means they’ve got nothing to lose. If this gets found out they’re gonna spend time in jail anyway, so there is a bigger incentive to keep up the lie (in the hopes it’ll never see daylight and justice) than to fear additional penalties if they commit ANOTHER criminal offense.

      Last time I looked, the Constitution prescribed the death penalty for treason, so there’s nothing left for them to lose at this point. They’ve already committed capital offenses. Remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely, so what check or balance would stop them from lying at will in order to cover up their own capital crimes?

  65. Posted August 11, 2011 at 11:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Indeed. May the fate of the Rosenbergs be with them (about 800+ now).
    They have committed multiple counts of treason. There is NO turning
    back from this horror of Fraud-gate, Obot-gate. They will be sent to Camp David, Guantanamo, Ft. Leavenworth, etc. Hopefully many will be executed for this terrible perversion of our American history. We shall see. Martial law must act and exist. IMO

  66. Posted August 12, 2011 at 12:20 am | Permalink | Reply

    Indeed! May the fate of the Rosenbergs be with them. IMO

  67. Posted August 12, 2011 at 1:04 am | Permalink | Reply

    @Gorefan. It would seem that she was mistaken about the note being added. Having said that DNA and Fingerprints probably weren’t initially created by God to link someone back to a cime scene.

    I don’t think it batters that the original intent of the system was not to track someone’s location.

    I’m also very bothered that the card shows an 1890 birthdate associated with the number. Even if the full birthdate isn’t known
    it was posted under the sections birthdates associated with this card.

    Daniels also did a great job of debunking the idea that someone messed up and misread a 9 for a 0.

    The SSI Card is just one of the clarical errors following this man around. His BC number seems wrong too.

    • gorefan
      Posted August 12, 2011 at 3:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Mark, I think the significance of the SSA’s geographic note is that they would not consider it to be an error if someone from Oregon received a SSN with a Florida prefix.

      With regards the 1890 DOB, in Susan Daniels affidavit on the second to the last page. There is a listing for Barack Obama at the Sommersville, Massachusett address and the xxx-xx-4425 ssn (second entry from the bottom of the report). And seven entries above that one is an entry for Barack Obama at the same Sommerville, Massachusetts address, with the same ssn but with a DOB of 1990.

      So does that mean that he is using the ssn of someone born in 1990? or 1890?

      Is that why Ms. Daniels cannot find any information on the 1890 person? Should she be looking for a 1990 person?

      Or is the 1990 an error in the database? Or is the 1890 an error in the database? Or are both of them errors in the database?

    • gorefan
      Posted August 17, 2011 at 5:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Hi Mark,

      I listened to your interview of Foggy. I was wondering about the comment you made about the left margin not lining up properly.

      Isn’t it dependent on who typed the document?

  68. gorefan
    Posted August 12, 2011 at 4:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Mark,

    “Daniels also did a great job of debunking the idea that someone messed up and misread a 9 for a 0.”

    I think I would disagree with you on this point. Ms. Daniels was too focused on the 5 digit zip code (96814, 96826). In fact, the SSA would not care about the last two digits since they are only interested in the state not the city. In fact, I image in the 1970’s, the SSA had a document like this IRS document.

    http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/zip_code_and_state_abbreviations.pdf

    Except the zip codes would be in the first column and they would be in numerical order. Notice how the Connecticut zip codes are listed (060nn-069nn) and Hawaii zip codes are listed as 967nn and 968nn.

    So I could envision a sceniario that goes like this.

    Barack Obama goes to the local Honolulu SSA office. Fills out and turns in his ss-5 card. The card is sent to Baltimore, Maryland for processing. A clerk/typists transcibes the handwritten ss-5 on to another form. But inadvertantly hits the 0 key instead of the 9. That form is processed and the 068nn means a Connecticut prefix is assigned.

    Butter, Mark

    Have a great weekend.

    • Posted August 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Seems that gorefan is another Obot plant and a trained troll
      for the DNC. Too much wishful thinking. Treason is Treason.
      IMO. Too much fiction & science fiction. IMO. Again, treason
      is treason.

  69. RTM999
    Posted August 14, 2011 at 6:21 am | Permalink | Reply

    I made a video of my own that lays out why BHO is NOT a NBC no matter where he was born! :


    This video explains why the English common law Justice Gray
    makes in WKA is a nonsense argument for the apologists to make…

    In short the English naturalized the children of foreigners born in England!

  70. doc
    Posted August 17, 2011 at 4:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    Interesting, gorefan, thats a lie, there are no archives for that page in the wayback machine. I just checked. I tried for a half hour to find it. But nice try, I am sure you might have swayed a couple people with the “big lie” tactic

  71. Posted August 31, 2011 at 12:19 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter & ALL, Now we learn 800 PM EST that Judge Lamberth,
    a Reagan appointee, is a traitor to the USA. He ruled pro-OBOT.
    The penalty for treason is death. We are all in danger now. IMO.

    • Posted August 31, 2011 at 1:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It’s supposedly none of our business whether the alleged POTUS has committed social security and identity fraud.

      I’d like to ask Lamberth whether it was anybody’s business if Blagojevich tried to sell a Senate seat. Who was hurt by that? Why is it anybody’s business? Whose business was it that Al Capone committed tax evasion? Why is it anybody’s business if somebody robs a bank – since the bank is insured anyway and it wasn’t any particular person’s money that was taken? Whose business is it if every one of our corrupt lawmakers is taking bribes from lobbyists or anybody else? Why is that any of our business? Why do we even have open records laws, when the lawfulness of our government is none of our business anyway?

      I’d like to ask Lamberth what ever IS our business.

      A nation cannot survive this level of lawlessness. It’s impossible. Lamberth and his ilk have thrown America into the garbage heap of history. It’s just a matter of time before this nation falls apart under the weight of the lawless judiciary, law enforcement, bureaucracy, media, and military.

  72. Posted September 1, 2011 at 12:20 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hint: Lamberth was seen, BTW, at dinner with ERIC HOLDER, AG—-
    several times in DC. The “fix” was obviously in. (per DC POST data).
    It is sad that a Reagan appointee would rule this way, and engage in collaboration and TREASON. May he too, meet the fate of the Rosenbergs. IMO

    PS/ Lamberth made very unprofessional comments to Taitz in this
    ruling. “OUT OF LUCK,”??? America is now near out of luck.
    Taitz should file againt Lamberth for his vicious, sexist, and in-
    temperate remarks. The DC Judiciary Board should be alerted
    re this unprofessional commentary and snide attitude. Orly T.
    should file a lawsuit against Lamberth for those remarks. Surely,
    Ronald Reagan is rolling in his grave for appointing such Garbage
    to the DC First Circuit Court. Outrage is not enough. Treason
    is treason. IMO.

    • Posted September 1, 2011 at 1:20 am | Permalink | Reply

      Do you know what dates Lamberth and Holder met? I wonder if a person could do a FOIA request that would relate to what their meetings were supposed to be about.

  73. Posted September 1, 2011 at 1:53 am | Permalink | Reply

    The meetings were noted in passing only, in the STYLE section of the
    DC Post. As I recall, late 24-25 July (when he reprimanded Taitz), and again (2011), in early August, just passing dalliances between two demonic sweethearts. Reported on by two female reporterettes, p. 2, who run the Arts & Style section. (Gossip) They were seen together by SEVERAL witnesses. Also by the busboys, etc. No pictures were allowed…??? Why???
    This was in EXPENSIVE restaurants in NW Wash, section called
    GEORGETOWN. At the time, I noted it (7-8, 2011) as totally unethical.
    I will try to find more. Others are welcome to do a microfiche search on the recent DC Post items. It is all so disgusting. Lamberth was obviously pressured/threatened. These people are “out of luck” traitors. They must be prosecuted and imprisoned. Judge or no Judge. This stuff is just in-your-face treason. This is NOT a lucky day for America. IMO

    PS/ I did relate all on this to Orly Taitz, Esquire, LLC.

    PPS/ We can just about guess what the meetings/shennanigans were all
    about. Pressure, blackmail, pension promises, free meals, etc.

  74. Tommy Thompson
    Posted September 9, 2011 at 3:38 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, have you seen the new motion filed by Orly Taitz? I believe the judge in that case used the lame excuse that she attained Obama’s SS# frauduently. She has since discovered that Obama himself had already released his SS#…the expectation of privacy would be gone. here’s an experpt from her motion:

    After Taitz submitted her opposition to motion for summary judgment, she appeared on a number of radio shows. During one of the shows, talk show host, Mr. Doug Hagmann, who is also a private investigator, related to Taitz that when Mr. Obama originally posted his tax returns on WhiteHouse.gov, he left his full Social Security number on one of the pages, and it was the same Connecticut social security number which is listed in the sworn affidavits of investigators Sankey, Daniels and Sampson which were previously submitted to this court.

    Based on this information Taitz did her due diligence and further investigated the matter. She e-mailed thousands of interested citizens in an effort to ascertain if they have records of the initial posting on WhiteHouse.gov of Obama’s tax returns with his full social security number. She received reports, that on April 15, 2010 the Huffington Post published an article about Obama’s tax returns being released and posted on White House.gov, they provided the link to the newly released reports.

    Originally, as the tax returns were posted an employee who posted them did not “flatten” the file. What it meant is that if any person were to open this file in Adobe illustrator computer application, this person could see layers of alterations made to the file. It showed on page 43 of Obama’s 2009 return a full unredacted social security number, that started with 042. (See attached.Exhibit 1(a) and exhibit 1(b))

    The moment this information was posted on the White House official web site it became public knowledge. It was not done by any illegal activity of the Plaintiff, it was done by Barack Obama himself or one of his employees, who was authorized by Obama to post this tax return on the web. Taitz did not force Obama to post his full unredacted SSN on line. This number became public record.

    • Posted September 9, 2011 at 12:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I hadn’t seen that. Thanks for keeping me updated.

      I’m sure the judge will make up some crap to get around that too, but at least he’ll have to use his creativity and the people will still know he’s giving us garbage.

      I wonder what would happen if people started to file suit against law enforcement, lawyers, judges, and bureaucrats who have been made aware of this fraud and have refused to do anything about it. At some point misprision would kick in, wouldn’t it? My argument all along is that we expect crooks to be crooks; the problem is when our system refuses to enforce the law – because that guarantees that the crooks will be successful in violating the rest of us. Law enforcement with integrity – not “democracy” – is what separates the USA from any two-bit third-world banana republic. What does it take to force a trial by jury rather than simply by a corrupt judge?

  75. Posted September 10, 2011 at 8:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    IMO, the most corrupt judge ever known is Texan, Judge Royce
    Lamberth. He must be using Mary Jane in formulating his pro-OBOT
    legal opinions. Orly T. should file a civil rights complaint against
    him–if this ever ends. What we see in Judge Royce Lamberth is all
    the horror of “circus trials” and Holocaust denial of facts and factoids.
    Ronald Reagan would be ashamed of this man Lamberth and all the
    evil he is capable of now doing in collusion with Eric Holder, AG.
    IMO. JS

    • Posted September 10, 2011 at 8:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’d like to give all these judges some truth serum and find out exactly what has transpired. I suspect there is more going on than meets the eye – just as there was with the media. I’d also like to give John McCain some truth serum. I have a suspicion that all of these people have been threatened with something or another.

  76. gorefan
    Posted September 13, 2011 at 1:03 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butter,

    Did you see the newest Hawaii BC over on WND? It’s for a girl born at Kapiolani Hospital on August 23rd, 1961 and the date accepted by the DOH is August 24th, 1961. That was a Thursday. So it seems to show that Friday was not the only day that BC’s were sent from Kapiolani to the DOH.

    Just thought you would be interested.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=342937

    • Posted September 13, 2011 at 5:00 am | Permalink | Reply

      I hadn’t seen that. Thank you for pointing it out. I had noted that there was another instance where the BC was received by both the local and state registrar on a Thursday rather than on a Friday – at a time when federal and state holidays made for a build-up of more than a week’s worth of BC’s. In that instance there were 2 consecutive Fridays where the state registrar’s office would have been closed. In this instance, the state registrar’s office would have been closed the Friday before this BC was received for Statehood Day, but it would have been open the next day. What this BC, if genuine, suggests is that we need to see what happened with all the BC’s for that week, to know whether they sent the BC’s in multiple shipments over the course of the week, or whether they collected them for a week and then submitted them – as the law stated they were to do.

      Right now I’m at the point of saying that we can’t know much of anything about anything from the posted birth certificates because none of them fulfill the legal requirements to be legally certified so we have no way of knowing whether Hawaii just doesn’t obey her own laws, or whether these documents are fabricated. WND refers to the “state seal” but there is no State of Hawaii seal on that BC, nor is there the official 2 1/4-inch-diameter official DOH seal – and the HDOH Administrative Rules in effect both then and now require one or the other to be on the paper that the BC is on, for it to be considered legally certified.

      So I have no way of knowing what the BC presented by WND really is. I probably have no way of knowing what the BC’s I based my analysis on really are either. Given that the HDOhHhas altered their own records (for instance, the birth index) and lied about what they do and don’t have (for instance, Virginia Sunahara’s BC) and that they don’t obey their own laws (for instance, refusing to release non-certified abbreviated copies to those who ask for them)… the only way we will ever KNOW anything is when all the records (including transaction logs and paper records) are opened up and forensically analyzed. Which is what I have been asking for all along.

      The HDOH conveniently claims that no rules or protocols were ever written down, even though that is required by state law. So they claim it is necessarily a “he said/she said” type deal – WHICH WOULD ONLY BE THE CASE BECAUSE THE HDOH IS VIOLATING STATE LAW, which totally blows their credibility in this “he said/she said” situation they’re insisting we’re in. Furthermore, there ARE rules written down – very specific rules that say what has to be on a certified copy, and the posted long-forms do not obey those written, legally-binding rules. If the HDOh was held to the rule of law we’d have to conclude that those posted BC’s are not genuine. If the HDOH isn’t held to the rule of law, then the HDOh could have put ANYTHING on their BC’s and there is no way to tell a genuine from a fake.

      Unless and until there is a full investigation and we get to the bottom of what is real and what isn’t, all we can do is shrug our shoulders and say, “Who gives a crap?” Which is exactly what the courts, media, and all the “cool” people are saying:

      “So we may be overrun with people pretending to be US citizens so they can be on our welfare while they make plans to fly planes into buildings. Who gives a crap? So we may have Zetas and Hezbollahs crossing into the USA freely with fake documents that allow them cover for all the destruction they intend to do. Who gives a crap? So our laws don’t mean anything and all the elections are just a big waste of time and money, and freedom is non-existent. Who gives a crap?”

      Until somebody gives a crap, this nation is just one sick joke.

      • gorefan
        Posted September 13, 2011 at 7:07 am | Permalink

        Has the third Friday of August always been the State Holiday. Technically, the admission day was August 21st, 1959.

      • Posted September 13, 2011 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

        Good question. I was trying to find out more about that last night but ran out of time. It had claimed at http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/us/hawaii-statehood-day#obs that it’s been the 3rd Friday in August since 1959 (which is contradicted by what I found below, for at least 1959, so the info on that site is based on the “3rd Friday of August” calculation, not on knowing historically what happened those years).

        At http://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10524/338/JL29147.pdf;jsessionid=5B6BB017596198BDAE82958E6931445F?sequence=1 it says that the HI legislature set aside the 3rd Friday of August as Statehood Day in 1969 so it’s been a state holiday since then at least.

        But what about before then? At http://astheysawit.com/6984-1959-hawaii.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=1959-hawaii it says the legislature set aside Nov 27th as Admission Day for 1959 only and in successive years it would be on the 3rd Friday in August “unless the opposition of the Retail Board to an additional holiday prevails over the wishes of the legislature.” That site reflects the news as it was reported in 1959 and I’ve not been able to find anything which specifically says what happened between 1959 and 1969. Probably the only way to find that out would be through the newspaper archives but I don’t have access to those.

        If the birth and death announcements genuinely came from the HDOH the pattern of dates reported in those weeks could show whether there was a gap in the Kapiolani births received at the HDOH office because of the Admission Day holiday, but I’m not convinced those announcements came from the HDOH because the name reported for the Sunahara baby in the death announcements is not what the HDOH has in their records; the paper’s report seems to reflect a misspelling of the father’s name, which is something more likely to be done by a hospital – which is where I suspect the birth and death announcements actually came from before 1976 when the HDOH rules authorized them to make lists for the newspapers.

        Ultimately what would show us how Kapiolani did their BC’s would be a comprehensive compilation of original long-forms from there (rather than the small sampling we have, which don’t even necessarily seem to be properly certified), but at a time when increased scrutiny is warranted the HDOH is denying access to even what is required to be accessible to a person according to UIPA and the HDOH Administrative rules (which allow certified copies of even the confidential medical portion of a standard birth certificate, upon specific request by a person named on the certificate). And if the HDOH is going to ignore the laws at will – and nobody is able to make them obey the laws – then what is to stop them from doing anything they darn well please with their records also (which we already have pretty good evidence they’ve been doing)?

        That brings us back to what I’ve been saying all along: we’ll never know anything until there is a full legal investigation with access to ALL the records so we can know if and when the HDOH itself has been lying, altering, forging, etc. Holding the bureaucracy accountable is the purpose of the “open records” laws, and it is definitely warranted here – which is precisely why the HDOH is violating those laws. They know the scrutiny is warranted and the response of a guilty party is to hide the incriminating truth – unlike the innocent party, which WANTS to have the truth revealed so they can be vindicated.

      • gorefan
        Posted September 13, 2011 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

        From the timeanddate.com link it does apear that the third Fridays is the holiday. And in 1961 that would have been August 18th. So if the DOH was closed it would have been the 18th. But this new WND BC was accepted on August 24th (Thursday). Is there any reason to think the DOH was closed on the 25th?

        So if there were BCs left over from the 17th, they would have to be at the DOH by the 24th to meet the 7 day requirement. But then you would have people born late on the 23rd and 24th, whose BC would have to be in the DOH by the 31st (Thursday). So does this mean that Thursday is now the official day to deliver BCs to the DOH?

        The only logical way for them to not be constantly up against this weekly deadline is to take BCs to the DOH more than once a week. Or, not care about the 7 days requirement.

      • Posted September 15, 2011 at 1:07 am | Permalink

        The most efficient way to make sure that you’re not just blowing off the 7-day requirement is to have a routine day on which that requirement was fulfilled. Sort of like Monday used to be wash day in the olden days. Didn’t mean they couldn’t wash on Tuesdays or any other day, but by scheduling it in on Monday tnose wise old ladies knew they would get it done. Their routine made sure of that. If they weren’t able to do it on Monday, they would do it when they WERE able to get to it, and then get back onto the Monday schedule right afterwards.

        Lori Starfelt claimed that the HDOH had told her that they compiled vital records lists on Fridays after the certificates had come in. That was their routine, and it made sense. Given that routine, it would also make sense that Kapiolani – the hospital which generated the most BC’s – would submit the week’s BC’s on Friday in time for that week’s list of vital events. And if there had been multiple batches of BC’s from Kapiolani that week, then why didn’t the Nordyke BC’s go with the earlier batch, along with (allegedly) Obama’s and Waidelich’s? If multiple batches were to ensure that the 7-day requirement was fulfilled, then the Nordyke situation shows the multiple batches made no difference anyway – since those BC’s only made it to the HDOH 6 days later anyway.

      • gorefan
        Posted September 13, 2011 at 10:26 pm | Permalink

        Hi Butter,

        If you look at the image of back of the WND BC, you can see that the front side has bled through. By adjusting the contrast you can actually make out a the information including the cert number.

        It looks like 61-099XX the last to digits are hard to read.

        You might find this article interesting.

        http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2011/09/i-catch-worldnetdaily-scrubbing-information-that-directly-contradicts-one-of-dr-jerome-corsis-most-important-fraud-theories/

      • Posted September 15, 2011 at 1:16 am | Permalink

        I will be posting a new post shortly on this subject, after researching it today. The short version: The WND BC is not legally certified, the font on its BC# is different than the font for the Nordyke BC’s (which are the only legally-certified long-forms we have from 1961), and the 2 overlapping numbers mean that they could not have been stamped on with an adjustable stamp.

        At best this could only be another long-form that lacks legal certification, but when you look closely at the particulars of that BC# it reveals that this is not a genuine BC, in my humble opinion. The BC# specifically has been fabricated – as evidenced by the overlapping letters that would be impossible with the adjustable stamp that the DOH used.

        Now why would somebody want to offer up to WND a long-form from 1961 with a fabricated BC#?

      • gorefan
        Posted September 15, 2011 at 1:52 am | Permalink

        Hi Butter,

        “And if there had been multiple batches of BC’s from Kapiolani that week, then why didn’t the Nordyke BC’s go with the earlier batch, along with (allegedly) Obama’s and Waidelich’s?”

        I think one explaination for the Nordyke’s not being sent with the President’s and Waidelich is the doctor had not finished filling out his section of the form. He didn’t sign theirs unti 5 days (Aug 11th) after their mother signed it (August 7th).

      • Posted September 15, 2011 at 2:15 am | Permalink

        How would having 2 different batches during the week make it any more likely that the 7-day deadline would be fulfilled? What the other long-forms show is that the doctors signed the BC’s on Fridays – apparently right before the BC’s went to the HDOH. Again, that element of routine comes in. Having the nurses or secretary have to round up the doctors for signatures would be a hassle if it was done randomly. It would be much easier if the doctors pretty much knew they needed to stop in to sign the certs on Fridays

  77. gorefan
    Posted September 15, 2011 at 1:58 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter,

    “Now why would somebody want to offer up to WND a long-form from 1961 with a fabricated BC#?”

    Supposedly, Paul Irey got it, from who I don’t know. And it was supposedly given to him so he could compare the type fonts of this BC to the type fonts of the President’s BC.

    It would be helpful if WND would uncover the cert #.

    • Posted September 15, 2011 at 2:21 am | Permalink | Reply

      The only legally-certified long-forms we have from 1961 are the Nordyke BC’s. If Obama’s BC was forged from the Nordyke BC’s a comparison between those type fonts wouldn’t tell us anything. I can understand why Irey would want to see a BC like this, if it was genuine. And the type fonts on the rest of the BC could be authentic for all I know, since they had to use something as a base and fabricating the whole thing would be rough. But it sure looks like the number was fabricated – and it seems like that was probably the intention of whoever gave this to Irey. Suck him in because the fonts make his point, and in that way get this fraudulent BC# accepted as legitimate.

      • thinkwell
        Posted September 16, 2011 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

        Hi bdz :) Hope all is well.

        Now Ron Polland is claiming that the Nordyke BCs are bogus. Something doesn’t add up here.

        Btw, did you ever talk to Stephen Pidgeon?

        Friday, September 16, 2011

        Dr. Ronald Polland: The Nordyke long-form birth certificates are bogus!

        ObamaRelease YourRecords on 1:54 AM

        BIG SHOCKER! The Nordyke long-form birth certificates are bogus!
        *** Dr. Ronald Polland ***

        Remember the controversy over Obama’s cert. # (10641) being three and four numbers higher than Susan and Gretchen Nordyke’s (10637 & 10638) who were allegedly born at Kapiolani the day after Obama?

        The controversy was, “How could Obama’s cert # be higher than the Nordyke Twins if they were born after him?”

        Well, get ready for the biggest controversy of all. [...]

        http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/09/nordyke-long-form-birth-certificates.html

      • Posted September 16, 2011 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

        If the two Nordyke BC’s were typed on the same typewriter I’d expect the type to line up, although some letters would perhaps be darker than others. I don’t know if there are anomalies on one that show up on the other – stuff that wouldn’t be likely to happen exactly the same way twice. I did notice that some of the handwritten numbers, check marks, etc that were on one weren’t on the other. The signatures didn’t match exactly.

        I’m not so sure that he’s got a case on this one.

      • thinkwell
        Posted September 16, 2011 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

        Don’t know what to make of Polland, whether he is simply mistaken, but well intentioned, whether he doesn’t care about the truth so much as self-serving notoriety, or whether he has a far darker hidden purpose of spreading misinformation and discrediting by general association those truly seeking the truth about Obama’s past. Hmmm…

        You know, so many of the politicians (regardless of stripe) and the regime-stream media are so invested in denial about Obama-fraud’s naked ineligibility, that I think it will be the stolen social security number or some tax crime that will be the lever that first starts Obama on his inevitable topple.

        For the sake of fear-of-punishment putting a “sense of duty” firmly back into the minds of the rest of the scumbag politicians we’ve inflicted ourselves with, I hope Obama-fraud receives no pardon and is made to bear the full and just sentence his many crimes deserve, no matter where that may lead (up to and including the death penalty if his treasonous actions and the rule of law support it).

        As Jefferson famously said, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

  78. Posted September 19, 2011 at 1:20 am | Permalink | Reply

    IMO, the Polland ploy seems to be an Obot diversion. He is a
    great diversionary tactician in many ways. Essential basic truth
    is: that Eleanor Nordyke (mother) is pictured in several photos with the new BC’s when issued. If what she has today are non-genuine, then the switch took place in 1961, IMO. Can we really believe stuntman, Polland? Not sure. JS

    • Posted September 20, 2011 at 3:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I thought the photo of her with the long-forms was taken by the Advertiser when they published the article. I don’t know how old Eleanor was when she had the twins and I’m really bad at judging how old a person is but I thought she looked past child-bearing years in the photo. Did the Advertiser ever specifically say when the photo was taken? Or is there a photo other than the one I’m thinking of?

  79. Posted September 21, 2011 at 12:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    IMO, yes. There should be others (1961). On the contrary, though, the pix of Mrs.Eleanor Nordyke was taken with the photostats of the BC’s
    as of 7/2009 per/by the Obama.Birther.Report data. Too recent for
    any cross check, but photostats are not originals, nor even good copies
    of an original copy, IMO. A photo of the BC originals from 1961-62 is
    needed. Mandatory. IMO. Thanks. JS

  80. Posted September 26, 2011 at 1:59 am | Permalink | Reply

    Photo of Mrs. Nordyke was allegedly taken in 7/2009, too recent.
    We need photos from 1961-1962. IMO. Anybody up to speed on
    this aspect? JS

    • Posted October 10, 2011 at 11:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Sorry for the delay on these posts. I thought I had approved them but I guess I didn’t. Sometimes I wonder if my head is screwed on straight…

  81. Posted October 1, 2011 at 10:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As noted, several times, may have been hacked—the site Obama.
    Birther.Report.com stated that the Mrs. Nordyke’s photo was from
    7/2009. Too recent. Also note that she (Eleanor Nordyke) is
    holding up photostats. Such copies, IMO, are not totally reliable.
    There should be a 1961-1962 photo of the BC copies, either at
    the hospital, or in the photo album of Eleanor Nordyke. Does anyone know? Can anyone comment? Thanks. JS

  82. Magnus Kaisen
    Posted October 10, 2011 at 8:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Time for a little humor…

    The Sunday funnies (10/09/2011) featured a Classic Peanuts with the usual Lucy/Football/Charlie Brown duped again routine.

    The punch line has a humorous application to this blogs interest.

    http://www.gocomics.com/peanuts/2011/10/09

    Enjoy

    • Posted October 10, 2011 at 11:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That was hilarious – and so applicable I wasn’t sure whether to laugh or cry. Thanks!

  83. Posted October 12, 2011 at 12:45 am | Permalink | Reply

    Agreed, very apropos. Even more hilarious (and ominous) is BTW
    that Mr. O. in the WH evidently failed on his new E-Verify data as
    submitted. This is a felony situation, almost automatically for
    any Federal job applicant who has a false or invalid or stolen
    SSN. Very ominous too. He was notified by INS that he now
    cannot work in the USA. This is far from over. IMO, worse than
    Watergate. Ridiculous and unbelievable. Eric Holder, do your
    duty! Eric Holder, then recuse yourself! Someone must act soon.
    IMO. JS

  84. JScovit
    Posted October 15, 2011 at 7:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Even more hilarious is that the Obot in the WH has failed the e-verify system. This is basically a felony. Now what will Eric Holder do? Stonewall some more? If you fail e-verify, then your SSN is not valid. Pure and simple. No SSN means not a valid citizen. IMO. Trouble looms ahead. See WND article. Worse than
    Watergate. IMO.
    JS

  85. Posted October 17, 2011 at 10:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Even more hilarious is that WND reports that Obot failed his
    E-Verify data as submitted. Washington Times reports the same.
    Big trouble ahead. IMO. JS

  86. Posted October 17, 2011 at 10:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    All Alert. Judge Royce Lamberth has now thrown out all the
    Taitz v. Obama cases. As stated before, the man is definitely
    a traitor, guilty of treason, and totally blackmailed by his boy-
    friend, Eric Holder, AG. Totally unreasonable. The fact that
    the Obot cannot pass E-Verify is proof of felony. Judge Lamberth
    is thus sustaining felony. This is all incredible. A disgrace to
    Ronald Reagan, the man who appointed this Texas garbage,
    Lamberth. We are all in trouble, and martial law looms on the
    horizon. The courts are now a JOKE. IMO.
    OCT 17, at 6:00 PM EST.

    • Posted October 18, 2011 at 3:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      Eventually the question ALL these judges will have to answer is the same one that Eric Holder and Obama will both have to answer as well: What did you know and when did you know it?

      Do judges take an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution? If so, every last one of these crooks/judges is guilty of treason, as you say.

      It is very interesting that the one judge who might not have been for sale was killed by a shot to the aorta and died within 7 seconds, while the alleged intended victim of Jared Laughner’s rampage was not killed.

  87. Tommy Thompson
    Posted October 18, 2011 at 6:17 am | Permalink | Reply

    I wonder if the charge of “misprision of felony” is applicable to federal judges? Knowingly not reporting a criminal felony.

  88. Posted October 29, 2011 at 11:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Alert all. Judge Puglisi, in Hawaii, and friend of ERIC HOLDER, AG,
    has now ended/denied all Taitz vs. Obama cases in Hawaii. How convenient! The OBOT also appointed Puglisi to his post, so what
    should we expect from such traitors? The Judges are jerks and con-
    men; and the courts are a JOKE. Danger looms on the horizon. Do
    not rule out martial law. IMO. JS

    • Posted October 30, 2011 at 5:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Not surprising. The only question is whether Puglisi left any bread-crumb trail to show the decision had to be abducted out of him. Like some of the other judges did, IMHO.

      I think we need to have laws specifically give standing to ordinary people to sue over violations of the law. The courts have proven worthless, since both law enforcement and judges are part of the ruling cabal that protects everybody within it.

  89. JJ
    Posted November 14, 2011 at 2:19 am | Permalink | Reply

    Summary: There is evidence that in October of 2008 the major TV and radio companies were threatened by Obama’s representatives if they reported on the eligibility issue –

    My take: nothing short of the knowledge of strategically placed bombs throughout the nation can convince me of the complicity and coordination of all media, Supreme Courts, Republican candidates, state senators, federal officers, secretary of states, congresspersons to have let this ‘coup’ happen.
    Sorry; there’s not enough incompetence or treason to go around for that to have happened willingly–there was force–and it was terrorist force.
    Now, all involved must continue with this farce for fear of discovery will cause riots and lynchings of those involved, esp. the Supreme Court, officials at the DNC, and HDOH officials.
    Peace.

    • Posted November 14, 2011 at 4:14 am | Permalink | Reply

      I suspect that they threatened another run on the bank. Fox could have told Obama’s handlers to go suck a lemon and then have reported the threat to the Bush DOJ and taken Obama out, destroying his ability to carry out his threats of FCC and anti-monopoly harassment after the election. The threat was vain unless Obama’s handlers had some way of making sure that Fox wouldn’t report the threats. IOW, the real threat had to be something that didn’t depend on Obama getting elected. In different places I’ve given some of my reasons for thinking the real threat was a run on the bank by Soros’ communist and Islamist allies that would collapse the entire free-world economy. One of those reasons was the behavior of the judges, many of whom engaged in what seemed to be deliberate, glaring ethics breaches in their dealings with the Obama eligibility issue.

      The one thing that gave me pause was SCOTUS’ ruling against the Obama regime on campaign contributions by corporations. Obama scolded them at the State of the Union address and I wondered why he didn’t just threaten them with another run on the bank if they ruled against him on ANYTHING, and not just on the eligibility issue. It occurred to me that they might have realized that the judiciary was smelling awfully fishy to a lot of us already and they needed to get us off the scent. Here recently the DC Circuit Court ruled in favor of the Constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual mandate, and the decision was written by a “conservative” justice – which caused Rush Limbaugh to say that even conservative champions are vulnerable to forsaking everything they ever espoused, but which caused me to say, “Hmmmmm……. Maybe the Obama handlers were saving the threats for the most important decisions…”

      What I do know is that there is so much crap going on that I don’t trust any of them. I want real answers, and nobody is willing to even acknowledge the legitimate questions.

      I agree with you, that there is more to this than meets the eye. That there were threats is already documented. Exactly what the real threat was remains to be discovered.

  90. JJ
    Posted November 14, 2011 at 2:38 am | Permalink | Reply

    I’m not a legal scholar…former educator though.
    Don’t any of these Obots ever put 2 and 2 together and wonder why for almost 3 years the fraud refused to release a document that doesn’t present any ‘problem’??
    What is their answer for that??? none seem to have a rational answer…so Obots, why?? Why would a dignitary withhold a document for 3 years and then release one not perjuring, not inflammatory, not embarrassing???

    Just asking??

    • Posted November 14, 2011 at 4:19 am | Permalink | Reply

      Why would Obama send a decorated military surgeon to jail for 6 months and cause him to lose his entire life’s savings…. just because Obama didn’t want to show the BC he now claims is his?

      If that BC was really Obama’s, then Obama has shown a willingness to piss on honorable military officers for no reason whatsoever.

      The campaign ads write themselves. If this guy isn’t ineligible then he is the biggest piece of dog doo-doo on the planet. Either way, he’s bad news and if America would choose 4 more years of him then we’re already dead.

  91. JJ
    Posted November 18, 2011 at 5:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    .If the fraud exposed the fake BC duriing Lakin’s litigation, wouldn’t it have been in the hands of the judiciary to examine??
    We didn’t want that, did we??
    I really can’t see any hope for this nation at this point other than pushing that ‘reset’ button.
    The 45 trillion speculated deficit is nothing compared to the 112 trillion in liabilities people won’t even think about.
    There is no way this can be carried much further–the best know it and are voicing just that.
    I know one thing only; God sent me a message 3 years ago..prep my girl..prep.
    I started storing food, supplies, water, ammo and guns.
    Off topic, but I feel as previous years, TPTB, the elite, have chosen their man…they achieved their goal to this point..we’re bankrupt.
    It was just too obvious in 2008 that McShame was chosen to lose. They own the electronic voting machines.
    Peace…JayJay

  92. Posted November 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

    ALERT ALL: Obama name added to NH ballot, in spite of SSN scandal,
    e-Verify failure, and Internet BC which is plagued with problems, etc.
    The NH Elections Comtee does NOT SEE A PROBLEM. He paid a fee,
    and wanted on the ballot. Simple as treason. All the room erupted in
    cries of Traitor/Treason. No one can challenge this, although Taitz says
    she will legally appeal to override. Again, the Courts will be hopeless. Wait and see. The hour is very late. Patriots must act soon.
    IMO. JS

  93. Posted November 25, 2011 at 9:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    But NH Ballot Commssion says OBOT is eligible to be on Demo primary
    ballot, even if ineligible. All he must do is pay the $1000 fee and affirm
    that he wants to be on ballot. Many in NH hearing objected. Ultimately,
    a convicted felon, a potential felon, and a murderer, etc., could also
    qualify, to be on the NH ballot. Makes no sense. IMO. They also reason
    that he was OK for the 2008 ballot, so he can therefore be on the 2012
    ballot. Makes no sense, if ineligible. IMO. JS

    PS/ Every state must have someone to challenge this nonsense on
    every state ballot. Regardless of courts. IMO. JS

    • Posted November 25, 2011 at 11:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Peter Lemiska has a well-reasoned and well-stated article about the NH situation at http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/lemiska/111123

      Here is a post I tried to post in response, but it was apparently too long:

      This is a well-written piece. For some of the evidence alluded to see http://www.butterdezillion.wordpress.com

      The president appoints lifelong Supreme Court justices, all federal law enforcement heads, all regulatory heads, and whatever “czars” he feels like hiring. He decides when, where, and why our troops engage and what allies we have (or which allies we betray). He issues whatever executive orders he wants. He vetoes whatever he wants. We are not talking about piddles here. We are talking about a person who – if he wants, or if he is incompetent – can literally destroy this nation and this world. It should be a no-brainer that if there is evidence that he has committed crimes (such as forgery, perjury, election fraud, and social security fraud) in order to get and stay in office, it needs to be investigated.

      But though everybody who takes political or military office takes an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution, none of them are willing to do a thing to ensure that an assualt on our Constitution and our laws is even investigated.

      There is much, much evidence that not only Obama has committed crimes, but that government agencies at every level have either overlooked crimes, disobeyed laws, or committed felonies in order to aid Obama’s crimes.

      For instance, the Selective Service Administration forged a draft registration for Obama – trying to pass off the ’08 automatic date stamp as if it was from 1980.

      E-verify shows that the social security number Obama used on his latest tax return was never issued to him, but the Social Security Administration refuses to investigate known fraud.

      The Passport Office has released in an affidavit what appears to be a forged “cable” claiming that retention periods were altered and pre-1969 passport applications were destroyed – even though the required paper trail for such rule change and destruction does not exist.

      In addition the State Department has overlooked specific security protocols in order to allow breaches to Obama’s passport file – THREE TIMES. Sources close to the investigation have said the breaches were to “fix” the record, yet the inspector general for the State Department didn’t even claim to check whether the record had been altered. I guess that IG suspected what Obama would later do to IG’s who actually did their jobs (such as Gerald Walpin…).

      The Hawaii Department of Health is a story all by itself. I have dealt extensively with them, and they have broken and continue to break almost every law and rule in the books. They have altered records, lied about records, refused to make required disclosures, illegally hidden Adminsitrative Rules, include legally invalid birth certificates in their birth index, etc. They claim they cannot report known forgery to law enforcement.

      The interim Health Director, Neal Palafox, was told to resign (while government operatives lied to the public about his reason for resigning) shortly after HI Gov Neil Abercrombie admitted to Mike Evans that HI has no birth certificate for Obama and also told a Star-Advertiser columnist that what they have for Obama is “actually written down” but would not convince skeptics that Obama was born in HI. Since then, DOH Director Loretta Fuddy has broken all the disclosure laws by saying they will only disclose copies of ORIGINAL birth certificates when they want to; otherwise everything will be done by easily-manipulable computer printouts.

      And unless HI issued serial numbers for their birth certificates randomly, the DOH is indeed manipulating birth certificate numbers to try to make it seem OK that Obama’s BC# is later (higher) than the numbers given to BC’s numbered 3 days later.

      And the HDOH has indirectly admitted that what Obama has released thus far are forgeries. They have admitted that Obama’s BC was amended in 2006 (while Obama was considering a run for the presidency) – which must be noted on any genuine BC the HDOH issues for Obama since then but was not included on either BC Obama released. That alteration also invalidates the BC so that it is no longer prima facie evidence of ANYTHING. Whcih could explain why the HDOH prints a birth index which includes LEGALLY NON-VALID BC’s. It also explains why he refuses to submit anything genuine in a court of law.

      In addition, the HDOH continues to claim they can’t disclose Obama’s long-form BC because he has a privacy interest they have to protect – a privacy interest that would not exist if he had already disclosed a genuine copy of what they have on file. IOW, they have admitted that they know what he posted is not what they have in their office.

      The really silly thing is that HDOH Administrative Rules (which the HDOH Director illegally hid until a year after the 2008 election) allow ANYBODY to get a non-certified copy of any abbreviated BC (short-form) the HDOH has in their office. HI’s disclosure laws say that anything that CAN be disclosed MUST be disclosed on request. IOW, the HDOH is REQUIRED to disclose Obama’s non-certified short-form to anybody who asks to see it. The HI Ombudsman’s Office has confirmed that the short-forms are discloseable to anybody.

      Unfortunately, I have learned by extensive experience that the entire system is so corrupt in HI that I am not willing to waste money even trying to get a judge to force the HDOH to obey the law. Just look at what Issa and Grassley are having to deal with in trying to investigate Eric Holder, the FBI, the AZ US Attorney, DHS, and INS in regards to Fast and Furious – the US government’s arming of Mexican drug cartels with guns either without tracking devices or with tracking devices DISABLED so they could only be tracked AFTER they were used in murders – and the death count for Fast & Furious weapons was over 200 the last I knew. Those entities have altered evidence, perjured themselves, and ignored subpoenas in a Congressional investigation. If a Congressional investigation can’t get the truth out of multiple government agencies conspiring to hide the truth, nobody can. This is sheer and blatant lawlessness.

      The Hawaii Democratic Party literally cut out of their Official Certification of Nomination (OCON) for Obama/Biden one whole line of print – the line that says the candidates are Constitutionally eligible and that the candidates are specifically the candidates for the Hawaii Democratic Party. Because the HDP took out the eligibility certification, Nancy Pelosi had to sign a different DNC OCON just for HI, claiming to certify Obama’s eligibility (even though the HDOH confirms that nobody from the DNC even requested to see Obama’s birth certificate). Why did the HDP refuse to certify Obama’s eligibility? It was apparently something done hastily and stealthily, because in taking out that one line they also took out the only thing they were required by law to do – sign off on the DNC candidate also being the candidate for the HDP. The HDP refuses to say why they took the eligibility language out. But the attorney they used in litigation for the past decade just so happened to be the divorce lawyer for Obama’s mother; he has probably seen the birth certificate Obama has been using his entire life. For some reason, the lawyers who have the ability to know what Obama’s records actually say…. refuse to certify his Constitutional eligibility.

      So… we’ve got the Selective Service Administration, Passport Office, and apparently the HDOH forging documents directly, the Social Security Administration ignoring blatant and known social security fraud, the State Department disabling security protocols to allow 3 breaches to sanitize Obama’s passport records while the inspector general refuses to check whether the record was altered, the HDOH admitting that Obama has committed forgery but refusing to do anything about it and actually trying to cover for him publicly, and the Hawaii Democratic Party failing to submit the required certifications in their haste to get rid of the Constitutional eligibility certification in their OCON. Those are some of the facts we have so far.

      Folks, where there’s smoke there’s fire. Fast & Furious shows us what we can expect from government agencies so this should come as no surprise to anybody who is paying attention. We’ve got lawless thugs in America arming lawless thugs in Mexico. Only a fool would refuse to ask the obvious question: Why? Why all this lawlessness?

      Sorry for the length of this. This provides just a little of the substantiation we have for what the author of this article has said: that there is evidence that deserves to be investigated and expalined.

  94. Posted November 26, 2011 at 7:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    NH Ballot Commission and Election Judges (all) must realize that
    there are possibly FOUR Felonies pending in the Obot eligibility
    matters: 1) The failure of e-verify for the SSN
    2) Failure by a FED govt employee to pass e-verify and
    to use proper SSN with taxes, tax fraud
    3) Non-payment of ILLINOIS taxes (state and FED) on
    the Rita Rezko strip of land deeded to OBOT in
    Chicago, about nine years ago (Sentencing due
    at end of DEC 2011 by Judge Amy St. EVE)
    4) Any involvement is felonious in FAST and FURIOUS,
    since it involves gun-running across state and Inter-
    national lines, as well as conspiracy and cover-up.
    Includes Holder, too.
    5) EXCLUDES the BC problems and the Internet BC
    fraud & uttering.

    FOUR felonies is way too much!!! Eric Holder, do your duty. NH
    Ballot Commission, do your duty. Sec of State in NH, Gardner,
    please do your duty. Is there no Constitution left for us??? IMO.
    JS

  95. John
    Posted November 27, 2011 at 2:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Looks like some country preacher’s wife has way too much time on her hands.

    • Posted November 27, 2011 at 6:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yeah, like the widow who gave her mite offered it up because she had too much money on her hands.

      Anybody who knows me or my family is laughing at the suggestion that I’m not busy enough. lol.

      But in all seriousness, the communists’ Cloward-Piven Plan is calculated to work because it raises a class of people who suck the money away from the working taxpayers and gives that money to people who can then become the rent-a-mobs because they aren’t carrying out the normal responsibilities of life. By making taxpayers pay for the free-loaders, the taxpayers’ burden becomes heavier and they need to take extra jobs (as I have in the last few months) so they can have some money left for their family to live off of. That keeps the productive people who are raising families, involved in their churches, etc “too busy” to engage in the research necessary to keep this nation free and prosperous.

      It’s a vicious circle, and every person who takes time out to engage with this corrupt process has had to deal with their own thoughts saying they shouldn’t waste time on corruption that will never change. Because most people have cared about nothing but their own pocketbooks and pleasure for the last 50 years, this country is practically unrecognizable as the United States of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. It’s becoming a lawless, corrupt, third-world place while most of America watches reality shows to keep entertained and sedated.

      I’ve got plenty of things I wish I could be doing. But in the last 3 years I have come face to face with the reality that unless something drastic happens soon, my children will never have the freedoms I have had. They will be beheaded for not wearing burqas or executed because they will be among Bill Ayers’ estimated 15 million people who resist communist “re-education”. Or maybe they will be slaughtered by the Mexican drug cartels that are almost entirely armed by the US government and are filtering ever-farther into the US itself while our “Department of Justice” makes sure the border is unprotected. Maybe they will be denied healthcare or the opportunity to buy and sell or make a living, because some bureaucrat decides that a non-communist or non-Muslim person’s life is not worth living. Maybe they will be hit by an Iranian nuke. In this climate of lawlessness, nothing is impossible to those who wish to harm us. WE have no protectors because the “protectors” are serving nothing but their own desires as if the rule of law meant nothing.

      Scripture’s ultimate criticism of the Israelites is when it says, “Everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” Lawlessness. At those points, the Lord had no choice but to wipe them out and start over with the “stump” – the few who cared at all about righteousness and justice. Right now we are seeing a huge, over-bloated government full of snakes who do whatever they darn well please and slither with their slime all over the face of the country. Unless we the people take action, the Lord will have no choice but to spit us out too. The New Testament rebukes, even more than the people who do bad things, the people who APPROVE of those who do such things. In modern America that means, among other things, that they VOTE for them rather than point out the lawlessness and fight for real justice.

      What I am doing is tied up with everything I believe, everything I live for, and the reason the Lord hasn’t taken me Home yet. “He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” Micah 6:8

      • John
        Posted November 27, 2011 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

        Well, you’re entitled to your bizarre conspiracy theories. They’re harmless, and they obviously help you feel that you’re a brave pioneer for a great cause. It must be lonely, though. You must get a lot of strange looks.

      • Posted November 27, 2011 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

        I suppose Fast & Furious should just be ignored, too, now that evidence is coming out that the DOJ, BATFE, AZ US Attorney, AZ AG, FBI, DHS, and ICE were all involved in covering up the fact that the US government was selling to Mexican drug cartels guns that could not be tracked until AFTER they were found at crime scenes, right around the same time that Obama was telling his disgruntled supporters that his people were working “under the radar” to get rid of the gun rights guaranteed in the 2nd Amendment, right around the same time that the people of Juarez, Mexico were fleeing the massacres there by the very people the US government had sold weapons to, and as the DOJ was suing Arizona to keep them from enforcing the border and immigration laws.

        Silly old conspiracy theory. Never mind the 200+ dead bodies resulting from it. Just plug your nose and step over them because you’ll get lots of strange looks if you act like something is wrong, and people will think you want to be a hero if you do anything to try to stop any more innocents from being killed…

  96. John
    Posted November 27, 2011 at 8:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Problem is, your “evidence” is all conjecture, conspiracy theory, and your own paranoid suspicions. That’s why nobody takes it seriously.

    • Posted November 27, 2011 at 10:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Plug your nose, step over the dead bodies, and continue to say they are a figment of my imagination.

      The selective service registration for Barack Obama has an automatic date stamp of ’08. That is a fact.

      Security protocols were ignored 3 separate times so that Obama’s passport file was breached 3 times, and the inspector general didn’t even claim to check whether the passport file had actually been altered. The man who headed the company that allowed the breaches was rewarded with a position as head of the National Security Council. That is a fact.

      The Hawaii Department of Health denied access to the invoices resulting from Obama amending his birth certificate sometime in late 2006. That is a fact. Amendments must be noted on genuine birth certificates from the HDOH, and an amended birth certificate is not considered prima facie evidence in HI. Those are facts.

      The 1960-64 birth index includes names that are included only on legally INVALID birth certificates. That is a fact.

      A Honolulu Star-Advertiser columnist reported that HI Governor Neil Abercrombie had said his investigation of Obama’s birth record showed there was something “actually written down” but that it was going to be a political issue in the next election because skeptics were not going to be convinced by what Hawaii has for Obama. That is a fact.

      Mike Evans said on multiple radio shows that he had spoken to Neil Abercrombie, who had told him that there is no birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii. After the public became aware of Evans’ claims, he denied that he had ever claimed to speak to Abercrombie, but the audio recordings are clear that he did and that his denials were inaccurate. Those are facts.

      The alleged COLB that Obama posted lacks the note of Obama’s 2006 amendment. The Factcheck photo of the alleged seal is taken at an angle so that a genuine seal would have to be flattened rather than remain round as the “seal” does on that photo, as I have documented through my own experimentation. And once you try the experiment to see the way the angles affect a round “seal”, you realize there is no way that a round seal photographed at that angle could ever look like it does on that Factcheck photo. Clearly a photoshop.

      The alleged long-form that Obama posted is not legally certified, lacking either the State of Hawaii seal or the official 2 1/4-inch-diameter seal of the Hawaii Department of Health as required by HDOH Administrative Rules dealing directly with vital records. It also has multiple layers, multiple type-fonts and colors, and other anomalies. The Department of Health has claimed, since both the short-form and supposed long-form were posted, that Obama still has a “privacy interest” in hiding his genuine birth certificate – which is an admission that what Obama posted is not what they have in their office for him, because if a person publishes information about him/herself, there is no longer any privacy interest in documents that reveal that already-disclosed information. And if a document has some information that may be disclosed and some that may not, the document is to be disclosed with non-discloseable portions redacted. Those are facts.

      Obama published his tax return in a format that revealed his social security number – a number that is confirmed by private investigators’ databases showing financial transactions by him using that number. But E-verify conducted by one of Obama’s employers (we the people) shows that number was not issued to Obama. Judge Lamberth ruled that Astrue was correct to deny Orly Taitz access to a redacted copy of the application for that SSN, indirectly confirming that it doesn’t belong to Obama, because if it belonged to Obama the privacy rights would have been waived when Obama published his SSN. And that original application for that number would exist and be discloseable even – and actually PARTICULARLY – if Obama HAD been given a different SSN after making that one public, resulting in his first SSN failing E-verify, as some have proposed to explain the E-verify failure. Those are all facts combined with standard legal logic.

      I won’t bother to go into the laws and rules broken by the people trying to cover for Obama; that would take too long. But the claims I’ve made regarding these things are backed up by the laws and rules and by the e-mails, statements, and news reports showing the specific actions taken.

      Obama has posted 2 forgeries, as indirectly confirmed by the HDOH in a number of ways as described above. He is using a social security number that was never issued to him, as confirmed by E-verify and indirectly confirmed by Judge Lamberth. Someone at the Selective Service Administration forged a draft registration for him showing an automatic date stamp of 2008. And his passport file has been illegally accessed not once, not twice, but three times while security protocols were ignored all three times; the inspector general doesn’t claim to have even checked whether the file was altered any of those 3 times. Those are all facts. And they do NOT paint a pretty picture of how our government has handled the truth about the records for Barack Hussein Obama II.

      In fact, it looks remarkably similar to the picture emerging from the Congressional investigation into Fast & Furious. Lawlessness to get Obama into office; lawlessness once he’s in office. If you ignore the acorn, don’t be surprised when the oak tree grows before your very eyes.

      How many people have to die before we take this seriously, guys?

    • Fedupwlibertards
      Posted November 28, 2011 at 1:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      FOGBLOW! http://www.fogblow.com

  97. John
    Posted November 27, 2011 at 10:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    None of the things you cite are facts–they’re all your own interpretations. But no matter–like all conspiracy theorists, you conjure your own facts, and reject any information that doesn’t support your theory. Again, that’s why your crusades get nowhere.
    But enjoy. If nothing else, you’ve probably inspired some interesting papers among the psych students at Doane.:)

    • Posted November 27, 2011 at 11:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think the difference between fact and opinion is taught in 3rd grade. I just gave you a list of facts. The auto date-stamp on Obama’s draft registration says 08. That is just plain fact. Call it true or false, but it is a factual claim. (And it happens to be true). Obama’s passport file was breached 3 times. Fact. The IG didn’t claim to check whether Obama’s file was altered. Fact. John Brennan was appointed as head of the National Security Council. Fact. The HDOH denied access to invoices resulting from Obama amending his birth certificate. Fact. DOH Administrative Rules require amendments to be noted on birth certificates. Fact. (I’ve documented this stuff in posts on this blog.) The COLB itself says “ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE” and HI statute says that amended and/or late BC’s are not prima facie evidence/probative. Fact. The 1960-64 birth index includes the birth names of at least 2 adopted children, which are the names on BC’s that are no longer legally valid. Fact.

      I could go on but anybody who has passed 3rd grade should see the pattern here.

      I also included the facts of what disclosure rules say. Any interpretation I’ve done has been based on those dsclosure rules. If these “public servants” are not obeying the disclosure rules even after having them pointed out ad nauseum, then we have another problem. Are you claiming that Judge Royce Lamberth doesn’t know how to apply the disclosure rules – that he didn’t realize that Obama publishing his SSN waived his privacy rights for that information? Wow. If our judges are that stupid it’s almost as big a problem as if they are that crooked. Either way, we have a problem, and it’s not rocket science to figure that out.

  98. John
    Posted November 28, 2011 at 12:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    I guess you missed a lot of third grade.

  99. Posted November 28, 2011 at 2:26 am | Permalink | Reply

    In general, John is a true OBOT and a brainwashed Doubting
    Thomas. He cannot discern the writing on the wall as Armageddon
    sets in upon us. John cannot be persuaded by tons of facts and
    factoids. IMO, hopeless case. Of course, John is a common name,
    and sadly lacks common sense. He cares not a cent about treason. Stick to the issues, and you will be able to defeat the OBOT zombies and trolls, every time. Truth will win. I believe that. IMO. JS

  100. Posted November 28, 2011 at 12:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Just block the nit whit. He is not worth replies.

    • Posted November 28, 2011 at 1:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You’re probably right. I won’t give him the satisfaction of blocking him, but at this point he probably doesn’t need a response either, since I think anybody who knows the difference between fact and opinion realizes that he’s just not thinking straight. What I’ve mentioned are observable facts and he still keeps saying I have no facts.

  101. John
    Posted November 28, 2011 at 12:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If it doesn’t, you can pray that the next election will result in a president of the proper skin color, and you and your friends won’t have to engage in this hysterical charade again.

    • Posted November 28, 2011 at 1:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I just can’t help but respond to this one. My preferred next President at this point is Herman Cain. So hopefully the next election WILL result in a president having one of any number of “proper skin colors” – in this instance, I’m hoping Black, but only because the guy who knows what this country needs and has shown that he obeys the laws of this country just so happens to be Black.

      So what is your point?

  102. John
    Posted November 28, 2011 at 2:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Give me a break. For all that talk, birthers would no sooner vote for Herman Cain than they would for Barack Obama.

    • Posted November 28, 2011 at 4:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      And you know that exactly how? Give factual evidence for your claim.

      • Posted November 28, 2011 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

        American liberals are the most racist people on the planet. Honestly Butter, why even waste your time with him.

  103. John
    Posted November 28, 2011 at 4:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

    LOL
    Should I “indirectly confirm it?”

  104. John
    Posted November 28, 2011 at 6:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Thanks, but it would be pointless.

  105. Gianni
    Posted November 29, 2011 at 2:56 am | Permalink | Reply

    Wow John, you’re playing that old and tired race card, aren’t you? Yep. And that’s why the far lefties must destroy Herman Cain, because his running as a Republican stands as an obstacle in your weird obsessive use of the race card.

    Get a grip, and stop being such a putz. The race card bit is old and tired. It doesn’t work anymore. Get with it. It is a failed strategy.

    • Posted December 1, 2011 at 1:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      Maybe, we can get beyond poor John and his dear John nonsense,
      if we focus on the reality card. The new reality is that so far, the
      OBOT is challenged on four primary ballots in the USA: NH, Georgia, ALA, and Hawaii. Those DOJ lawyers must now work double over-
      time to remedy this. Others may follow example, too. Is it racist
      to uphold the US Constitution and the electoral process? No, IMO.
      Bye bye, John. Sorry. IMO. JS

  106. John
    Posted November 29, 2011 at 12:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’d say Mr. Cain is doing a pretty thorough job of destroying himself, with no need for help from the “far lefties.” As for race, it’s what the birther and tea party movements are about, and every thinking person knows it. They began when a black man was elected President, and they’ll end when he leaves office.

    • Posted December 1, 2011 at 4:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      False accusations are not to be accepted, whether they are against Cain or Obama. What matters is the facts and the evidence that reveals the facts. That’s the epistemology I have lived out with Obama and it is the epistemology I have regarding Cain as well.

      Right now we have very few facts on the accusations against Cain. It’s only a matter of time though, and my gut feeling is that Cain is much more credible than his accuser, who (as I understand it) has been found guilty of libel, has been through bankruptcy, and has been evicted several times including recently. Somebody in desperate need of money right now and willing to criminally lie about another person.

      I don’t agree that somebody should give up just because there are people who are willing to make false accusations. We have libel/slander laws to protect people from lies about them and their character. The left doesn’t care about truth; their objective is to lie and keep the facts hidden until it’s too late for the truth to matter any more. IOW, they tell lies when they know there’s not much time for the truth to be discovered and make a difference. The truth that will eventually be found out doesn’t matter to them, because the lie will have already made it around the world and back by then and the damage will be done. And the damage is all they care about; truth be hanged.

      It’s a disgusting, dirty way of life for the left, and as long as they get what they want by doing it, they will keep doing it with no care for anything but their own agenda.

      • Fedupwlibertards
        Posted December 1, 2011 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

        I could not have articulated it any better.

  107. John
    Posted December 1, 2011 at 12:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Mr./Ms. Scovit….
    A birther lunatic screaming an objection hardly consitutes a “challenge on the primary ballot.” But by all means, let us now how those “challenges” work out.

  108. Gianni
    Posted December 3, 2011 at 4:21 am | Permalink | Reply

    John,

    Your logic is flawed. So you say that people who oppose Obama are racist? Do you oppose Cain? If so, you must be racist according to your own logic.

    See how easy it is to play the race card?

  109. John
    Posted December 3, 2011 at 12:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    No, I did not say that people who oppose the President are racist.
    I said that the tea party and birther movements are about race–refusal to accept the reality of a black president. As for Mr. Cain, he is an interesting campaign sidebar. And most of the rural southern whites who loudly support him now would never actually vote for him.

  110. Posted December 4, 2011 at 5:53 am | Permalink | Reply

    John, you need to keep up. So far there are at least 5 states in which the election board or the Secretary of State is under challenge to Obama’s placement on their ballots. In fact all 57 states will have a challenge before long…that’s according to one Democratic candidate. I myself filed my own complaint with our SOS in Alabama and asked to file a formal challenge however somebody else beat me to it.
    consider this fact…when just one state decides to refuse to place Obama on their ballot due to his eligibility there will be a situation where the Supreme Court would have no choice but to listen to the challenge. You can’t have one state declaring a candidate not eligible and another saying he is…that conflict can only be satisfied at the Supreme Court level. No issue of “standing or jurisdiction” is involved. So John you’re about to SEE THE FACTS…but you can’t handle the FACTS.

    • John
      Posted December 8, 2011 at 8:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You’re living in a dream world.
      The fact is that these challenges consist of letters from isolated rural nuts, and are going nowhere.
      No state is going to even consider not putting the President on the ballot.
      You don’t understand the concept of “standing.”
      There are 50 states, not 57.

  111. Posted December 10, 2011 at 9:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    TT is correct and to be commended. John just simply does not understand our system, and refuses to analyze the faulty system. He attacks other people’s motives and hurls racism invective, but
    does not address the issues of fraud, conspiracy, treason, felony,
    etc. Typical OBOT zombie and/or troll. Mr. Cain is no longer in
    this Prez race for 2012, John. So sorry. Please try to keep up.
    Have a pleasant 2012–if you can. IMO. JS

    • Posted December 12, 2011 at 7:23 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s the behavior I observe as well.

      Regarding “keeping up” I apologize for being the bottleneck. My approval of comments has been patchy lately so there’s some time delay which makes comments seem out of place when it’s really my fault for not getting them approved as quickly as I should. My apologies to everyone.

      • Posted December 12, 2011 at 7:34 am | Permalink

        Social security numbers were not issued at birth the way they tend to be now. I am 1.5 years younger than BHO and I didn’t get mine until I was much older. The simple answer to your question, is that the person who was born in 1890 didn’t need one until the 1970s because they were near the end of their life and needed it to obtain certain medical benefits.

        Here’s what Susan Daniels (The PI who uncovered the SS# issue with Obama) had to say to Mr. Berg in a direct email.

        Mr. Berg:

        I read part of your article regarding Obama’s CT SSN. You out-right lied in it:

        According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

        I am the private investigator who discovered he was using a fraudulent number. I looked up a number of those you had listed in your article and found that ALL were issued between 1935 and 1951. Yet, you blatantly lied. You need to get your facts straight.

        Susan Daniels
        Susan Daniels & Associates

      • Posted December 12, 2011 at 8:49 am | Permalink

        It is very conceivable that some of the people who retired to Hawaii (and thus had their last residence listed as HI) were living in Connecticut at the time they applied for a SSN. The problem for Obama is that he never lived in Connecticut, and the point at which he should have applied for a SSN was when he was living in HI. For Berg to make a valid point he would first off have to be truthful, and secondly, he would have to show that those people resided in Hawaii AT THE TIME THEY APPLIED FOR A SSN, not at the time they died.

        This is sort of a side note, but a while back when some colleagues and I were doing some research we found some messed-up stuff on ancestry.com. IIRC, there was a time when they were letting people put whatever they wanted on there. I was investigating the Asing family, and all of a sudden it was showing young people in that family as being dead, with their obituaries being in such-and-such newspaper. But when we checked those newspapers there were no obituaries for them and those people are, as far as I know, still alive to this day. It raised serious questions in my mind as to how private my communications were, that these false flags were put out there when nobody SHOULD have had a clue that we were checking into those people at that precise time. AND it raised serious questions about the integrity of ancestry.com.

        But then, I know I’m just a conspiracy nut. Doesn’t everybody who’s alive today have listings in ancestry.com showing them as being dead and their obituary listed for a particular newspaper edition? Silly me!

        It sounds crazy to suggest that Justia.com, WayBackMachine, ancestry.com, and Google, as well as all the agencies involved with Obama’s records (including the SCOTUS stay clerk) are engaged in this crooked stuff, but the evidence is right there for each of those cases. In this particular case, SOMEBODY claimed that those people were dead and cited specific (non-existent) obituaries from the Honolulu papers. And they did it right around the time when I and my colleagues were researching those people, communicating on a secure conferencing site. Know what though? The content of what we posted was included in notifications that went to our regular e-mail accounts, and a computer-professor friend of mine suggested, based on the observations I noted to him, that either my ISP or somebody like DHS appeared to be interfering with my e-mail account.

        I think I’m past brain-dead for the night. Why in the world am I still awake at 2:30AM when I’ve got a nightmare week ahead work-wise? I really must be crazy. If anything I just said is jibberish, please just ignore it. lol

    • John
      Posted December 12, 2011 at 3:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you, Hope your fantasies keep you toasty warm as President Obama embarks on his second term. :)

  112. Posted December 12, 2011 at 6:49 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I have been a fan of attorney Phil Berg from day one but he just wrote that Obama’s SS# is legitimate. I was shocked. In his explanation he says that the number couldn’t belong to the man born in 1890 because SS#s didn’t start being issued until 1936. Our group is the original obamacrimes dot com. We’ve been together now for 3 years and I could surely use your expertise on why Berg is wrong.

    http://obamacrimes.com/?p=1610

    • Posted December 12, 2011 at 8:00 am | Permalink | Reply

      This is just an initial response since I haven’t done any checking on this, but my understanding is that a person has to apply for a SSN. Certainly a SSN would not have been given automatically at birth in 1890 but that would mean a person born in 1890 – who would have been 46 when SSN’s began to be issued, if Berg is correct on the dates for that – would have to apply for a SSN sometime after 1936. I don’t know how they managed SS benefits for somebody who hadn’t been paying into SS with a SSN for all those years, so I don’t know when a person like that would have applied for a SSN or why – if a person might have stayed out of the SS system at age 46 and through the working years because they didn’t think it would be any use to them and then in their retirement years they suddenly found a use for a SSN, or what. I don’t know what the scenario is for how the man born in 1890 got that SSN.

      I’m confused as to whether it was verified that the SSN in question has never been issued at all, or whether it was not issued to Obama.

      As to Obama’s SSN being legitimate, I don’t know how Berg could say that is so when E-verify says otherwise. And Judge Lamberth apparently also recognizes that it is not Obama’s SSN because he agreed that the SSA properly denied Taitz access to the redacted application for that number because of that applicant’s privacy rights – which would not still exist if the applicant was Obama, since Obama has already published his tax return in a form that allowed that claimed SSN to be viewed by the public. So Lamberth himself has indirectly confirmed that Obama used on his tax return a SSN that does not belong to him.

      Some have claimed that E-verify doesn’t show Obama as the holder of that SSN now because the SSA gave Obama a different number after he disclosed his SSN on his tax return. But doing that would presumably have required new paperwork and the original paperwork and application for that number would still exist – and is discloseable if Obama was the original applicant. So Lamberth’s ruling that it is NOT discloseable to Taitz is an admission that the record exists and that the applicant is NOT Obama. If the number had been reassigned to somebody besides Obama, then there would exist TWO applications that would fulfill Taitz’ request. If either one of those applications was by Obama, that application would be discloseable. So by saying there is no discloseable application, Lamberth is admitting that the SSA has no application with Obama’s name on it that was given that SSN.

      My hope and fervent prayer is that Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse will get access to the agency transaction logs for ALL of Obama’s alleged documentation files – including passport, SSN, selective service registration, and birth certificate. All of which show serious indicators of foul play by government officials. I actually wonder if a RICO investigation is in order – with the potential crimes being perpetrated by the GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, so the public interest FAR, FAR outweighs any privacy rights that may have ever existed.

  113. Posted December 13, 2011 at 2:08 am | Permalink | Reply

    Unfortunately, Phil Berg (once a comrade in arms) is very much in error.
    There is no SSN# for Obot that can now pass E-Verify. Simple fraud
    and/or felony. Berg totally opposes (it seems) all cases by Orly Taitz.
    They are not on the same page, IMO. Hence, Berg tries to counter and
    conflict with Taitz on the SSN data. Susan Daniels is correct, O. Taitz
    is correct, M. Astrue is correct, but Berg is dead wrong. Sorry, Phil.
    TT has a genuine right to be shocked. I am shocked too. IMO. JS

  114. Posted December 13, 2011 at 5:39 am | Permalink | Reply

    John, again I repeat that you need to keep up. The complaints and suits are being filed by “Candidates” and attorneys and not some “isolated rural nuts”. Standing is NOT a factor…why would you even think it would be? You don’t seem to understand what “standing” is. And in the case standing was an issue, each candidate filing a complaint would have standing since they themselves would be injured individually and separately from the average citizen. Each state is going to be asked what paperwork or documents were used to verify each candidate’s eligibility. We were lied to in 2008 when almost every SOS claimed that the National Democratic Party certified Obama and Biden’s qualifications. We now know that was NOT true. Fool me once, shame on you…fool me twice, shame on me. As far as the 57 United States, you’ll have to take that up with your President.

    • John
      Posted December 25, 2011 at 10:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The “candidates” and attorneys are isolated rural nuts. Their complaints have all long since ended up in the round file.

  115. Posted December 14, 2011 at 1:46 am | Permalink | Reply

    TT is sooo correct. PB is dead wrong on OBOT SSN #—-cannot
    and does not compute. No way. E-Verify does not lie or accept
    lies. Sorry about PB. I too agree that it is very shocking and much
    in error. Whatever the motives, PB ought to rectify this situation.
    Truth counts. IMO. JS

  116. Posted December 19, 2011 at 3:42 am | Permalink | Reply

    For all, an update: OBOT now legally challenged in primaries in almost
    12 states (pending). Important to note: He O., cannot pass E-verify.
    If a primary ballot qualifies one for a Federal nomination as PREZ., then
    how can these 12 jurisdictions now allow him on the STATE Ballot for a
    primary???????
    Since, it is a felony to fail E-verify (SSA), and a double felony for a
    Federal employee to fail E-Verify (SSA, OPM, IRS, DOJ), then how in the world is OBOT able to convince the Secs of State in all 50 states, that now he is qualified, when not totally qualified???? A citizen can only qualify with a valid SSN #, which OBOT seems to lack. It is unlikely that Jablonski (his new lawyer, re Bauer) can argue that 2008 ballot qualifies OBOT for 2012. IMO, cannot apply now. Huh? Crunch time.
    This would compound a FELONY. Huh? IMO. JS

    • John
      Posted December 20, 2011 at 1:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Again, the “challenges” are letters from lone crackpots and cranks, and go straight to the round file (or the email equivalent thereof.)

  117. Posted December 25, 2011 at 7:39 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, taking Factcheck to court for producing and promoting the fake COLB was what I thought someone should do from the beginning when everyone kept getting dismissed on “standing”. (or jurisdiction) I think this might go somewhere. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=379561

    • John
      Posted December 25, 2011 at 10:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Only if you assume that the birth certificate is fake, which is nothing more than the contention of a handful of crackpots.
      It’s going nowhere.

      • Fedupwlibertards
        Posted December 30, 2011 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

        Get your head out of your a**. His father was NEVER a US Citizen. Therefore, at best, he is NATIVE born not NATURAL and does not meet the qualifications to be CIC. End of story.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

        “Don’t isolated crackpots deserve some representation too?” Another Nebraskan walking in the footsteps of Sen. Hruska! I love it. Thanks for a good laugh to start the New Year.:)

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

        You have posted absolutely no content, John. Everything that comes from you is an ad hominem. In debate, ad hominems are what somebody does when they know they’ve lost the debate and have no substance to offer. In my house we call it “stinking up the place”.

        Bureaucrats or judges calling somebody a “crackpot” so they don’t have to consider their arguments according to the laws, rules of evidence, precedent, and other elements of “due process” is about like Nancy Pelosi saying they have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it. It ignores the whole concept of due diligence/due process.

        The statutes don’t exclude “crackpots”, nor does the Fourteenth Amendment. The only way to know whether the argument has merit is by considering the argument ON ITS MERITS. Maybe you prefer the old Gulag style of justice, or “judge’s knowledge” that is currently used in places like Iran, but the US is the land of freedom because we are ruled by LAWS.

        Or at least we used to be.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

        Thus ruled Judge Crank……

  118. Posted December 27, 2011 at 11:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I can see Obama’s dilemma in these state challenges. It is up to the candidate to prove or show that he is qualified. It’s not a court of law. How is he going to prove that a “dual citizen” at birth is a natural born citizen??? While the Supreme Court did say in happersett v minor that a child born on US soil to citizen parents is a natural born citizen it never said a “dual citizen” is natural born. In fact there’s no case ever in the Supreme Court where a dual citizen was declared to be a natural born citizen. He has no facts to make his claim that he is a natural born citizen. The burden of proof is on him, just as it would be for any other candidate.

  119. Posted December 29, 2011 at 10:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

    here’s one of those “lone crackpot attorney’s” in the Georgia challenge to the ballot….excellent. And remember there’s many more states to go. http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1560/737/Attorney_Van_Irion_Files_Opposition_to_Obamas_Motion_to_Dismiss_in_Georgia_Ballot_Challenge.html

    • John
      Posted December 30, 2011 at 5:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      No, the burden on proof is on those who contend that he is unqualified. And your example from Georgia is indeed a lone crackpot attorney. And the challengers from other states are isolated crackpots as well.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 3:48 am | Permalink

        What exactly is the legal definition of “isolated crackpot”, and where in the law does it say that they don’t deserve due process or equal protection? You keep saying that these challenges automatically go in the circular file. You may well be right, but if so it only shows that there is NOT due process happening – which is precisely our concerns.

        The HDOH itself has shown that Obama has failed to qualify by Jan 20, 2009 because they have revealed that his BC was amended sometime in late 2006 – which means he doesn’t have a legally valid BC. What he has is not prima facie evidence. That means that the burden of proof falls to HIM to prove that the claims on his BC are true.

        And that might also explain why their 1960-64 birth index includes names from legally non-valid birth certificates. Maybe the only way they could get Obama’s name to show up in the index was by including every name that they have ANYTHING on – even the BC’s that were incomplete, which according to the “For Office Use Only” portion of their BC request form are supposed to be in a totally different index.

        Or maybe they just alter their records at will, which is actually suggested by more recent evidence I’ve gotten showing that the birth names of all adoptive children were NOT included in the 1960-64 birth index. More than likely the Asings were added to the birth index, probably because the HDOH had been alerted to the fact that we were going to be checking for it soon thereafter. What it tells us, though, is that they can add individual names to their birth index list and will do it for sheerly political reasons. If they would do it for the Asings, why wouldn’t they do it for Obama?

        No matter how you slice it, there is funny business at the HDOH that warrants scrutiny.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:42 am | Permalink

        John, these “lone crackpot attorneys” in Georgia, and every other state are following the guidelines set out by their state to challenge a candidate’s eligibility. I was sent the form for my state. To be placed on the state ballot the candidate must provide proof of eligibility. The burden of proof is on the candidate to prove his eligibility. The challenges are asking where is this proof. In fact let me ask you….where is Obama’s proof that he is eligible to run for POTUS?

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

        He doesn’t have to prove anything. He is the President. The burden is on his challengers to show that he shouldn’t be. Rumors, suspicions, innuendo, and tortured interpretations of century-old remarks and court cases by a handful of rural crackpots aren’t going to do it.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

        The 20th Amendment says that the President elect, “having failed to qualify”, is not to “act as President”.

        The word “qualify” is a verb; it means action. Who had to act there, John? Who had to “qualify”, and who cannot be allowed to “act as President” if he fails to do that act of “qualifying”?

        The person who wants the job is the one who needs to show they are qualified – unless you believe everybody is ENTITLED to a position. If my daughter wants to be admitted into college it is up to her to take the qualifying tests and submit them to the college. If she just showed up on their doorstep and said, “You have to let me in unless you can prove I’m too stupid to be admitted”… I think they might say that her coming without any qualifications might BE the proof that she’s too stupid to be admitted! lol

        BTW, your comments about “rural crackpots” is extremely offensive to me. Must be made by a snobby urbanite whose last brain cell was killed by smog.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

        The President did qualify. That’s why he’s the President. Your daughter is not a college student. She has to qualify to become one. As for the “rural crackpots” characterization, I’m sorry that it offends you, but in reality, that is who the “birthers” are. Rural cranks–mostly from the South–who are deeply offended that a black family comes and goes from the White House every day without using the servants’ entrance.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

        How could Obama qualify without a legally-valid Hawaii birth certificate? There is no person in the United States today who can LEGALLY state that Obama is old enough to qualify, who his parents were, or that he was born in the US – all of which are required for somebody to “qualify” – an act which can still be uncompleted after the electors and Congress have completed their roles in the election itself.

        Barack Obama became the President elect after the electoral votes were counted by Congress (if we ignore the fact that the count was never conducted according to legal requirements). After that point in time it was still up to him to “qualify”, according to the 20th Amendment. Exactly when, where, and how did President elect Barack Obama ever “qualify”? Keep in mind that HI law says that the evidentiary value of an amended birth certificate must be determined by the administrative or judicial person or body to whom it is presented as evidence. It has no evidentiary value unless and until it is presented as evidence to such person or body. What administrative or judicial person or body did Obama present his amended birth certificate to as evidence? What law gave that judicial or administrative person or body the authority to receive that evidence? When did it happen, and how do we access the records related to that determination of the probative value of that amended birth certificate?

        I know you’re not going to answer these questions because the answer is that it was never done. You won’t even attempt to answer these questions because you are a troll whose only communications are farting ad hominems into the air. You are an utter waste of time. I ask these questions for the sake of anybody who would try to claim that the Supreme Court or Chief Justice Roberts EVER fulfilled the requirements of the 20th Amendment. They didn’t. They refused to take any case which would have authorized them to receive Obama’s amended BC as evidence and thus be required to assess the evidentiary value according to federal rules of evidence.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

        I will also add this: evidentiary requirements do not allow Obama to be his own witness regarding his age, parents, or birthplace. He has no way of either knowing or remembering the events in question.

        The claims that Obama has made about himself – in his books or in affidavits – are legally worthless as evidence in a court of law. Likewise, the claims made about him by Pelosi or anybody else are legally worthless as evidence in a court of law, unless Pelosi etc are claiming they were eyewitnesses to Obama’s conception and birth.

        IOW, all Obama has as evidence for a Hawaii birth, Ann and Barack as parents, and an Aug 4, 1961 birth is whatever is genuine in the HDOH office – and Neil Abercrombie told a Star-Advertiser columnist that what they have “actually written down” would be an issue in the next election, because it would not be enough to convince skeptics. He also told Mike Evans that his investigation failed to find a birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii. The former OIP Director affirmed that the HDOH had rightly denied access to supplementary documents used to support claims on Obama’s BC – which would not be needed if Obama was born in a hospital, which means that the claim of a Kapiolani birth is totally fabricated on both forgeries Obama presented, and that is fully known by everybody at the HDOH or OIP who has seen Obama’s actual records.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

        Your legal theories, even if you are an attorney, which I doubt, are a waste of time and effort, because there is not and never will be a legal forum in which to bring them up.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

        Because we have a Banana Republic, which is precisely what I’m saying. Thank you for once again confirming what I’ve been saying. The difference is that I will not accept that, whereas it’s apparently just peachy for you and your ilk.

        My efforts are only a waste of time if this country is already dead, like you and your ilk are already dead to freedom. Obama’s claim to fame will be the successful assassination of this nation – although I think it would more accurately be labeled a suicide.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

        We’re not a banana republic, though many of your mindset might welcome that, if you were controlling the bananas. :) We’re a great country, blessed with freedoms that allow even the most benighted political cracks to speak their minds without fear.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

        I don’t answer them because they don’t matter. All your questions are irrelevant and moot, and so is your selective parsing of the Constitution. That’s why all your court “challenges” are tossed, and serious people ignore your fringe arguments.

      • Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:17 pm | Permalink

        Like I said, the only communication that matters to you is farting ad hominems into the air. Thanks for confirming that.

        The substance I give here is for those who have the courage to deal with facts. Please don’t get discouraged by the smell around here. I don’t want to censor comments so I’ll try my best to just ignore the non-substance comments and trust that others are able to tell the difference between substance and ick.

      • John
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

        Phrases like “farting ad hominems into the air” are rather crude and inelegant for a minister’s wife, don’t you think? But I’ll assume that it reflects your political frustration, and not your manners.

  120. thinkwell
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 8:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    John,

    Words mean something. This was especially true to the Founders who did not willy-nilly place superfluous words into the founding document over which they carefully deliberated for many months. If the Constitution states that our President must be a “natural born Citizen,” it is clear that the Founders meant the requirement to be more restrictive than just simply being born a citizen. Obviously the qualifier “natural” adds a further important something or the Founders would have simply written “born Citizen.”

    If you cross a donkey with a horse, a jackass results, The result is neither a natural born donkey nor a natural born horse. What ensues is an unnatural hybrid that is neither completely donkey nor horse and is sterile and unable to reproduce its kind (let alone donkey or horse). I submit to you that, politically, our Founders would have considered Obama to be such a jackass.

    By examining the writings of the Founders, one can clearly see that the intent of the natural born Citizen requirement was to ensure that our Commander-in-Chief be born with sole, exclusive allegiance to the country that was to entrust him with its command. Obama, by his own admission, was born equally a citizen of Great Britain as recognized by US treaty. It is insanity to suggest that the Founders would have intended that such a person, born with equal allegiance to their former bloody enemy, ever be given command of their own military forces.

    When two horses mate it takes no law to ensure that they do not produce a dog or a donkey. It is by nature that only a horse ensues. That, my good obot, is the obvious meaning of the Constitutional phrase “natural born.” To produce a Citizen by nature and nature alone (no law required) requires two parents who themselves are Citizens. This was the Founders’ understanding and their use and inclusion of the phrase, natural born Citizen.

    Words truly do mean something, John.

    • Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Bravo! Well said!

    • John
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Words do indeed mean something. Unfortunately for you, fringe partisans don’t get to interpret what those words mean. Except in their own minds.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:06 am | Permalink

        Ad hominem (“fringe partisans”) and argument from authority (all that matters is how the authorities “interpret” those words). Logical fallacies.That’s all this guy has to offer.

        How about let’s play a game. Whenever John posts, let’s see who can be the first to identify which logical fallacy he’s relying on. Anybody wanna play? lol

  121. Posted January 1, 2012 at 9:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    John, I really take exception to your remark about birthers being from the South and it being racially motivated. I live in Alabama but was not born or raised here but I can tell that you are way off base here. I don’t like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid either…that’s 2 out of 3 that are white. Here’s some of those SOUTHERN crackpots. Oh wait a minute…they’re from New Hampshire…and they’re congressmen.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/01/01/new-hampshire-house-of-representatives-members-to-hold-press-conference-on-obamas-eligibility-on-january-3/

    • Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, and I’d have taken Herman Cain as President any day. I’d take Justice Thomas over Elena Kagan every day of the week.

      • Fedupwlibertards
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

        Amen to that!

    • John
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

      No, they are not Congressmen–they are state representatives. New Hampshire is a quirky state, in which nearly everybody is a state representative. And these New Hampshire crackpots are all from rural towns. As are the southerners who make up the vast majority of “birthers.”

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:03 am | Permalink

        Ad hominem. In debate this is an admission that they can’t rebut the argument.

  122. Posted January 1, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    John, your notion that Obama being elected somehow certifies his eligibility is pretty lame. I’ve even heard this from a “Federal Judge”. If it weren’t for voter fraud and misinformation about Obama’s qualifications, Obama would not have been elected. Since when does the voting public create a court ruling?

    • Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      All the judges seem to be claiming that as long as an entity is doing what the Constitution gives them to do, the RESULTS are automatically Constitutional. That would mean that as long as the Constitution gives the job of legislating to Congress, the states, or whatever, then EVERYTHING they legislate is automatically Constitutional.

      So that – for instance – Cognress could enact a law requiring every woman to be raped and murdered, and as long as it was Congress who made the law, it is a “political question” and the courts can’t rule on the Constitutionality of Congress’ RESULTS. That’s their reasoning.

      Only an idiot would really believe that’s the way the Constitution works. But alas! We have a lot of idiots in America today. A lot of them wearing black robes.

    • John
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      There is no cause for a court ruling. The American people elected him president. If you think that’s the result of fraud and misinformation, that’s your problem. All but a handful of Americans don’t agree with you.

  123. Posted January 1, 2012 at 10:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I agree with you about not deleting John’s remarks. I don’t delete those like that at my site either. I don’t think John and his ilk realize that they are their own worse enemy. I leave their remarks for those looking in to see just who the idiots really are.

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, and for those who are following along, let me use this as a teachable moment also. What John has been doing when he’s not giving ad hominems (calling names) is actually a logical fallacy called “argument from authority”: Because the authority says it, it must be true. It doesn’t matter if there is videotape of a crime in progress, as long as there is a judge who says there was no crime in progress. Who ya gonna believe, yer lyin’ eyes or the “authority”?

      Look at John’s responses – as well as most of the responses by Obot apologists – and what it comes down to is, “The judges agree with me so you must be wrong. Nyeah!”

      We live by the rule of LAW. That means that judges are supposed to have standards of evidence, precedent, transparency, etc that they use when they make decisions. All of that is being violated so that the judges are holding themselves above the law. We are not ruled by kings any more, but we ARE ruled by unaccountable judges who have placed themselves above the law and negated the protections placed into our system to keep judges from having absolute power – since we know that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And we have only to look at Iran and other places to see what awaits us here if we continue to allow this – places where women are stoned to death simply because of “judge’s knowledge” – a judge claiming to know everything and having power to put do death without any evidence or any hearing.

      If John and his ilk were in Iran they would be saying to all the falsely-accused “Soraya M’s” waiting to be stoned to death, “Ha! All the judges agree that you’re guilty. So nyeah! Your protests are a waste of time, you rural cranks!”

      Anybody looking at this needs to realize exactly what’s at stake here, and why this whole big mess has very little to do with Obama and EVERYTHING to do with the rule of law. We are dealing with lawlessness in every level of government – from DC to the most local levels.

      • John
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:16 am | Permalink

        Um, no judges have made any rulings, Butterdezillion. Or will. They’re just brushing you off as cranks and nuts.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:34 am | Permalink

        OK, guys, which logical fallacy does John utter forth in this latest epistle?

      • Fedupwlibertards
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

        Perhaps because they have been bought and paid for by the likes of you! Just sayin!

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:19 am | Permalink | Reply

      I’ve noticed that most of the people defending Obama on this issue want to discuss anything but the obvious signs that the document released by Obama is forgery. Almost zero percent of those defending the document have bothered to open it up in Adobe Iluustrator to see the amateurish cut and paste job for themselves.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:46 am | Permalink

        Obama was awfully quick to try to get the attention off of that pathetic forgery also.

        I haven’t written up the technical explanation for it, but even considering the remnants of a seal on that image, it is not legally certified according to the requirements of the Administrative Rules, which require that a certified copy have either the official HDOH seal or the State of Hawaii seal displayed on the page. Title 11 describes the official HDOH seal as being 2 1/4 inch in diameter and having stars between the words on it. The seal remnants on Obama’s latest forgery are too small to be the official HDOH seal and the State of HI seal is not displayed so the document is clearly NOT legally certified.

        So even if a person didn’t believe the blatantly obvious signs of forgery that you mention, they could look at the legal requirements for certified copies and know that this is not a legally-certified copy. I hope and pray that Sheriff Joe’s posse is aware of this and that they get some depositions from the HDOH people regarding who knew what and when – because Fuddy HAS to know that Obama posted a forgery rather than what she gave him, and if she failed to report it to law enforcement then she is guilty of misprision of the felony of forgery.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 3:58 am | Permalink

        Nellie, I’ll pass your comments on to a technical advisor to the Arpaio cold case posse.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 5:37 am | Permalink

        Mark, I sent mail just now, at 11:37pm Nebraska time. I requested a “Read” receipt so I’ll know you got it. Please let me know if there was any delay between when I sent it and when you received it. Thanks!

  124. Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hello Mark, I enjoy listening to your interviews with the experts on the birth certificate forgery. I myself have created over 100 fake COLBs and even created a long form for Obama before he released his. People like John obviously, like you said, have never bothered to download the “image” themselves and do their own research. I like Butter’s analogy concerning John’s comments….”farting ad hominems into the air”.

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 3:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      First of all Tommy, thank you. I’m glad you liked the interviews. We have another one coming up the 3rd Saturday in January I think. An author who wrote a book arguing the BC is legit will be debating Mara zebest, Karl Denninger, and Tom Harrison. I’m really looking forward to it and so are all of the participants. Here are the links to a few of the old shows in case John wants to listen to them.

      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/markgillar/2011/05/28/jerome-corsi–wheres-the-birth-certificate

      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/markgillar/2011/06/18/is-barack-obamas-birth-certificate-a-poorly-forged-joke

      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/markgillar/2011/07/31/experts-debate-the-authenticity-of-obamas-birth-certificate

      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/markgillar/2011/11/19/experts-discuss-obamas-birth-certificate-and-ssn

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 6:17 am | Permalink

        thanks Mark, I’ll be watching for it. One point I’ve been trying to make lately is that a lot of attorneys keep saying that the “image” of Obama’s Long form is not proof of fraud and that the real physical copy in the vault in Hawaii is the only thing that could be used to prove fraud. I totally disagree…the “image” Obama posted is itself proof of fraud because it can be shown that it can only exist in cyberspace. There can’t possibly be a physical copy that resembles what was posted online. I created a short video trying to explain that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEst3cV_tQE
        I can tell that Joe Arpaio’s posse must be really on the ball. To understand that what they need is the microfilm is extremely telling about the depth into which their investigation has gone. I’m wishing him all the luck in the world and I fear for his safety.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

        At the very least there’s the Federal General False Statement Act, which is what they got Blagojevich on initially. I’ve posted it somewhere on here, but it basically makes it a felony to allow a lie to stand uncorrected when that lie impacts something under the jurisdiction of the federal government. If Obama stated directly that either the COLB or supposed long-form were his birth certificate then he himself is guilty of perjury and document fraud. If he never directly stated that, then he is guilty of violating the Federal General False Statement Act for allowing Congress, federal judges, etc to believe the uncorrected lie that it was his birth certificate. And the same thing would be true for anybody who knew that was not his genuine birth certificate, so Fuddy, Okubo, Fukino, Abercrombie, Pelosi, Axelrod, Factcheck, etc are all already guilty as sin.

        I hope that the Cold Case Posse is able to identify how deep the crimes go so there will be a LOT of orange jumpsuits needed. Finding out who definitely knew this treason was going on and holding them to account for it could be messy. Nobody believes it will really happen, which is precisely why it NEEDS to happen. The FOIA-type laws talk about transparency being needed to nurture trust in the process; well, that trust is already decimated. People EXPECT government to be a racket that protects its own crimes. That’s why Sheriff Joe is such a breath of fresh air to law-abiding folks.

        I’m DEFINITELY praying for his safety and success, as well as that of his posse. The Lord bless and keep them and their families.

  125. John
    Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

    They certainly can use your prayers. The old codgers could keel over at any time between now and February. Or forget what it was that they were supposed to be investigating.:)

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      What makes you think they are “old codgers”?

      • John
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

        Go back to the Arizona press stories when Arpaio promised this “investigation” to make the birthers shut up and leave him alone. His “posse” is made up of long-retired deputies and elderly volunteers.

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        So you have to be young to conduct an investigation? Is there some heavy lifting involved in this type of casework that I don’t know about? Are you suggesting that older, more experienced investigators and attorneys would somehow conduct a less thorough investigation?

        I guess we have to respect the fact that you’re willing to make yourself look stupid in order to take a jab at Nellie. I’m sure it
        comes naturally for you. Keep up the good work.

      • Posted January 4, 2012 at 11:18 pm | Permalink

        As I said before, six months back, this man is an Obot troll and
        zombie, fixated and brainwashed in the mythology of Obot as a
        citizen. William Gilardy, Dunham’s Hawaii attorney, DNC member,
        also refused to certify the Pelosi document on Obot’s status as
        a citizen in 2008. It is getting close to CRUNCH TIME on the issue
        of Obot lack of truth. May the fate of the Rosenbergs reside in 2012,
        with traitors like J. They would destroy our country and our way of
        life. And I am not a rural country hick—- more like a city boy. And
        at least, I can differentiate the truth from falsehood, and basic right
        from wrong. Truth will overwhelm and destroy the Obots. Soon. IMO.
        JS

        PS/ Best in 2012.

  126. Posted January 3, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, the judge in the Georgia challenge not only threw out Obama’s team’s motion to dismiss but granted the Plaintiffs to separate their challenge from Orly Taitz’s challenge. The judge also made remarks to the effect that Obama is a candidate just like everyone else and must prove his eligibility. http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/01/judge-malihi-denied-obamas-motion-to.html

  127. John
    Posted January 5, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    LOL
    No, Mark, you don’t have to be young to conduct an investigation.
    But it does take more than a half dozen unpaid old duffers sitting around swapping conspiracy theories. There is no investigation.

    • Posted January 6, 2012 at 1:33 am | Permalink | Reply

      LOL John, click your ruby slippers together three times and keep saying that:

      There is no investigation.
      There is no investigation
      There is no investigation

      • Posted January 6, 2012 at 2:26 am | Permalink

        Mark, with my son Caleb as my witness, you just gave me a belly laugh like I haven’t had in a while. LOLOL

        That was perfect. Oh, my sides…

  128. Fred Stephens
    Posted January 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I wonder what John thinks of the investigative work of Martha Trowbridge.

    That should certainly get his shorts in a knot.

    • Posted January 5, 2012 at 6:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m not familiar with her work. If you could fill us in that would be great. =)

      That’s one of the downsides for all of us researching intensely; it’s hard enough to keep track of our own stuff and near impossible to keep up with the work of others as well. I’m so glad we’ve got people specializing is specific areas of research so we can hopefully cover all the bases.

      • Starbeau
        Posted January 5, 2012 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

        Neither was I, but I keep track of several blogs and the blog of Mario Apuzzo led to Martha Trowbridge’s site, the earliest blog from Martha being on Sept. 29, 2011 with this URL:

        http://terribletruth.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/saps-stool-pigeons-and-stanley-anns-hair/

        I recommend that anyone reading her blog begin with the blog noted above and read them in order by clicking on the link at the bottom of each one. It is easier to follow the development of the investigations of Martha Trowbridge.

        The blog site is:http://terribletruth.wordpress.com/

        I must confess that I assumed everyone knew of Martha Trowbridge’s site and her story about Obama and his past. Where he was born, what his birth name is, and who his actual father is.

      • John
        Posted January 5, 2012 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

        Birther nut. I’m always amused at the way birthers use words like “investigation” and “research.”:) What they do is nothing of the kind. It’s just forwarding and recycling loony conspiracy theories.

      • Posted January 5, 2012 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

        Ad hominem. Admission that you have no rebuttal of the content.

  129. John
    Posted January 5, 2012 at 8:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I don’t rebut the crazy guy on the corner with the “Repent Now!” sign either.
    Proverbs 26:5

    • Posted January 5, 2012 at 9:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      So do you spend a lot of time conversing with him, calling him crazy? lol

      • John
        Posted January 6, 2012 at 1:54 am | Permalink

        No. I smile, ask him how he’s feeling, bring him a cup of coffee and a hot meal now and then. But we never discuss his wacky issues.

      • Posted January 6, 2012 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

        Then why are you discussing my “wacky issues” with me instead of bringing me a cup of coffee and a hot meal? lol

        Or just ignoring me altogether.

  130. Posted January 5, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, Mr. Hendershot here in Alabama has asked me to be there in the hearing Monday the 9th to video tape the event. I’ve tried to convince him to focus mainly on the NBC issue and to show that Obama cannot prove that he is a NBC and therefore cannot be put on the ballot until he can do so. the defense has already started throwing out “standing”. But I don’t believe standing can be an issue in this unless Hendershot insists on Obama being removed from office. Plus this court would not have jurisdiction…but it does have jurisdiction on who is allowed on the ballot in the state of Alabama. Orly will also be there. We’ll see how it goes.

  131. Posted January 6, 2012 at 6:45 am | Permalink | Reply

    Starbeau

    I went to the link. It’s pushing the idea that Malcolm X was actually Obama’s father. You do realize if that were really true, the link you referred us to just made the case that Barack Obama is both native born and natural born?

    Unlike BHO Sr., Malcolm X has a U.S. birth certificate. So does Stanley Ann. Two U.S. parents would mean BHO Jr. is natural born.

    • John
      Posted January 6, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

      LOL

      Guess it’s back to the drawing board on that one.

      • Posted January 6, 2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

        John, if there’s one thing you’ll eventually learn about me it’s that I am not the least bit hesitant to call out those on my side of the argument when I disagree with them.

        I’m sure you do the same when Obots say something you disagree with. Am I right John???

      • Posted January 6, 2012 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

        Steel sharpens steel, and right now America needs some sharp steel. Lots of people have said I err too far on the side of engagement with “trolls”. And most of the time it does feel like wasted time because so much of it is ad hominems, distractions, or disinformation. But sometimes they have caused me to research and learn things that were very, very helpful.

        So disagreements and honest steel-sharpening is vital. Hard to do, but vital.

      • John
        Posted January 6, 2012 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

        What is an “Obot?”

      • Posted January 7, 2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

        An Obama robot. Somebody who just spews forth the Obama line without listening or considering anything else.

    • Posted January 6, 2012 at 1:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Unless he wasn’t born here. I haven’t looked at the site yet; been really busy with something else. But I know there are theories out there and people have done a lot of research on Obama’s true parentage. What matters most to me is the rule of law, and that’s based on legal records so that’s what I’m focused on.

      At this point, it is obvious that Obama has lied, hidden records, and produced forged records about his past. The whole system has either watched him do it or aided him in doing it. That’s true no matter what it is that he’s trying to hide. Anybody who thinks that the country should go through the crap that we’ve gone through – that Lt Col Lakin should have been jailed for 6 months and lost his life’s work and savings – because Obama was embarrassed that his daddy was a married-to-somebody-else communist man instead of the married-to-somebody-else communist man he claims to have been fathered by…. belongs in an insane asylum. (My apologies if Malcolm X wasn’t married; I don’t know much about his private life). Obama committed crimes; for that he needs to be brought to justice. And so do all those who aided and abetted those crimes.

      • Starbeau
        Posted January 6, 2012 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

        Yes, you are right that if Martha Trowbridge has identified Obama’s mother and that Obama was born in New York City two years earlier and given the name Bari Shabazz then Bari Shabazz would be a natural born citizen. However, an immense amount of fraud has been perpetrated, for the sole purpose of electing the illegitimate son of Malcolm X, President of the United States with the name Barrack Hussein Obama.

        Who Obama is and how he arrived on the scene to be elected POTUS is going to be revealed in complete detail at some time. Better now than later. The information that he has concealed, and those that contributed to it, should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

        And that is going to be a huge problem. The only way to truly identify Obama’s father, unless Obama realizes that the game he has been playing is coming to an end and he identifies his father and mother, is by DNA test. I suspect that many in the government already know.

        The case in Georgia, which is scheduled to go to court on/about January 26, preventing Obama from being placed on the ballot will be watched by many States beyond those that are already advancing cases to eliminate him from the ballot, in sufficient quantity to prevent his re-election.

        Their have been persistent rumors of Obama canceling the forthcoming election. It is my opinion that if the case in Georgia plays out and we are allowed to locate and inspect a true long form Certificate of Live Birth of Obama, the court will find a way to rule that he is in fact a natural born citizen. The fact that an immense fraud was concocted by Obama and his minions to conceal his true identity will not be considered because that was not the case at bar. The time required to begin a new case and charge him with fraud and get through our court system, or Congress in case of attempts to impeach, will go far beyond 2012.

        The voters that elected Obama in 2008 do not care who he is or that he may have committed fraud. To understand Obama and his policies, one only needs to watch “Uncle Fred” in his 1992 speech (link provided by Martha Trowbridge in her January 5 blog). Obama has followed the script.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      No, Mark, two U.S. citizen parents (of legal record) and born in the U.S. = natural born Citizen.

      Citizenship or nationality is conferred from the parents acknowledged according to law, NOT from an only-biological father who is not the parent of the child legally.

      Mr. Obama was born in Kenya, based upon an overwhelming ponderance of evidence, testimony of Mama Sarah Onyango Obama, and a host of supporting testimonies. He was born in the Lady Grig Maternity Unit of Coast Province General Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya, The presiding physician was Dr. James O. W. Ang’awa, later Obama Sr.’s next-door neighbor in Nairobi. The Supervisor of Obstetrics was John Kwame Odongo.

      Stay the course, Mark! When you are attacked on either birthplace or citizenship of parents at the time of the birth, don’t surrender the other link in the chain. nbC requires BOTH!

  132. John
    Posted January 7, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Fair question, Butterdezillion.
    The reason is that the sign-waving guy on my corner is a garden-varety religious loon.
    Birtherism and the obsessiveness of its cultic devotees is unique even in the long history of American political paranoia, because of its racist roots.
    As a student of American history, I find it fascinating.

    • Posted January 7, 2012 at 4:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Unless you want that comment written off as an ad hominem you need to provide documentation that “birtherism” has racist roots. For instance, show me how it is racist for Leo Donofrio to challenge the eligibility of a Black, a white, and a Hispanic. Show me how he singled out one particular race to accuse of ineligibility. Show me how I am so racist in my outlook that I wanted Herman Cain to be POTUS.

      In all this time that you’ve been on here you have not engaged with any actual factual evidence, as if we weren’t even giving any. Facts are color-blind. That’s what the career attorneys at the Voting Rights Division of the DOJ tried getting Eric Holder to acknowledge but facts have nothing to do with anything Eric Holder cares about. The only “fact” he cared about was that Blacks are “his people” – and he refused to prosecute them, even if the facts showed they were guilty. THAT is racism. THAT is determining somebody’s guilt or innocence based solely on the color of their skin. THAT is precisely what birtherism is against. It is against issues being decided by something besides facts and evidence. What I am fighting for is the rule of law. That means that the EVIDENCE is all that matters.

      And evidence is what Obama’s people have documentably been trying to keep anybody from seeing and any court from hearing. If you can’t see that then there is none so blind as you.

      • John
        Posted January 7, 2012 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

        Leo Donofrio is a birther crackpot.
        Attorney General Holder never referred to blacks as “his people” or said anything of the sort–your “facts” are unsupported accusations by another crackpot named J. Christian Adams.
        Birtherism has nothing to to with evidence.
        What you and others like you are trying to do is find a socially acceptable way to show how appalled you are at having a black President, without saying things that will get you banned from family gatherings or fired from your jobs.
        “Defending the Constitution” sounds like a great cause.
        But it doesn’t fooi anybody.
        This is about race.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:18 am | Permalink

        I was going to call this ad hominem and be done with it. But it’s got more than ad hominem in it so we’ll use it as a teachable moment.

        It also has another logical fallacy called the “No True Scotsman” Fallacy. It’s where a person discredits anybody who disagrees with their premise just because they disagree with their premise. Something like this: Every Scotsman has purple hair because if they don’t have purple hair they must not be a true Scotsman. Or… in this case, every intelligent person knows birthers are nuts because if they don’t know birthers are nuts they can’t be an intelligent person.

        You dismiss Congressional testimony, for instance, simply because you say that the person who testified was a “crackpot”. That’s not an evidence-based epistemology. That’s a fallacy-based epistemology.

        Obots have accused “birthers” of using this fallacy, saying that “If Obama comes up with evidence “birthers” will just say that evidence is a forgery so they need more evidence; they will dismiss any evidence that doesn’t agree with them.” But it’s not the same thing, because there is always an outside standard for measuring the evidence. The evidence is not rejected simply because it disagrees with them; it is rejected because it shows clear signs of manipulation, based on forensic standards.

        If you catch me saying, “I don’t believe Dr Conspiracy’s evidence is truthful because if it disagrees with me it CAN’T be truthful”, then I hope you will tell me I’m engaging in the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. And I will be the first to admit that there is a STRONG tendency towards this in every person. It’s easy for a “birther” to assume that if somebody presents an argument that seems harmful to the “birther” cause they are automatically an Obot liar. Especially since it was reported that Obama has hired people to go on the web and argue his case, posing as normal, non-agenda-driven people. But in the end, evidence is evidence and it has to be evaluated by evidentiary standards.

        I have found far more “birthers” than Obots who are willing to evaluate the evidence on its own merits, based on external evidentiary standards – that is, accepted forensic standards and not circular reasoning such as the No True Scotsman fallacy, which uses the argument to prove the argument and thus the argument can never be disproven because the epistemology doesn’t allow refuting evidence to be considered credible. It’s really a cultic kind of epistemology that won’t allow any thoughts outside the particular belief to penetrate the circular reasoning.

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:22 am | Permalink

        LOL
        You’ve memorized pop definitions of a few logical fallacies, gleaned no doubt from some internet email. But you haven’t learned the one that you most need to understand–special pleading.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:05 am | Permalink

        Describe “special pleading” to me. Unlike you, I am willing to evaluate my own arguments according to external standards.

        I’ll say from the outset that it is not “special pleading” to note the difference between circular reasoning versus analysis using external standards of evidence.

        Let me give an example. Person A asks the question, “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” And on the basis of the person’s response decides that the person in question has beaten their wife. That is circular reasoning.

        Person B points out that the person’s wife has on multiple occasions had black eyes and bruised ribs inconsistent with “fell down the stairs” type explanations and appears to be terrified of her husband, and the husband has been arrested for drunken brawls – and concludes that the person in question has probably beaten his wife.

        If Person A was accused of circular reasoning the accusation would be true. If Person B was accused of circular reasoning the accusation would be false. Not because Person B needs any special treatment or pleading. By definition what Person A did was circular reasoning. By definition what Person B did was analysis based on accepted standards for evidence. There would still be room to question Person B’s conclusions, but as long as they weighed the evidence according to well-accepted evidentiary norms it would be absurd to claim that their reasoning is circular or that they need a “special pleading” to be recognized as making an evidence-based argument.

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:21 am | Permalink

        “Special pleading” is selective interpretation of fact to fit and support a pre-ordained conclusion. You’re not evaluating information about the President’s parents by using accepted norms of analyzing evidence. On the contrary, you are picking at nits to promote your cause, uncritically accepting what fits, and summarily rejecting what doesn’t. Which, of course, is what conspiracy theorists do.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 5:29 am | Permalink

        John, if you can remember to do it, please tell William Bryan I said “hello” the next time you talk to him. Thanks.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 5:16 am | Permalink

        Dear Student of History a.k.a John,

        The DOJ dismissed a summary judgment against the New Black Panthers for the simple reason that Obama and Holder aren’t interested discrimination cases where the criminals are black and the victim are white.

        I had J. Christian Adams on my show and found him to be far more intelligent that Obots (there’s that word again) who defend all things Obama no matter how moronic they make themselves look in the process.

        In order to test Adams’ statement, I wrote the Criminal Division of the DOJ and pointed out that Maruse Heath, one of the two baton wavers in Philadelphia, was a convicted felon in possession of firearms. I presented them with his own Black Planet page as proof. Even though Heath is seen carrying everything from a shotgun to an AK-47, the DOJ wasn’t interested. They wrote back and said they were unable to help me.

        What possible reason could Holder have had for dismissing the judgment John? Do you think anyone should be allowed to wave a metal baton at people trying to vote? Would you feel the same way if the individuals waving the batons where members of the KKK?

        As a “student of history” I’m sure you know the relationship between Democrats and the KKK. A “student of history” would also know that after signing civil rights legislation into law, LBJ said “I’ll have those N _ _ _ _ _S voting democrat for the next 100 years.” Interesting motivation wouldn’t you say John?

        One doesn’t have to go back to the 60s to find racist democrats. Let’s fast forward to the 80s when liberal democrat Mike Wallace
        said in reference to complicated loan contracts that they were “difficult to read … if you’re reading them over the watermelon or over the tacos.”

        Apparently liberal democrats who have worked for 60 Minutes loves bringing up watermelon when discussing black people. For example a couple of years ago Dan Rather said Obama “couldn’t sell watermelons if you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic.”

        Hypocrite Chris Matthews who has called the Tea Party a racist movement more than once did try to cut Rather off, but did nothing to verbally reprimand him. Matthews let Rather off the hook, but I didn’t let Matthews off the hook.

        Then there was Joe Biden who said that “in Delaware you can’t go in to a 7-11 or a Duncan Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.” Yes this is the same Joe Biden who said in reference to Barack Obama “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,”

        Harry Reid famously described Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

        Jessie Jackson referred to Jews as “Hymies” and New York as “Hymie Town.”

        Barack Obama himself described his grandmother as “a typical white woman.”

        I won’t even get into the details of former Klansman Robert Byrd or people like Al Gore Sr. who along with his democrat buddies tried to block the civil rights act of 1964 with a filibuster.

        Now we have the Occupy Movement carrying anti-Semitic signs. Funny how that never makes it into the evening news. When the New York Times did mention it, they referred to it as “flashes of anti-Semitism.”

        Do you want to see what real racism looks like John? Do you?
        If so, take a close look at this video.

        I look forward to your reply with eager anticipation.

    • Posted January 7, 2012 at 8:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Dear Student of American History,

      Speaking of “obsessive cultic devotees” I find it a bit interesting you left out those who worship at Al Gore’s Church of The Green God, 9-11 Truthers and people who watch Wheel of Fortune.

      At least in case of Barack Hussein Obama, there is ample evidence that key pieces of his life narrative put forward in Dreams From My Father are factually incorrect.

      • John
        Posted January 7, 2012 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

        None of those red herrings is under discussion.
        And there is no “evidence” whatesoever that any of “Dreams from my Father” is factually incorrect.
        It’s birther nonsense.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:25 am | Permalink

        Umm… have you seen Stanley Ann’s records from the University in Seattle? When was she in Hawaii, and when was she in Washington?

        Have you seen the Polk Directories for Barack Obama Sr and for Stanley Ann Dunham? When did those 2 live together as husband and wife?

        Have you seen the INS records for Barack Sr, where he does not claim Obama Jr as his son? How does that fit into what is in Obama’s books?

        I just gave 3 pieces of real evidence. Now let’s hear you tell me how those reference materials can’t be true because they are “birther nonsense”. (circular, cultic reasoning that excludes as “no true Scotsman” any evidence that disagrees with the circular reasoning).

        Now if you want to argue that those reference materials are incorrect because they show signs of having been manipulated, or because there is other more credible, contemporaneous, or reliable evidence refuting them, that’s another story. That would be actual analysis; that is always welcome. That’s what you see on places like Free Republic, where people are always challenging the conclusions reached by others. That’s what people do when they are evidence-based rather than fallacy-based.

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:29 am | Permalink

        Classic.
        Conspiracy theorists always argue in the form of questions. That’s because they don’t have facts–they parse words, pick at minor inconsistencies in the record, and interpret everything to fit the conspiracy theory.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:46 am | Permalink

        Then why don’t you argue why the inconsistencies are superficial rather than substantive, instead of using ad hominems? It just dumbs down the whole argument when you resort to name-calling and denials of the evidence that actually exists, and makes your side look really stupid.

        You probably don’t see it, but your response to me was to throw out my questions to you because, you claimed, they are “typical birther” (and thus can’t be valid because anything valid wouldn’t be “birther”). You just illustrated the very thing I was talking about. You did not engage with the FACTS; you spouted the circular reasoning that my interpretation of the facts must be wrong because I interpret it to fit the “conspiracy theory”.

        If Stanley Ann lived in Seattle starting a month after Obama Jr was born that is NOT a “minor inconsistency”. Obama said that Ann and Barack broke up 2 years later, when Obama Sr wanted to go to Harvard and couldn’t take his family. If Ann and Obama Jr were in Seattle a month after he was born, and Sr was in Hawaii, then the whole claim that they lived together as a family for the first 2 years of Obama’s life is a blatant lie. That is NOT a “mere flesh wound”; it’s an amputation of both arms and both legs (ala the Black Knight in “Monty Python – Holy Grail”). lol.

        When you throw in Abercrombie’s claims that he saw Jr at social events with Ann and Sr that makes some problems, especially when you also consider what Mike Evans said Abercrombie told him – that the first time he actually saw Jr in HI was when Jr was around 6 years old and playing T-ball. And when you consider that Sr wasn’t claiming Jr as his kid in the INS documents at the time. We’re talking huge, gaping holes in the story, and major contradictions.

        At this point you can say “Mere flesh wound” all you want, but it’s just gonna make most sane, informed people laugh.

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:53 am | Permalink

        None of those are facts–not one. They’re nothing more than your own suspicions and theories, based on selective interpretation and special pleading.
        But I do like the Monty Python analogy.:)

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:23 am | Permalink

        Monty Python is so funny. At least we can agree on that. =)

        It is a fact that the records at the University in Seattle show STanley Ann taking classes there shortly after Jr was born. That is a fact. If you want to argue that the evidence is flawed because x, y, and z, go ahead. That’s what evidentiary dialog is all about. But there is evidence that has to be accounted for. It is not “special pleading” to suggest that the records at the university – absent signs or other evidence of manipulation – are accurate. It’s also not special pleading to suggest that the records are inaccurate, if there are signs or other evidence of manipulation. What makes the difference is whether there is observable evidence to support the argument being made.

        It is a fact that Mike Evans claims in an audio recording that Abercrombie told him he first saw Jr when he was T-ball age. I think I’ve got a link to that audio recording posted somewhere on this blog. Again, if you want to claim that Evans was wrong, for whatever reason, that is one thing. But it is a fact that Evans said that, and that is evidence that needs to be explained. If we can get a criminal investigation the phone records would show whether that conversation happened or not. In the meantime the standard ways of weighing those claims involves analyzing motives. Why would Evans lie about that? Why would he bring up the subject, unprovoked, on multiple radio programs out of the blue like that? It would also involve checking for consistency between what Abercrombie has said elsewhere. A Star-Advertiser columnist had Abercrombie saying that there is real concern about the birth certificate, and not just because of politics, because what Hawaii has is not likely to convince skeptics that Obama was born there and there are state eligibility bills pending. Those comments reported in a column are evidence. Again, normal analysis involves motives. Why would that columnist put those words in Abercrombie’s mouth if he hadn’t said those things?

        We can differ in our conclusions but the quality of the analysis is measured by how well it addresses the evidence and applies normal evidentiary standards to that evidence.

        I realize that lots of us have been round and round regarding evidence and at some point you just get tired of going into it again so you just roll your eyes and say, “That’s already been all hashed out and you’re wrong”. Both sides do that. In the end, though, whichever argument best accounts for the evidence, applying normal standards for evaluating the evidence, is the one with more credibility. Ad hominems serve no purpose.

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:33 am | Permalink

        Again, you’re just spinning your own interpretations of second-hand hearsay and finding inconsistencies where they don’t exist, solely because you want them to be true.
        That’s why it’s pointless to argue “facts” with a conspiracy theorist–they don’t distinguish between facts and what they want to believe.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:57 am | Permalink

        What was Mike Evans’ motive for bringing up out of the blue, unprovoked, on multiple radio shows, his claims about his discussion with Neil Abercrombie?

        Why do the university records in Seattle list Stanley Ann as taking courses there during the time when Obama’s book claims that the family was a happy threesome in Hawaii?

        Why didn’t Sr claim Jr on his INS forms?

        Why does the Polk Directory list different addresses for Stanley Ann and Barack Sr during the time when Obama’s book claims that the family was a happy threesome in Hawaii?

        You say I’m spinning things, so let’s hear the interpretation of those facts that isn’t “spin”. Tell it like it is, accounting for those observable data points (University records, Polk Directories, and INS forms). What would normal reasoning say about why those observable data points exist?

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

        Who cares?
        None of these questions will be valid or merit a serious answer until they are raised by credible people with credible documentation, not by fringe partisans obsessed with discrediting a President they hate.

      • Posted January 9, 2012 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

        I see. The “little people” can’t raise valid questions and deserve no answers.

        Duly noted.

      • John
        Posted January 9, 2012 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

        Everybody has the right to raise questions.
        But every question does not deserve a serious response.

      • Posted January 9, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

        What constitutes “credible people” and “credible documentation”?

        See, if you want to say that the HDOH is the credible witness to any of Obama’s records then you have to explain why the UIPA responses I received from that very HDOH DOESN’T count as “credible documentation”. Because what I have argued all along is on the basis of what the HDOH itself has claimed to me. There are holes all over the place, based on the statements and documents from the HDOH itself.

        So if that’s not “credible documentation”, then what IS?

        Regarding “credible people”, that sure seems to me like the “No True Scotsman” argument – anybody who would question Obama’s eligibility is non-credible because nobody credible would question Obama’s eligibility. Circular reasoning.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:40 am | Permalink

        Sometimes the 2 sides sound like an old married couple that already knows what each other is going to say so they just throw barbs at each other. lol

        Speaking of old married couples, I better feed my husband of 20 years and our kids. =)

      • John
        Posted January 8, 2012 at 1:42 am | Permalink

        Treasure that time.
        Family seems to be another thing that we agree on.

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 2:01 am | Permalink

        Whenever we can get our whole family together at one time for a meal it feels like a holiday. Not gonna happen tonight though. I’ve given up on mealtimes being our together time every day, but devotions at bedtime seems to be one of the anchors in our day. Supper’s ready now so those of us who are here can at least have it together. Adios!

      • Posted January 8, 2012 at 5:26 am | Permalink

        Actually, there are many errors in Dreams From My Father.

        I challenge you to debate me on this subject on live radio:

        Give me a call at 979-209-0702 and we can pick a date that works for both of us. You can also email me at mark@teapartypowerhour.com

        Can’t wait to hear from you John!

  133. Posted January 7, 2012 at 8:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As of now, I would discount all Trowbridge miscellany and side
    issues AS SPECULATIVE. Obot would have a Valid and True
    SSN# if his papa were/was Frank Davis, Malcolm X, etc. The
    current SSN# of Obot (from CONN.), fails E-verify system (SSA) due to fraud and felonious theft. He has NO AMERICAN ISSUED SSN # AT ALL! He cannot prove proper citizenship, regardless
    of John and the trolls and the zombies– IMO. The racism smoke-
    screen does not work and is an insult to American intelligence.
    Obviously, John (real name?) is an ANON foreign agent on this
    forum. As a provocateur, he really should be banished for the
    smear job on the Tea Party citizens and patriots. His comments
    are borderline disgusting and offensive. He does not care about this country, only about preserving the Obot myth and stealth, deception and fraud. May he suffer the fate of the Rosenbergs.
    Stick to the issues. Truth will win, IMO. JS

    Hint/ If you do not know the meaning and implications of the
    pejorative , obot, you cannot be much of an American
    citizen or even literate— maybe, rural country hick? Huh?

  134. John
    Posted January 7, 2012 at 11:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I guess you don’t just live in your own alternate reality==you have your own alternate language too.

  135. John
    Posted January 8, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Can’t accept, Mark.
    But thank you for the invitation.

    • Fedupwlibertards
      Posted January 9, 2012 at 8:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      What’s the matter John, afraid Mark will “clean your clock” on live air? You love to use the Saul Alinsky tactics in your postings but I notice a pattern when you are challenged you run squeeling like a pig. Could it be you are not who your profess to be? Hmmm…..nuff said.

      • John
        Posted January 9, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Permalink

        Yes, of course, I’m terrified of that.
        Couldn’t take the humiliation.

  136. Charitas
    Posted January 11, 2012 at 12:42 am | Permalink | Reply

    Looking over the list of ongoing friends and critics, John does seem to stick out like a sore thumb so to speak.
    Other sites questioning HDOH issues have his counterpart.
    Since you raised the Hmmm…,,nuff said issue let’s see if he stays around.

  137. Posted January 12, 2012 at 12:27 am | Permalink | Reply

    General Alert: Ms. Taitz in emergency Obot hearings in Hawaii
    on 13 Jan soon 2012!!! Also, hearings in Ga. for 26 Jan 2012.
    If she wins one of the cases, it is basically the end of the Holder
    regime and its followers. Fingers crossed. Can the impossible
    happen? Huh? IMO. JS

    • Posted January 12, 2012 at 12:54 am | Permalink | Reply

      My understanding is that the HI AG is going to argue that Hawaii doesn’t have to honor the subpoenas of another state. If any judge would allow that argument to win the day, they are in effect declaring war on the other states of this Union and the US Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit clause.

      Is it true that the GA judge could have Fuddy arrested for refusing the subpoena? Is it true that he could have Obama arrested for refusing the subpoena for all his records listed in the subpoena, or for failing to show up?

      I hope that judge has requested to have all his and his family’s phone calls recorded so the Obama folks don’t even try to mess with him. At this point that is the only way we can have any confidence that the judge is not being threatened. If I were him I would go through local law enforcement and make sure all contact with me was recorded, for my own safety and for the integrity of the whole process.

  138. Posted January 12, 2012 at 3:29 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I filed one of the challenge cases in Alabama. I will be getting the motion to dismiss most likely tomorrow morning. I just read it online, even though I don’t have a copy yet. I’ve already got a response to the motion ready to be delivered tomorrow morning. They are trying to use a law in Alabama 17-16-44 saying the civil court doesn’t have jurisdiction. But yet I have a letter from our Secretary of State who says that our State courts have the authority to file injunctions in relation to these cases. I hope to be able to keep Obama off the ballot here in Alabama…the deadline to file is the 19th. Hopefully our local court will insist he prove that he is a natural born citizen before he’s allowed access to the ballot.

    • Posted January 12, 2012 at 4:39 am | Permalink | Reply

      If the civil court wouldn’t have jurisdiction, then who would? Or is it like the “before inauguration is too early and after inauguration is too late” deal – where they claim it is impossible for the Constitution to ever be enforced?

      It sounds like maybe the SOS sides with the law. I hope that’s how it works out. May January be an awesome month where Alabama leads the nation in more than one way! =)

      God be with you and give you success, Tommy – for all our sakes! Thank you for all your hard work!

  139. John
    Posted January 12, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    “Credible documentation” means documentation that would persuade rational, fair-minded people.
    It does not mean documentation acceptable to birthers or other partisan zealots.
    The fact that you do not wish to accept what Hawaii state officials have said about the President’s birth is of no consequence.
    Everybody in the rational world dsagrees with you.

    • Posted January 12, 2012 at 4:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

      John, can you even hear what you’re saying? “Credible documentation” is documentation that non-birthers believe. Non-credible documentation is documentation that birthers believe.

      That is the textbook illustration for the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. “The only real evidence is evidence that my side believes, because if my side doesn’t believe it, it must not be good evidence.” That is a circular, non-falsifiable view. IOW, there is no way you could ever be convinced that your view is wrong, based on that flaw in your logic.

      The problem with what you’re saying is that I *am* accepting what HDOH officials have said about a variety of things – and there are contradictions all over the place. Which version of the HDOH’s claims do you believe? You can’t believe them all because they contradict each other. And for rational people, contradictory claims are suspicious. That’s why we even have the whole process of cross-examination in our courts. That is an established principle for judging the credibility of a person’s claims. That standard has nothing to do with “birther” arguments; it’s a standard OUTSIDE any circular reasoning.

      There are established principles for evaluating the genuineness of documents also; those are the principles being used by Obama voters as well as non-Obama voters to show that both the supposed birth documents Obama has posted are forged. On this blog I used the scientific principle of reproducibility to show that there is no way in real life (without C&P-ing after the photo was taken) to get a combination of the folds and “seal” that appear on the FActcheck photo. I’ve challenged anybody and everybody to show me how that could possibly have happened. If it can’t be reproduced it is very, very suspect. That is sound scientific analysis – based on established scientific principles in existence long before the “birther” issue ever came up.

      If you can’t show how that combination happens in real life, then you have to make a SPECIAL PLEADING in order to believe the genuineness of the Factcheck photo. You have to claim that the skies opened up and God Himself caused that anomalous, miraculous image to appear – because it sure as heck didn’t happen because of the mere laws of nature, as demonstrated time and time again through methodical experiments. That particular combination cannot be verified by duplicating the result in real life.

      Look on any “whodunnit” cop show on TV and you will see the same kind of forensic analysis. You’ll see cops looking for contradictions in the witnesses’ claims. You’ll see minor details proving what the real circumstances had to be, to get that particular result. You’ll see a search for motives and evidence for a cover-up. This is really, really basic stuff.

      If real life was NCIS, Obama’s “show” would have been over minutes after he posted the forged COLB, and both Fukino and Okubo would have been jailed as accomplices to Obama’s forgery shortly after they admitted that Obama’s BC has been amended.

      • John
        Posted January 12, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

        You know, you seem like an intelligent woman. But you have so much emotional investment in these crazy theories that it’s impossible to crack your shell of gullibility and single-minded obsession. It’s a classic example of the mindset Hofstadter described in his classic essay, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.”
        But I guess those racial anxieties have to be dealt with somehow. And fortunately, you’ve chosen a safe and harmless way to do it. In an earlier time it would have been white hoods and midnight rides, and somebody would have gotten hurt.

      • Posted January 12, 2012 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

        Wow, John. I talk about the scientific principle of being able to duplicate a result and you psychoanalyze me as being a closeted KKK-er. The ultimate ad-hominem way of refusing to address actual evidence and analysis.

        I let these comments stand here because they illustrate so clearly the difference between genuine analysis and circular reasoning that writes off all contradictory evidence as non-valid.

        If somebody shows me how the Factcheck photo’s particular combination of angles and “seal” can be duplicated in real life I will recant what I’ve said about it. That’s how scientists operate. But I haven’t found anybody who has done that. God knows I’ve tried everything I can think of and can’t duplicate that result. I’ll go wherever the evidence leads but so far nobody has been able to show me evidence that what’s on the Factcheck image is even POSSIBLE without photoshop.

        And the same thing is true with other things. I’ve invited people to explain to me how Okubo’s statement about “date filed” and “date accepted” (given a BC# by the HDOH) being the same thing for Oahu BC’s could possibly fit the “date filed” and BC#’s on the collection of supposed BC’s we’ve got right now. You’ve said I should just believe the HDOH. Fine – but if I believe what Okubo said about “date filed” being “date accepted”, that means we’ve got about 3 or 4 forged BC’s out there right now, including the Waidelich one which CNN claims they filmed Waidelich picking up from the HDOH. So which HDOH claim do I believe – Okubo’s statement, or the COLB they gave Waidelich? Nobody has shown me a way they could both be true. And for any rational person, those contradictions fail the cross-examination test and call the credibility and/or LEGALITY of the HDOH’s claims into very serious question.

        Which is why I have called for an investigation. That’s all I have ever asked for, and it is what any reasonable person would ask for given the contradictions by the HDOH and the blatant anomalies (physical impossibilities, even, as I’ve shown) in what Obama claims are the documents he received from the HDOH.

    • Posted January 12, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Not being able to persuade irrational Obots like you who would still continue to defend the document even if Obama himself admitted it was fake does not mean the documentation is less than credible.

      How foolish you look ignoring all the obvious signs of tampering in the BC released by Obama. I can see now why you didn’t accept my offer to debate. Each piece of irrefutable evidence I presented you with would be met with the brilliant retort of “but, but, but the Hawaii state officials said…”

      • John
        Posted January 12, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

        “Irrefutable evidence”–I love it.
        That’s why people with any sense do not debate with conspiracy buffs.
        But good luck with your broadcasting career. I’m sure birther talk show hosts are in great demand.

      • Posted January 12, 2012 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

        Ad hominem. You are a one trick pony, John.

      • Posted January 13, 2012 at 4:40 am | Permalink

        Actually John, there is much more to my show than the birther issue. Thanks for providing us with yet another example of an
        Obot shooting his mouth off without first doing the necessary research.

        If the evidence isn’t irrefutable, then prove it by debating me.
        Once again, the number to call is 979-209-0702

      • John
        Posted January 13, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

        I’m sure your show is the talk of the industry.

      • Posted January 13, 2012 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

        If it’s good enough for Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Juan Williams, Mark Steyn, Pamela Geller, David Limbaugh and other well-known public figures, my show should be good enough for you.

        In fact, you’d undoubtedly be the most unimpressive guest who has ever been on the show should you find the courage to accept my invitation.

        We both know you are a coward and will never accept.

      • John
        Posted January 13, 2012 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

        Pamela Geller? David Limbaugh? Much as it pains to miss a chance to be counted among such distinguised company, I’m afraid I must pass. Sounds like your probing intellect and devastating birrther wisdom would be too much for me.

      • Posted January 13, 2012 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

        I noticed that you skipped right over Newt Gingrich. This provides me with an opportunity to point out a second characteristic of Obots. In addition to shooting your mouths off before doing any research (see above), cherry picking data and hoping no one will notice is yet a second characteristic of your inferior liberal minds.

      • John
        Posted January 14, 2012 at 1:19 am | Permalink

        Give me a break.
        You’re a dittohead with a birther radio talk show, and a few dozen listeners. When you call these people, they can’t turn you down, because Republicans can’t afford to offend the fringe cranks.
        Get over yourself.

      • Posted January 14, 2012 at 1:39 am | Permalink

        John, the ad hominems and insults are bringing down the quality of this blog. If you choose to submit a comment that engages with actual content I will approve your comment but if it’s just the taunts of a 2-year-old I’m not going to waste anybody’s time by allowing it to post. All of our time is much better spent in other ways; life is too short to waste it this way. Sometimes it’s best just to take away the option of throwing away our time.

      • Posted January 14, 2012 at 2:02 am | Permalink

        Again John (and this does seem to be a pattern with you) you’ve opened your mouth before looking into the facts.

        First of all, I’ve only done a handful of birther related shows. For good guests, listener numbers have actually hit over 20,000 and yes I know exactly how many people listen and how long they listen to each show. In the nearly two years I’ve been doing the show, I’ve never had only a few dozen listeners. I started with an audience of over 1,200 on my very first show. Hell, I’ve got more than a couple of dozen people reposting my show on their sites each week.

        Secondly, I’ve never been a Rush fan. I’ve always been more impressed with his brother David. While not as well known as
        his brother Rush, I find him to be the more insightful of the two.

        While I’ve been impressed with David, I can’t say the same about you. For the record, you have no facts to support your arguments. Nothing you’ve posted hints at the author having anything above a grade school education. Furthermore, you’re a coward. We both know I would destroy you in a one on one, live debate.

        You’re nothing more than a paper tiger hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. You don’t even have the cojones to use your full name. John, you’re a cowardly, pathetic shell of a human being.

        Should you ever grow a pair, the number to call to set up a debate with me is 979-209-0702.

  140. Posted January 13, 2012 at 4:47 am | Permalink | Reply

    Nellie, may I suggest that John not be allowed to post on this site until he agrees to debate me on the authenticity of the birth certficate released by Obama?

    • Posted January 13, 2012 at 1:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t think you’d get a very good debate from him. I’ve been looking for any content he’s offered up besides “You birthers are so dumb” and there just isn’t any. He’s exhibited the circular reasoning of someone whose view cannot be falsified. I don’t like to censor anybody but it does make it harder to find real content when there’s all this farting around. Hopefully it is clear to any watchers that he’s not adding any substance to the conversation so we can just ignore him and everybody will know why. There’s only so much 2-year-old, “You’re dumb”, “No, you’re dumb”, “No, you’re the one who’s dumb” that grown adults care to waste their time on. I suggest we just ignore him unless he actually engages with some content.

  141. John
    Posted January 13, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Says the lady who screams “ad hominem!” in every post, with only a rudimentary understanding of what it means. I suggest you look it up, along with a lot of the other neat fallacies around. “Reductio ad absurdum” has always been a favorite of mine.

    • Posted January 14, 2012 at 8:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, Mark is correct. But just like his Obot leader, John would use
      a phony name and be booted off the radio program. He cannot afford to reveal his true evil name or affiliation. He surely cannot ever
      reveal his identity in a skirmish, because it would reveal the truth of
      the obot troll curse. Just like his mentor, John has several names,
      (Soetoro, Dunham, Soebarkah, Bounel, Obama, etc.) IMO, this is
      why Obot was penalized with loss of law license in Illinois, lying
      about MULTIPLE NAMES. John will lose his license too, one day
      soon, if he is booted from this FORUM. Please stick to the basic
      issues. Leave the racism smears to others. These are legal and
      constitutional issues on this FORUM. The birthers deserve better
      as true citizens and patriots. Ditto, the bulk of the Tea Party partisans. IMO.
      Again, John (whatever?), please stick to the issues of the FORUM as
      they develop. Let us resolve to stop the nastiness and the slander
      and the libel and the mud-slinging. Stick to the issues! IMO. JS

  142. Posted January 14, 2012 at 9:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Newer General Update: Hawaii AG & HDOH now seeking ban on all
    OT legal cases. Treason and Stalinist tactics all at the same time.
    Perfect example of un-American and anti-Constitutional behavior in
    Hawaii. Censorship and sanctions indicate PANIC TIME and CRUNCH
    TIME in Hawaii. No wonder Abercrombie just partied with Obot and
    Michelle. “SANCTONS,” ??? Why not just impale OT, and drink her
    blood? May these vile people in Hawaii suffer the fate of the Rosenbergs
    to the tenth power. IMO, these legal tactics are not the work of decent
    American citizens. Sorry. IMO. JS

    • Posted January 14, 2012 at 9:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The whole idea of somebody being a “vexatious litigator” because they want a subpoena from another state honored would be laughable if these people didn’t seriously think the rest of the country so impotent that we couldn’t see justice done in spite of their lawlessness.

      As it is, their actions constitute an act of war against the rest of the United States. If they refuse to abide by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution I say we should cut off any federal funds to them until they join the Union in reality and not just superficially.

      If we allow small pockets of America to become corrupt, lawless places – where the rest of the country has to accept their records and judicial decisions but they don’t have to accept anybody else’s – then we are literally inviting Mecca to set up household in a small pocket of America and there to become the caliphate that we all have to abide by but cannot dare to question.

      Obama has been a disaster. Not only have race relations been damaged by an AG who refuses to enforce the law based upon the race of the defendant, but we are closer to a war between states than at any time since the Civil War. We’ve got HI doing whatever it darn well pleases as if it knows that SCOTUS would never hold it accountable to the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and we’ve got the feds keeping AZ from being able to implement any of its state laws based on language and concepts that are not even in the US Constitution.

      Somebody please wake me up and tell me that I didn’t die and go to Hell, the past 3 years have just been a really bad nightmare.

  143. Posted January 21, 2012 at 8:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Ongoing Alert ALL: Big roadblocks now erected against Obot and
    the obots in Georgia and in California. Could be a big ballot issue.
    Watch for Holder to send in Federal troops or Marshalls to keep
    the Obot name on the ballot (primary). Then ditto, the General E.
    These are dangerous and historic times for citizens and patriots.
    Tally Ho! Where will it all end? Huh? IMO. JS

    PS/ Old birthers never die; they just de-certify frauds, felons,
    usurpers, charlatans, and traitors.

  144. Starbeau
    Posted January 27, 2012 at 6:12 am | Permalink | Reply

    January 26, 2012
    At the hearing in Georgia on Obama’s eligibility, before the hearing started, the judge called the attorneys into his chambers and explained that he was going to enter a default judgment in their favor due to Obama’s attorneys failure to attend. The attorneys requested to be able to present abbreviated versions of their arguments so that they would be on the record. At that point, the attorneys estimated over 2 hours would be required to get their presentations into the record and they proceeded to do that.

    The attorneys believe that the default judgment automatically translates into the judge’s recommendation to the Sec. Of State being that Obama should not appear on the ballot in Georgia. They also believe that the Secretary of State will follow that recommendation.

    Good times are on the way!

  145. Posted February 1, 2012 at 1:41 am | Permalink | Reply

    Ongoing: We are still on pins and needles, waiting for the final
    Malihi ruling in Georgia. This could be the BIG ONE. Although,
    I am sure that the obot crazies and trolls will probably appeal to
    the Atlanta Fed Distr Court, then onto the US SCOTUS. They will
    be so upset, that they might raise poor Virginia Sunahara from
    the dead. Let them eat crud, for the treason and lies and fraud
    which they have put America through in this ordeal. Remember,
    “Old Birthers never die, they just…… etc.” IMO. Hang on! JS

    • John
      Posted February 4, 2012 at 2:04 am | Permalink | Reply

      You lose.

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 5:58 am | Permalink

        No, John. When the books are finally opened and the truth can no longer be hidden I will be standing tall. The only Judge that counts is incorruptible, and He knows all things. For now Obama can cower in the corner refusing to show anything genuine and still get his “triumph” here, but justice will not be delayed forever.

        Even when it appears that evil is winning, it can never ultimately win.

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:34 am | Permalink

        I’m sorry, saying “you lose” doesn’t add anything to the discussion here. If John has something important to say, then by all means let him have a voice. A taunt of “you lose” is just more of the same from an idiot with zero facts to provide.

        I’d personally like to see him continue to be banned unless he can come up actual facts. We’re all capable of reading the results from Georgia for ourselves. We didn’t need John’s help with that.

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 8:21 am | Permalink

        I hear what you’re saying and I struggled over whether to approve the comment for those exact reasons. In the end I approved it because it is like a serpentine hiss in our ears and I wanted to tell that hiss to go back to Hell where it belongs. There will be a day of justice, even if it’s not today. And in that day there will literally be Hell to pay for the guilty who refuse to repent. This one’s not over. Not by a long shot. The serpent can feel real proud bruising our heels for the moment, but in the end the serpent’s head will be crushed. Dead as a doornail. None of their taunts can hurt us because in the end there will be justice – full and complete – by a Judge who is not corruptible, who will not be evaded, and whose knowledge is complete.

        That’s my belief, and remembering that gives me peace no matter how bitter today seems. Adolf Hitler thought he won too, but where is he today? Right where he belongs. And unless Obama and all his lemmings repent between now and then, that’s where they’ll end up too. I just want to give them a friendly little reminder of that. =)

        Those who seek the truth will never lose. Never.

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:13 am | Permalink

        Wow. this ruling was so bad that it will be torn to shreds in the Georgia Supreme Court. http://obamaballotchallenge.com/a-week-of-injustice-four-years-actually

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:33 am | Permalink

        I’m afraid the judicial system is so badly compromised that we will never get anything right from it unless and until we figure out exactly what is compromising it, and eliminate that threat. There’s more going on here than meets the eye.

  146. epicurious
    Posted February 1, 2012 at 11:10 am | Permalink | Reply

    Nellie,

    No one wants public recognition by name; I know I certainly do not. Otherwise I’ll likely end up in a FEMA camp as a suspected terrorist. Just a kind and anonymous mention that some of the information you report is sometimes the work and contribution of other researchers who are just as dedicated as you are to revealing the truth that hopefully leads to the arrest, conviction, and imprisionment of the usurper-in-chief and everyone else who has aided and abetted the perpetuated fraud. We are all on the same team in a broad sense.

    I have great admiration and appreciation for all that you have done. I don’t think there are too many out there who have put in as much time and effort into this endeavor as you have. And for that, I thank you.

    Regards.

    Epi

  147. Starbeau
    Posted February 4, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I love your comment;

    “Those who seek the truth will never lose. Never.”

    Sir Winston Churchill stated in his most famous speech ever:

    “Never, never, never give in”.

    We must adopt the above or we lose our country.

    • Posted February 4, 2012 at 5:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m going to say something for those who are Christian or open to Christianity. So if any of the readers aren’t interested just don’t read any more because this probably won’t make sense to you.

      My son read “The Flames of Rome” by Paul Maier. He got to the part where it described the tortures that the madman Nero put on display in the arena after he blamed the Christians for the fire that destroyed much of Rome. I thought he would never speak to me again, for letting him read the book. And he wouldn’t finish it.

      We’ve since talked a lot, with all our kids, about one particular passage of Revelation that isn’t too hard to understand – Rev. 13:1-10, where it describes the Beast out of the Sea who will be given power to conquer the saints by killing them, and there will be no way to stop it. It will appear that evil is winning, and on the earth it WILL be winning. Just like it appeared to be winning when Jesus was whipped, nailed to a cross, and spat upon while being mocked by people who didn’t deserve to even shine His shoes. The hordes of Hell had a field day, mocking the only truly righteous Man the world has ever seen. The very One who died to save any in those hordes if they would simply receive His gift of blood-bought forgiveness.

      What Revelation describes will happen sometime before the end. Rev 13:10 sums up with, “This calls for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of the saints.” Rather than being demoralized by the apparent triumph of evil we need to read to the end of the Book and realize what we see here is not the whole story. The Beast loses in the end. The apparent triumph of evil should only serve to remind us that the Lord knew all this in advance and foretold it to us, which is all the more reason to believe He also knew what would become of the Beasts and Dragon and all their followers.

      John would like to post a comment mocking me as a backwoods hick who can’t see the real world. I’m not going to approve it to post because it shows that he’s not even listening. I don’t deny the apparent triumph of evil here and now. But as one who has claimed to be a Christian, John is disingenuous for suggesting that the here and now (“real world”, as he calls it) is all there is. Justice is real. And there is nobody who has ever lived, is living now, or ever will live who will escape it. In this world, maybe. In the next, NEVER.

      Those who trust in the Lord and seek truth will be vindicated. It’s just a matter of time. None of the mocking and none of the injustice they inflict upon us can change that.

      • Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

        Only a brainwashed obot addict, troll, and zombie would
        taunt, “you lose.” The very broad view is that: THE AMERICAN
        PEOPLE LOSE IF THIS CONTINUES. They are the big loser,
        inspite of the two bit JOHNS of the world and underworld.
        Also, all MUST remember that Malihi had to be threatened by
        the DOJ and the Rasputin Holder, if this ruling is to stand.
        Only threats and sanctions and blackmail are involved in
        such an evil finding. The Constitution is also a big loser in
        this Manichean struggle with the forces of John and his ilk. IMO. JS

  148. Charitas
    Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Good morning Butter,

    I am guilty of being jaded with regards to elected and appointed leaders, I expect them at every turn to something self serving or dishonest rather than representing the law abiding citizenry. My expectations are usually correct. Sometimes I wish I were just a naive hick.

    Thank you for reminding us of God’s promises and the certainty of them coming to pass. The troubles in this world too often distract us from listening to God.

  149. Posted February 4, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    IN ADDITION: What the closed minded judge (Malihi) has done
    is compound the felony of e-verify FAILURE with misprision of
    felony. He has totally disregarded FEDERAL LAW on e-verify
    (SSA). The Judge, IMO, is another traitor like Judge Lamberth,
    little difference. And I am sure that Eric Holder made threats to
    arrive at this finding by this Muslim jurist, Malihi. I already warned
    OT, long ago, that this traitor was not her friend or ally in any way.
    I was correct, and then some. No way is there sufficient proof
    that usurper Obot was born in Hawaii. He still lacks any SSN #
    from Hawaii. Enough said. CASE CLOSED. IMO. JS

  150. Posted February 4, 2012 at 10:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    actually I think this ruling by judge Milihi may end up to be a good thing in the long run. If this case had merely been declared a “default judgement” with Obama’s attorney not even showing up it most likely would have been passed off and ignored. The Dems weren’t going to win in Georgia anyway. Now that this ruling is so obviously flawed in every way possible it will most likely end up in the Georgia Supreme Court. That’s what we wanted anyway. One single judge can be threatened, bribed or be committed to the looney bin but that won’t likely happen with the supreme court. Maybe now this mountain of evidence can be examined by a “REAL” court under “REAL” rules and laws. The attorneys are setting up now for a Georgia Supreme Court battle. And after seeing Jablonski’s writings and listening to attorney Barry Ragsdale for two hours on the radio (he’s the attorney in the Alabama cases, including mine) I can tell you that these guys are “clueless” when it comes to this issue. If the Obama team had someone who really knows the law, I would think he would have already shown up by now. I have high hopes for the future.

  151. ksdb
    Posted February 6, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Judge Malihi has been overturned before by the Georgia Secretary of State. Evidently he has a history of making up his own rules instead of following the law:

    http://sos.georgia.gov/pressrel/pr000607.htm

    Notice how then Secretary of State Cox says: “accepting the view of the ALJ would mean that a candidate can determine his or her own qualifications …”

  152. Posted February 7, 2012 at 2:06 am | Permalink | Reply

    Judicious view on this crisis: Truthfully, IMO, big problem also is that
    Malihi is not native born, non-nbc, and really should not be involved in
    this case, IMO. Seems like the “fix” was in early on this case. Malihi
    and his parents are Persian (Iranian Muslims), via the data from lawyer
    Ms. OT. Conflict noted. It seems ludicrous that a foreign born judge
    is ruling this way on a solely American issue, on ballot eligibility, on
    citizen concerns, on voter concerns—- also, spreading DOJ fairytales,
    hearsay, gossip, lies, and “unsubstantiated” half-truths and non-truths
    on the Obot qualifications and suitability for 2012 state primary and
    Federal election. IMO, makes no sense. Won’t due, especially since
    Holder, Jarrett, and Jablonski, and DeJeute, et al, fed this 10-page LEGAL report to Malihi, IMO. Conflict of extreme interest. Makes no
    sense, also that Judge Malihi can barely speak coherent English, our
    national language. Trust the obots and the obot clan to outrage almost
    everybody, IMO.

    Hopefully, this mess will be appealed and overturned. I trust and pray
    that rational reason wins out over these judicial lies which Malihi comm-
    unicated as facts and factoids, IMO. As stated here, once
    before, “Old birthers never die, etc. ” Hang on, for a rough ride. IMO.
    JS

  153. Posted February 8, 2012 at 12:03 am | Permalink | Reply

    Ongoing: Kemp has caved in GA case, sustains garbage from/by
    Malihi. Cowards and traitors all: from Lamberth, Carter, etc., to
    Kemp. Hall of shame be with them, Fate of the Rosenbergs be also
    on them. Now more than 1,000 co-conspirators involved in this national
    fraud and disgrace, IMO, started by the fraud in Hawaii by the grand-
    mother (1961). Treason cannot continue forever.

    Measured in history, maybe 200x times more serious than all of
    Watergate. And coverup still continues. No end in sight, IMO.
    Hopefully, some appeals are now due, even in the SCOTUS. But
    chances seem slim. We shall see. The nation is still on a LEGAL
    cliff over this mess, IMO. Hang on. No truce for the obots. JS

  154. Posted February 16, 2012 at 12:07 am | Permalink | Reply

    More Ongoing Data: 1) Voeltz and/or Klayman now file challenges in
    Florida on Obot ballot eligibility. Pending for November evidently. IMO.

    2) Noted SSN fraud investigator, Susan Daniels (w Manning) reveals that
    Obot used the Stolen SSN Conn ID # also, in the state of MASS. , as
    now discovered on microfiche. Per Daniels data on OBR.com

    What Ms. Daniels does not state: Obot still lacks any valid SSN # from
    Hawaii. He cannot pass e-verify (SSA) from CONN. or/and/or from MASS. Total mismatch and fraud. Where then is proof of any Hawaii
    birth or residence with no SSN # issued from SSA in Hawaii or DC or
    Baltimore? E-verify does not lie or accept lies and fraud. Grandma
    Toots never saw e-verify coming down the road, nor did Obot. The
    fraud and felony continues, accompanied by treason, IMO. When
    will it end? Susan Daniels must go further, much further, with the
    implications of the case, IMO. Failure of a Fed GOVT employee to
    pass e-verify is a double felony: ID fraud, uttering, and tax fraud.
    Very serious. The Attorney Generals and SOS in both states should
    be alerted by Susan Daniels, IMO. Old birthers NEVER die, etc……IMO.

  155. Posted February 26, 2012 at 12:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    Seems also that another KANGAROO COURT/BOARD has
    qualified Obot for the Indiana ballot. No concern over default,
    empty chair, fraud, felony, treason, etc. Just another ho-hum day
    for the Indiana morons, trolls, obots. Sick Hoosier people, disgrace
    to America. IMO. JS

    • Posted March 3, 2012 at 10:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The PA loss by Kerchner on technical issues is just more legal
      evidence of kangaroo courts and rigging, fraud, and treason.
      These are like Stalinist show trials which never finish round one.
      Old birthers will live to fight another day. We have no other
      choice now, short of MARTIAL LAW. The hour gets worse
      No shows, refusal to submit any documents, empty chairs, total
      deception, fraud, obstruction, meddling, flip-flops, acrobatics,
      whining & now complaining about harassment. Who has har-
      assed OUR CONSTITUTION? Huh? Onward to the next state.
      We don’t need legal tricks, we need JUSTICE. How much longer
      can this treason continue? Remember and never forget the
      Rosenbergs and Benedict Arnold. IMO. JS

  156. Posted March 2, 2012 at 2:44 am | Permalink | Reply

    Ongoing: More treason, now in PA. Case of Kirchner is dismissed
    on minor technical issues. No concern for the central crisis issues.
    Afraid to challenge the obots, zombies, and trolls. If this sort of
    attitude prevails, then the judiciary has no meaning and cannot
    protect the citizenry from terrorism, invasion, detentions, jailings,
    firing squads, and deportations, etc. I do not believe we can emulate Castro’s Cuba or Hitler’s Munich. The hour is grave and
    dangerous, and can only get worse. If there is civil unrest and
    martial law, it will be no great surprise. This is what the Obots want,
    evidently. Old birthers cannot die–they must fight another day,
    and prevail to de-certify this great evil and American tragedy. It
    is just stunning and diabolical. Like Cassandra, we are not allowed
    to tell or reveal the truth; and if we dare do, we are boycotted and
    not believed. Am I missing something? Huh? IMO. JS

    PS/ Any may Andrew Breitbart, R.I.P.

  157. Charitas
    Posted March 10, 2012 at 6:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Good morning Butter and fellow bloggers,

    By now the buzz must be going around concerning the Pravda article regarding sheriff Joe Arpaio.

    http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/07-03-2012/120708-arizona_sheriff_obama-0/

    Pravada repeats most of the issues raised on this website and has fun tweaking the nose of the US news media for their silence on this subject.

    One new item (to me anyway) that is buried in the article is that Obama was involved in efforts to amend the US constitution with regards to the “natural born” requirements.
    This apparently took place several years before his run for the presidency.

    To those with investigative knowledge of this case, the timing of Obama’s amendment efforts and the timing of efforts to access Hawaiian records might prove something interesting such as who exactly was doing the leg work early on in Honolulu (library microfilms, COLB research etc, SS number and draft card.)

    • bvw
      Posted March 10, 2012 at 11:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That’s Freeper Danae who published that as an opinion piece in Pravda. Harder to get a news article in there, but it can be done if it has some “America is crazy” bent.

      For Danae: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2857297/replies?c=12

      Just a note to Danae: Freeper Laz is not just playacting at hitting on gals he meets online. He’s a good guy in many regards, funny and well-liked in the forum, but in that guy-gal area he may have a rough history. He got to a point where he did be get married a Freeperette, as I recollect.

    • bvw
      Posted March 10, 2012 at 11:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

      A cleaner link to the Free Republic article.

  158. Posted March 21, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

    National Archives notes fraud and felony in the 1961 INS records
    fiasco. Arpaio notes felony (in the GLOBE) on the BC forgery.
    Typical fraud, felony and sanitization of records by Obot and
    the treasonous trolls. May the fate of the Rosenbergs be on them.
    Outrageous and un-American. IMO.

  159. Posted April 4, 2012 at 11:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As usual: Georgia Sup Court denies obot ballot appeal, unanimously.
    Bought out and sold out. Obvious threats made over the nuclear
    reactors for Georgia. This fraud and treason cannot continue, as is,
    unchallenged. There will be a change, even martial law, IMO.

  160. Posted April 11, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As expected: NJ Judge rules Obot is Ok for ballot. No proof offered.
    Everyone knows, per the Judge, that Obot was legally born in Hawaii.
    No proof offered. Again, fantasy, fairytales, fraud sustained by a corrupt
    NJ Judge. Worthless hearing, hopefully appealed soon. Old birthers
    never die, …. IMO.

    • Posted April 12, 2012 at 4:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That’s 2 judges now that have made a decision that Obama is eligible apparently using the standard of sharia – no evidence needed, just “judge’s knowledge”, the standard typically used to sentence to death women the judges claim to just “know” were committing adultery even though there is no evidence.

      That’s the only standard that can work for Obama now, because a law enforcement body has found probable cause for forgery and fraud involving Obama’s BC and draft registration. IOW, the evidence is actually AGAINST Obama at this point, so keeping Obama on ballots has to rely on the sharia standard – judges can rule AGAINST the only evidence submitted to them.

      America, take note. It’s not just Eric Holder who is establishing a “facts-be-damned” judicial philosophy. This is a pattern, and I don’t believe that it is mere coincidence that the administration that is overseeing this is protecting both the New Black Panther Party and their fellow Muslim terrorist ally, Hezbollah.

      • bvw
        Posted April 12, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

        Of The Alien and Sedition Acts the Wikipedia entry says “Twenty-five people were arrested. Of them, eleven were tried, one died awaiting trial, and ten were convicted of sedition, often in trials before openly partisan Federalist judges.”

        It was the Sedition Act which was the terrible law, in whole a negation of the 1st Amendment’s right of free speech and press, was passed in 1798, during the term of the 2nd President, John Adams. It was bitterly opposed by Madison and Jefferson and many others. Yet it was NEVER overturned in the courts, nor even appealed to the Supreme Court. The laws were passed as temporary measure and expired at the end of Adams term in 1801. Most judges were partisan Federalists.

        America has suffered harms at the hands of malicious and overly prejudicial partisan judges all throughout our history.

  161. Posted April 19, 2012 at 1:16 am | Permalink | Reply

    On the Rico Act, we should note from the Viviano and Gaston and Thom-
    as claims and plaintiff complaints to Ms OT, that Federal crimes were
    committed in ARKANSAS IN 2008 PRIMARY ELECTION. Threats to
    an Ex-Prez are a federal crime; death threats to an ex-Prez are a Fed-
    eral crime. Death threats to the daughter of an ex-Prez are a Federal
    crime. Blackmail threats and death threats to the spouse (Hillary) of
    an ex-Prez are a Federal crime. Homicide/murder of a DNC official
    in Arkansas as a message to an ex-Prez, is a Federal and state crime.
    This situation is far worse than oultlined in the GLOBE tabloid. This
    is data which should have been brought to AG Gonzalez or Musick. This
    is a sad day and a bad miscarriage of Justice to learn all this. Very
    doubtful that the current AG will act or respond. This type pf lawlessness
    will be the end of our election system if unchallenged. The Congress
    should investigate and act. Simply must, IMO. JS

  162. Posted April 19, 2012 at 8:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Unexpected: Arizona ID law for voting upheld by 9th Circuit. Totally
    unexpected. Even provisionals, dissidents, illegals, independents,
    and Obots must obey. Quite a surprise, IMO. All 50 states then
    should comply, or the SOS should be sued into compliance. No
    word yet from Holder and that crowd. We will see, etc. IMO.

  163. Posted April 21, 2012 at 10:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Unexpected: Seems Arizona ID law for voting is OK, good to go.
    The 9th Circuit upheld the law, very unexpected. All 50 states should
    follow suit, IMO.

  164. Multisigma
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 4:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Happened across this item concerning BO’s short career as a “law professor” on another blog and just thought to pass it along for whatever corroborative value it might have.

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/03/to-be-lawyer-or-not-to-be.html

    • Posted May 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Situation Normal, Treason 911: Miss. Court rules nobody has
      standing, no one can challenge Obot on the ballot (primary or fall),
      and that the SOS and Democ party of Miss cannot engage in
      determinations of ballot eligibility. Total con and fraud and uttering.
      IMO. Can we get Daffy Duck, Mickey Mouse, and Elmer Fudd on
      the ballot? Pretty please??? Total disgrace to our US electoral
      process. And where does it end? We never had these fraud prob-
      lems before–not until the trolls, zombies, and Obots appeared on
      the scene. Old birthers never die, and never say die, etc…but this is
      ridiculous. IMO. JS

      PS/ Appeal, appeal, appeal. No other option. IMO.

  165. Posted May 16, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Challenges to Obot on the ballot now pending for the weekend in both
    North and South Dakota. Courts and SOS will rule. Verdict will prob-
    ably favor the Obots, trolls, and zombies. This is the sad state of the
    prejudical quasi-justice system in the current tainted and rigged pro-
    Obot atmosphere. Maybe I judge wrong, but at least I know a setup
    when I see one coming. Old birthers never die, they just de-certify…
    etc. IMO.

  166. RTM9999
    Posted May 17, 2012 at 4:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    Has anyone ever noticed this concerning the requirement to give “Christian” names to a legitimized child in the 1955 Hawaiian territorial statutes?

    It’s out of order in the evidence but look at what is page 2 of the evidence which is Page 385 of the Hawaiian territorial statutes concerning statute # 57:24 concerning legitimization…

    Didn’t Maya , Barry Jr.’s sister state something like “SAD was single and pregnant when she gave birth to Barry”?

    AND …

    Isn’t it also something akin to “That no one knows what the particulars of the marriage were between Barry Sr. and SAD were”?

    If Barry is Barry because that is his Christian given name because he was considered legitimized…

    Obviously his original would not have the name Barack Hussein Obama on it…

    What about that?

    Is there a way to look into that possibility?

    • Posted May 19, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think when they say “Christian” name they’re just talking about the first name, as opposed to the surname/family name.

      • RTM9999
        Posted May 21, 2012 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

        Agreed…

        That’s why his first name on his original BC no matter where he was born would most likely be “Barry” (As his mother SAD always called him. ) and not Barack.

        So IOWs and yes IMHO this is yet another way to at least give some reason to view the forgeries as w/o basis in fact since most likely given what Maya states concerning the nature of the Obama relationship … The first name isn’t likely at all to be “Barack” (or even the middle name Hussein. )at all….

        AND yes according to that law the last name according to the law would still be “Obama”.

  167. ksdb
    Posted May 19, 2012 at 8:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    Arizona is making quite a fuss. This is wild too … Hawaii has refused to provide a standard verification (which is contained in a law Obama voted for in 2005) for EIGHT weeks. Talk about a tacit admission that they can’t prove Obama was born there. Wow.

    • Posted May 19, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      From what I read in an LA Times article, AZ SOS Bennett copied an application form off the internet and sent it in with $5. The HDOH responded by saying he needed to prove he was authorized to request/receive a verification. I would presume that Bennett responded by showing that he is the AZ SOS and has discretion to require canddates to convince him of their eligibility. If he’s done that and it’s been more than 10 business days since he’s heard from them, they could be stalling (par for the course in my experience) and the OIP will have to be involved to force a response out of them. They have to either deny or comply with his request. If they deny his request they have to give a legal reason.

      Thing is, if his BC was amended in 2006 as the HDOH admitted, and if there are supporting affidavits as OIP Director Tsukiyama admitted (which would only be necessary for amended and/or late BC’s), then the birth record they have for Obama is not probative/legally valid and HRS 338-13 says that the probative value must be determined when it is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. IOW, the State of HI on its own does not vouch for the accuracy of any of the claims on an altered or late BC. If Obama’s is late and/or amended (as is indicated by HDOH and OIP UIPA responses AND by their need to alter the 1960-64 birth index to include legally non-valid names in order to get both Obama’s and Virginia Sunhara’s names on the list at the same time) then Hawaii CANNOT verify any birth facts for Obama. Their law forbids it. The only way there can be any legally-recognized birth facts for Obama based on what is in HI is if Obama actually presents that BC (complete with “ALTERED” stamp on it and notes about what proof was submitted to support the amendment) to a judicial or administrative person or body, who then have to follow the rules of evidence according to legal protocols.

      If the HDOH ever DOES verify birth facts for Obama, then they have made conflicting public statements regarding Obama’s records, and Bennett would have to figure out which statement was accurate. That could only be done through an audit of the records, as recommended by a HHS inspector general’s report anyway (see http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf ) That report says that a birth certificate alone should not be used to determine eligibility, especially when much is at stake – for instance, a passport (which was the example they used, contrasting documentation necessary for Little Leage versus getting a passport). And it says that if there are signs that there could be a forgery (such as a vague or too-light “seal” such as was the case on the photo that Savannah Guthrie posted online) other proofs should be requred and the records audited.

      That poses a problem for Obama because EVERY “proof” known to exist for him shows signs of tampering:

      1. Both the COLB and long-form show signs of forgery (the COLB has a “seal” that doesn’t bend with the fold of the page it’s supposedly on; the electronic file had authenticating marks that could be moved around on the page – clearly C&P’ed from a different document than the rest of the image was taken from; and Savannah Guthrie’s photo has just the kind of indistinct and light “seal” that the OIG report refers to as being too fishy) and conflict with what the HDOH has revealed through UIPA responses.

      2. The draft registration is the only one from that post office at that time that lacks the first 2 digits of the 4-digt year stamp.

      3. The SSN he used on his tax returns fails e-verify and was issued from Connecticut where Obama never lived.

      4. His passport file has been breached 3 times, and sources close to the investigation told Newsmax that the purpose was to sanitize the record. And the one who oversaw the breaches was rewarded with a position as Chief of National Security.

      ALL the records are suspect, and for any one of them to be used to determine eligility – according to the OIG recommendations – there would have to be a complete audit to figure out exact;u how and when that record really originated.

      No matter how you slice it, Bennett is going to have to demand an audit before he can be sure of anything. There will be immense pressure on him to just bypass that step. We need to pray for him.

      Something that may make the HDOH a bit hesitant to illegally “verify” Obama’s birth facts is the realization that if Obama is defeated in the election, we may have an Attorney General who DOESN’T shield all the crooks from federal investigation and prosecution, and at that point an earnest US Attorney in AZ would have everything he needs to throw every complicit person in HI in jail for a very, very long time.

      Anything we can do to make it apparent to the HDOH that Eric Holder will not be able to stall justice forever…. will help “convince” Loretta Fuddy to do the right thing, for once in her life. If she does, she will respond to Bennett by saying that she CANNOT verify Obama’s birth facts. At that point Bennett will have what he needs to keep Obama off the ballot.

      What we can do right now to help Bennett is to pray for him and to pressure our Congress-critters to hold Eric Holder’s feet to the fire AND to impeach him. Because Eric Holder is the lynchpin for this whole lawless mess we’re in. He’s the placeholder making sure that the feds will protect the crooks rather than prosecute them. If he is taken out of his position the whole lawless dam bursts and the crooks will have to fight to be the first person to turn so they can plea bargain for immunity or a lower charge in return for the goods on everybody else.

      • Posted May 19, 2012 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

        RANDOM VIEWS: Robert Mueller, FBI, is also to blame in this
        Treasonous mess. IMO. As for Bennett in AZ, the man must
        know that there is NO SSN from Hawaii for the Obot King. Case
        is closed, and end of discussion. None exists because of the
        ILLEGAL ALIEN status of the fraudster, etc. BTW, current
        word on several sites and on ORYR seems to be now that
        Bennett has been threatened and has caved and is basically
        going to side with Obot on the ballot. Great American tragedy
        repeated. Old birthers never die, etc., ……… IMO. JS

        PS/ November, here we come. IMO

      • RTM9999
        Posted May 21, 2012 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

        Could one of the earliest possible reasons for an amendment have been to change the Christian given first name to “Barack Hussein” “Obama” instead of “Barry Obama” ?

        I’m getting a distinct impression that the statements by Fukino and Fuddy are actually “verification in lieu of certification”s which are factually useless other than to verify that a can’t be described because of privacy statutes document of some kind exists in the vaults.

        §338-14.3 Verification in lieu of acertified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, thedepartment of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu ofthe issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of acertificate and any other information that the applicant provides to beverified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.
        (b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.
        (c) Verification may be made in written,electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.
        (d) The fee for a verification in lieu of acertified copy shall be a maximum of one half of the fee established in section338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.
        (e) Fees received for verifications in lieu ofcertified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be depositedto the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of thestate general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1; am L 2010, c 55, §1]

        As can be seen by the statute the HDOH verifies that a document exists and the applicant by way of what is stated on the application can get back a verification that contains what was stated by the applicant and that becomes the circumstances under which the birth is reported w/o certification.

        When Fukino’s first press release is viewed it is obvious that she merely verifies that an un-described document exists and that she has seen that document and that is all…

        In subsequent statements more information is added to the meme, but it is w/in reason to understand that Barry as an applicant for a verification in lieu of a certification could get info released that he supplied on that application and the HDOH would neither lie, violate the law or commit a fraudulent act by releasing that Barry provided phony info in statements to the general public.

      • gorefan
        Posted May 24, 2012 at 5:10 am | Permalink

        Hi Butter,

        Have you ever asked the DOH what is the size of a 1961 BC? I mean the actual bound volume document. Along the left hand margin of President Obama and the Nordykes there appear to be addtional fields. Are these the medical information?

        In fact, have you ever asked Hawaii what are all the fields on a 1961 BC? I was wondering how many fields are not reported on the LFBC.

      • Posted May 24, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

        As a matter of fact, I have. They said that their complete birth certificate is what is on a Certificaton of Live Birth. Even Dr. Conspiracy said that was bullcrap.

        HI statute says that the HI vital records certificates have to have at a minimum the items required by the CDC’s recommended certificate but the HDOH Director can arrange the items as desired. The HDOH Administrative Rules say that the medical stuff will be left off the standard certificate unless the requestor specifically asks to have a copy of the rest of the stuff too. Of course, this particular HDOH Director won’t even obey the law allowing (and thus requiring, by virtue of UIPA) a person to see the NON-CONFIDENTAL part of their actual BC.

        If you’d like to ask the HDOH more about it, good luck. I’ve already tried and they’ve given me laughably false responses.

  168. Posted May 22, 2012 at 8:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As of now: Scandal on Obot is red hot. John McCain has now told
    Bennett to leave Obot on ballot. McCain is a two-faced traitor, IMO. He
    should not meddle. This is about to explode. Old birthers, get ready….
    IMO.

    • Posted May 23, 2012 at 8:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Further data: Bennett has received data from HI on Obot. He is
      satisfied and has CAVED. No doubt. Issue: Jonathan Wisch of
      Hawaii cannot verify OR certify the data on any BC for Obot. He has
      no such HDOH authority. Furthermore, the natal address on ALL
      BC and ALL Obot documents is a lie, a forgery, and a fraud. The
      address was the address in Honolulu for the Lefforge family. No
      joke. Obama NEVER LIVED THERE. No joke. Very serious.
      Old birthers, please pay attention now…IMO. The crisis is still
      red hot and boiling. Fraud is Fraud. Bennett of AZ cannot accept
      fraud as fact from Wisch. We have been betrayed by McCain and
      the Arizona RINO cult. We need JUSTICE. IMO. JS

  169. Posted May 24, 2012 at 3:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Gorefan. I spoke to Ms. Fukino about the bc. She said there are actually several pages of questions answered by the person applying for the birth certificate that are attached to it. She said this information is never made public.

    • Posted May 24, 2012 at 4:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks, Mark.

      What’s interesting about that is that she’s not telling you about the confidential medical portion, which is not questions for the registrant, but information filled out by the medical personnel. That informaton is required to be made public to a proper requestor who specifically asks for it. So Ms Fukino is BS-ing her way along. There probably are questions they ask the registrant; I have no basis to contradict her on that part. But there is also the confidential medical portion which she seems unwilling to let anybody know about, and Okubo was willing to lie about (as even Dr Conspiracy knows and has publicly stated).

      John Whelan, just letting you know that I’m not allowing ad hominems to post. If you want to get on this board you need to submit actual content.

    • gorefan
      Posted May 24, 2012 at 8:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It sounds like she is talking about typical forms that one fills out at the hospital (previous medical conditions, for example). I would think those pages are not included with the BC at the DOH. There is also medical data that isn’t known until after the birth (for example, vital signs of the baby and the mother).

      That medical data is also not reported to the parents.

      • Posted May 24, 2012 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

        Unless they specifically ask to see all that, according to the HDOH Administrative Rules.

  170. RTM9999
    Posted May 25, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Further on what a verification in lieu of a certification is and what it certifies….

    It occurred to me that everything up to this time from and including Barry and the HDOH has always been by very nature and stated purpose by being in line with rules and procedures verification in lieu of a certification…

    The vital event is certified to have taken place.

    Little Barry was born alive in a place that the HDOH can’t certify.

    IOWs even the COLB if it exists as a document was a verification in lieu of a certification that little Barry was born alive and all of the subsequent statements from the HDOH have been that the vital event happened.

    Yup the HDOH has certified that Barry was born alive and the rest is unsubstantiated maybe but most likely not certifiable fact from any of the associated forms, amendments, etc. that are in the HDOH’s care as shown on the latest verification in lieu of a certification the document “verified to match” the image on the WH which if you read what’s written by seal …

    It doesn’t certify that the information on the Barry “LFBC” abstract is accurate the same way it does on the Nordyke twins BCs..

    • Posted May 26, 2012 at 7:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well, but: The 1961 BC is revised for 2001, but not all. Then,
      the 2007 BC is revised for the 2006 issue, but not all. Then, the
      2011 TV copy BC is the FINAL COPY, but no word on the
      AMENDED/REVISED nature is stamped on the copy for TV.
      This is a chain of fraud, IMO, backdating to the mythical 1961
      certified copy, with some data deleted too. No court would
      certify or verify the 2011 copy as accurate and true, IMO.
      As for Bennett, he will accept anything now to get out of this
      mess. JS

      FINAL VIEW: All Bennett of AZ had to do when asked to
      clarify and revise, was to issue one last request:
      What is the Hawaii SSN # of Obot from 1961, 2006, 2011?
      Did it change from Baskin-Robbins onward? When? Why???
      Where is the SSN card issued from DC or Baltimore?
      None? Oh my, ILLEGAL ALIEN. Old birthers, check it out!
      IMO. JS

  171. Jim Black
    Posted May 26, 2012 at 4:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Instead of requesting HDOH to verify Obama’s birth in Hawaii, I think he should have asked them to verify Obama’s natural born citizenship. That would have generated a different response, if one at all, and really stir up the hornet’s nest. Also, I wonder why Alvin Onaka said that Obama’s BC is “INDICATING” that he was born in Hawaii? An indication does not necessarily mean that something is factually true or accurate. Look up the meaning of indicate. Why did Onaka use this word and not something more affirmative like “beyond a shadow of doubt, or absolutely genuine?

  172. Posted May 26, 2012 at 8:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    All that Bennett of AZ needed to do, was to ask Wisch & HDOH: what
    is the Hawaii SSN # of Obot from 1961-2011? Huh? Case closed.
    Illegal Alien. IMO.

  173. Charitas
    Posted May 27, 2012 at 5:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Why does Bennett make his birth record requests directly to HDOH? Should he not rather make the formal request to POTUS?
    The stand off should be BH Obama (or anyone else) unless they present legal birth “certificate” (a mere document will not do).
    POTUS would not have to present his “certificate” in person, Bennett could go to the White House or POTUS could send the “certificate” to Bennett in AZ by legal proxy.

    Bennett, by placing his request to HDOH, especially in the manner he did, simply adds to the controversy.

    • Posted May 28, 2012 at 12:33 am | Permalink | Reply

      This is supposed to be a way similar to E-verify, where somebody in government who needs to know the truth about a person’s records can get it straight from the vital records office and bypass the problem of provenance or potential tampering, or the person refusing to grant access to the records (which is the case with Obama). And if it the response was being given by an honest agency it would work fine. But then if the agency had been honest all along we would never have had Obama usurping the White House the past 3 years.

      I believe that the reason Hawaii had Sunahara’s birth record under a different name (causing it to be missing when the secretary queried the database for her birth record for me) was because they didn’t have to worry about law enforcement or other people doing E-verify on Virginia Sunahara since she is deceased. They did have to worry about somebody doing E-verify for Obama and finding out that he doesn’t have a valid birth record. So they switched the name on Virginia’s legally valid record (using her BC#) to Barack Hussein Obama II to keep anybody from getting a failed E-verify on Obama’s BC. As somebody on Birtherreport.com pointed out, Alvin Onaka is a head honcho with the E-verify type stuff.

  174. Multisigma
    Posted May 27, 2012 at 11:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Spelvin over at CIR has an article about former HI elections clerk T.L.Adams that might be of interest:

    http://www.coachisright.com/hawaii-senior-elections-clerk-barack-obama-was-not-born-in-hawaii/

  175. Posted May 29, 2012 at 2:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, Jerome Corsi just asked this question and I told him to contact you because you have done extensive research on this:
    “Jerome Corsi
    Last question — also very important — could someone have been born at Kapiolani Hospital in the same month and same year as Obama and ended up with a number that was some 500 lower than Obama — also a number that was six digits long, not five digits one? For instance 1961 009876 Is this type of a number possible.”

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 2:53 am | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks for passing this on, Tommy. My e-mail is being monitored and certain incoming and outgoing e-mails are being intercepted and not delivered. I’ve got 2 email addresses and they are both compromised. So even though I’d rather speak privately with Dr Corsi about this, I can’t necessarily get anything to him via e-mail.

      Short answer: No. Not if Okubo was truthful when she said the “date filed” was the same day as the “date accepted” (when the BC# was given by the HDOH Office) for almost all Oahu BC’s. This is why John Woodman/Dr Conspiracy’s theory about the BC’s being collected for a month, alphabetized, and THEN numbered was pushed so hard. The BC#’s we know of are so drastically out of sequence that a theory like that would be necessary to explain them, unless the HDOH either gave BC#’s randomly or is manipulating those BC#’s. But Janice Okubo’s own statement refutes the alphabetization theories and the random-number theory.

      Pen Johannsen has made claims that rely on BC’s being kept for a while and alphabetized also. I believe his analysis is based on erroneous assumptions. I’ll post an article about that.

      If you have access to Corsi, you can let him know that if he wants details/documentation I’ll have to send it through somebody else’s e-mail.

  176. Posted May 29, 2012 at 7:00 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I got your message to him…thanks. I’ll let you know when he responds…it’s 2am here.

  177. Posted May 30, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As of now: Trump is on a media rampage on the BC issue, etc., and I
    do believe that we may see a Romney-Trump ticket in November. I do
    believe that Trump will continue on this data to November. It is quite a new development, IMO. We shall see, … He knows a bit. IMO. JS

  178. Posted May 31, 2012 at 8:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Repeat in NJ: Apuzzo was given a no on the Obot ballot appeal
    item in NJ. Typical thug, troll, zombie judges in NJ. Apuzzo must
    appeal further. Never ending story of treason, IMO. Old birthers
    have only 155 days left approx. to de-certify the charlatan, fraud,
    pretender, messiah, etc. Critical. IMO. JS

  179. jayHG
    Posted June 4, 2012 at 7:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    There’s no such thing as indirect confirmation. You want to talk about made up stuff. You said the judges made up judge’s knowledge……well you TOTALLY made up indirect confirmation.

    (Edited to remove ad hominems which followed the above)

    • Posted June 4, 2012 at 8:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Just for kicks, Jay, I searched on bing for “indirect confirmation”. I didn’t look at all 121 pages of results, but the first 60 or so of those pages contained quotes from scientific research, news articles, financial analyses, etc. None of them were pages from my blog.

      So I guess you’re right. I totally made this stuff up. The 121 pages of search results are all just a figment of our imagination. =)

      • Posted June 4, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

        And Google took .24 seconds to come up with 36,600 results for “indirect confirmation”.

  180. Posted June 12, 2012 at 12:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    As expected: Traitors at SCOTUS reject any hearing for Keyes,
    et al on Obot. Turned away and refused to hear. Fate of the
    Rosenbergs will get them soon. IMO. Pure treason. JS

    • bvwRedux
      Posted June 12, 2012 at 10:34 am | Permalink | Reply

      Hey, JScovit, the Rosenbergs were NOT traitors per the WORDS OF THE CONSTITUTION. It’s like “Natural Born Citizen” — we know what the Founders meant it to mean, but the oh-so-deluded modern jurist and legislator simply IGNORES THE HISTORICAL MEANING.

      To be guilty of the capital crime of Treason the Constitution clearly states “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.” At the times the Rosenbergs operated as spies for the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union was our official ALLY.

      You want a traitor to use as an example? The most appropriate one is the original famous traitor Benedict Arnold.

  181. Posted June 13, 2012 at 1:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    And, in addition: More nonsense and garbage from the court in
    Indiana. Taitz case dismissed on Obot eligibility. Same morons,
    trolls, obots, zombies, and traitors. No big surprise. Indiana has
    shown total contempt for the citizenry. No concern for fraud, fantasy,
    and fairytales by the Obots. Sad day, but old birthers never die, and
    never say never… IMO. Florida is soon next. We shall see. JS

  182. Posted June 14, 2012 at 11:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter:

    Eratta:

    The statement at the bottom of the short-form COLB, “ANY ALTERATIONS…INVALIDATES” refers to physical alterations to the issued certificate like someone trying to change the look of a number on it. If a COLB is based on a “LATE” or “ALTERED” original birth certificate, then there must be a summary statement TYPED ON THE COLB indicating that the birth certificate is late, delayed, altered, or amended, and the documentary evidence used to substantiate it.

    If this is the case, then the COLB by itself is insufficient proof of birth. To legally prove that a birth registration occurred on the date indicated on the COLB, the birth registrant would have to provide a copy of the documentary evidence used to obtain the original birth certificate.

    If Obama’s Certificate was registered as “LATE,” meaning one or more years after his actual birthday, the question is “HOW LATE WAS IT?”

    Obama’s very first original Hawaiian birth certificate could have been obtained, let’s say, in 2006 by Obama, himself, who presented the required documentary evidence, and received an original birth certificate marked “LATE.”

    ANY certificate issued one year or later following a birth will automatically be marked as LATE.

    If it was a LATE registration AND an out-of-state registration, it would also have to show that it was an out-of-state birth and the birth place could not be Hawaii. If it did, then the certificate would be forged. But, as we know, it was also a forgery because it contained false information in addition to leaving off the qualifiers.

    Now, if his out-of-state birth occurred within 30 days, his birth place would be Hawaii, but, then it would not be marked as “LATE” or “ALTERED.”

    “ALTERED” and “AMENDED” refer to the same certificate but are not synonymous. “ALTERED” refers to the type of certificate and “AMENDED” refers to the action(s) that required it to be altered, like a change in paternity.

    Don’t forget that no Certification of Live Birth was ever issued for Obama, but since the LFBC came out, everyone doubled-down on the “Certification” as having already proven his birthplace.

    Obama did not have to prove he was born in Hawaii. He only needed to convince the media and the public that he was born there and that birth in Hawaii is what made him a “natural-born citizen.”

    With Obama’s supporters, perception is everything – reality is irrelevant.

    • Posted June 15, 2012 at 1:04 am | Permalink | Reply

      Do you mean that as long as the birth was registered within 30 days, a person born out-of-state could still CLAIM a Hawaii birth and there would be no way to know the difference? The problem comes in when somebody can’t get all the information and signatures necessary within the 30 days to claim a Hawaii birth?

      Actually, too, I’ve heard somebody tell about babies that were a month or two old coming in on boats and registering Hawaii births. IIRC, Mike Zullo talked about a 2-year-old who was listed in the birth announcements as being a newborn. If that announcement truly came from the HDOH, how could that be? If the doctor was willing to lie about it, you could claim a different birthdate just to make sure the registration appears to be within 30 days of the birth, but what doctor would sign that a 2-year-old was a newborn? Or maybe that’s a case where the mafia sold a birth certificate for the 2-year-old…

  183. Posted June 15, 2012 at 2:37 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, Mark Gillar did a great interview with Mike Zullo and mentions the wholesale creation of faked birth certificates in Hawaii in the early years. Most, he said were Japanese born children…even the sale of birth certificates was common. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiTFfrm5jvY

  184. Posted June 16, 2012 at 5:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As of now: Treason is treason, as charged. Whether The Rosenbergs or Benedict Arnold. IMO. That WAS the final charge.
    And the firing squad, or the electric chair is sufficient, IMO.
    I won’t quibble. JS

    PS/ All: Gary Kreep evidently won his judge race in CA. So, no
    more Kreep. No more Donofrio. Both fine warriors, IMO. Sad but
    true. Birthers must fight on, etc. IMO.

  185. Posted June 19, 2012 at 12:35 am | Permalink | Reply

    Situation now: Obots and trolls and zombies are engaged in excess
    procedural delays in Florida Obot case. Judge is playing along, playing
    for time. We will probably know the final SCOTUS verdict on ACA Healthcare case before we know the final verdict on Obot ballot challenge in FLA. Honest. Sad, but true. We shall see…. IMO.
    PS/ Appeal, appeal, appeal.

  186. Posted June 28, 2012 at 12:00 am | Permalink | Reply

    New Twist: Globe and Arpaio allege that a man/male from the DNC
    faked and falsified the BC for the OBOT. But, we were assured before,
    in 2009, that it was due to DNC staff member, female, Divorah Adler.
    Others in Evanston ILLINOIS, two black females, alleged that they created the false BC for OBOT. Will the real felon or felons, please
    stand up now, so that this mess can be resolved? Oh yes, maybe the
    once Attorney General, Eric Holder, could get involved in resolving this
    mess? Robert Mueller & the FBI do not seem to care. Am I missing
    something? We are deluged with bad facts and bad history, IMO. Old
    birthers, do not despair… JS
    PS/ At least, the felons in Hawaii should fess up to the crimes. Do not
    let the Mainland hog all the glory of the scandals. IMO

  187. Posted June 29, 2012 at 8:14 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butter,

    I’ve come to this issue very late in the game (like this week). There’s a gazillion things I don’t yet know and I’m trying to learn on the fast track. Plus things I don’t understand (I’ve read several different explanations about Adobe Illustrator “layering” and I still can’t understand them).

    One one very large comments field, I ran across this very strange piece of data.

    One commenter named “John” at comment #331 wrote:

    “Look closely at the composite with all the bogus layers removed and Obama’s ineligibility becomes obvious.”

    He then links the following:

    What is very strange about this is the year of the dates signed by both parents — as 1981 !!!

    Have you ever seen this before?

    • Posted July 11, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Hesperado, I apologize for taking so long to get back to you. And thank you for your concern for me at Free Republic.

      I asked Mark Gillar to send me snapshots of the different layers on the long-form, and I don’t see any way that the dates from those layers come out to 1981, unless the first 2 layers – consisting of white dots – were used to white-out the original date on a source document. We haven’t figured out a way to get the first 2 layers to me in a way that I can see where the white dots are, since the only way to see white is to lay it on top of a different color. But there is something I noticed on one of the layers that does not appear in the final copy with all the layers together so I do suspect that the first 2 layers may have been used to white out that certain thing and perhaps other things too.

      So at this point it looks like the image that you linked to is not genuine but there is the possibility that there’s more to the story. If I can somehow see what was going on with the first 2 layers it may tell me a lot. Seeing the individual layers so I can sort out the implications has been very interesting on its own. When I’m able to figure out what’s going on with layers 1 and 2 I hope to post a document showing all those layers individually so people can see the kind of C&P it took to come up with this final document.

      • Posted July 11, 2012 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

        Thanks Butter, I’m glad everything’s ok. I still don’t understand all this “layering” business — I’m just dense about that kind of stuff. So you’re saying that those pdf’s of the forms with the date 1981 on them must be phony? I wonder why they were fabricated? To make the eligibility proofers look bad?

        Also, I read that Obama’s Connecticut SS card # is connected to two different birth dates — 1961 and 1890! What is 1890 doing there!!!??? (1890, by the way, is the birth year of Abd al Aziz, the founder of Saudi Arabia…)

      • Posted July 12, 2012 at 12:07 am | Permalink

        I’m not good with computer type stuff either so it’s been a steep learning curve for me. I’m getting there, sort of, but it just takes a lot of time and effort.

        Unless there was something majorly screwy with the first 2 layers, where 1981 was whited out so that 1961 could be put in instead, the images showing 1981 on them are phony. At this point I can’t really say, because I haven’t been able to see what was on those first 2 layers. If you believe the stories of the Fogbow folks, though, they created a phony Kenyan birth certificate in order to try to make “birthers” look bad. So I don’t put anything past them. It’s been difficult to know who and what is genuine, and who and what is disinformation put out by agents provocateur. The tactic endorsed by one of Obama’s closest friends/advisors (I keep forgetting his name; I’ve got a link about it somewhere) is to present disinformation but to do it through sources trusted by the people you want to deceive. And though I can’t prove it yet, I believe this is what even the HDOH is doing.

        It sounds crazy for me to talk like this. If I heard somebody talking like this, I’d think they were crazy – unless I had experienced some of the things I’ve experienced. If we ever make it through this critical time in the nation’s history, there will be a LOT of stories to tell – stuff most people would never have believed.

        So anyway, for right now I can’t say whether the 1981 date is genuine or not. It doesn’t appear to be but I can’ say for sure until I see the first 2 layers.

  188. Posted July 3, 2012 at 1:36 am | Permalink | Reply

    Another rigged verdict, no surprise: Lewis in Fla. case on Obot eligiibility
    makes a mockery of the law: No one has standing since he is not yet
    fully nominated; the SOS of Florida cannot determine eligibility (not his
    job, etc.); and finally, everyone knows that Obot is truly a natural born
    citizen. No doubt. No proof offered. Contradicts facts of the parents
    on the BC, short or long form BC. Makes no sense, as usual. Another
    distorted view of reality (3 times), just as bad as Justice John Roberts.
    Makes no sense. IMO. Birthers beware. The deck is stacked. IMO.
    PS/ As predicted. No surprise. IMO.

  189. Posted July 11, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Noteworthy: Ms. Taitz filed Rico case in Federal Court against Obot
    et al., about 120 pp. worth. Heavy work and heavy lifting by Orly.
    Should make the elite in WH squirm, including Papa Holder. Also
    of note, Susan Daniels went to FED Court in Ohio on the SSN and
    SSN fraud and theft by Obot and the trolls, zombies, etc. Nice
    touch, Sue. We shall see more. Old birthers never die, we just
    keep keeping on. One day, soon, etc……. IMO. JS

    • Posted July 11, 2012 at 11:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m hoping something bears fruit soon. I’ll keep praying, and keep working.

  190. Posted July 12, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Peripheral but central too: In Taitz vs. Sebelius case in LA Court,
    the major objection to healthcare ACA law, Obamacare, is that the
    Muslim community will be exempt and exempted from paying such
    mandated insurance fees to a central planner govt, IRS, etc. Quite a big stir on Obama tax as unfair to Christian and Jewish taxpayers.
    New twist per Orly Taitz. I basically agree that all should be included, not exempted (should include the Congress, the Indian
    tribes, and the Muslim-Americans). Such exemptions invalidate
    the law, SCOTUS ruling, IMO. We shall see…You cannot cherry
    pick universal coverage (if that is the goal). IMO. JS

    • John Whelan
      Posted July 12, 2012 at 11:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The team seems to be down to two. Being a conspiracy nut can be a lonely business…….

      • Posted July 16, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

        How interesting that you think what you see is everything that is.

        Every parent knows the time you worry about what the kids are up to is when they are quiet. lol

      • What A Hoot
        Posted July 18, 2012 at 2:21 am | Permalink

        Oh, we are here. Just most of us, with the increase in taxes, the higher gas prices and food prices, the government-forced changes in our health increasing our expenses $1000+/per MONTH, we are busy working two jobs now. But, ahhhhh, all are reading and communicating via other venues. Not everyone gets invited to the party.

  191. Posted July 16, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Obviously: John from Canada forgets that, “Old Birthers never
    die, they just de-certify.” This may even include some Canadians.
    We shall see. IMO. JS

  192. Multisigma
    Posted July 18, 2012 at 3:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    Arpaio has gone public with full accusation of fraud. Should get interesting rather quickly?

    • ksdb
      Posted July 20, 2012 at 9:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

      No denials from the White House or the Obama campaign. That’s rather telling.

  193. Posted July 19, 2012 at 1:30 am | Permalink | Reply

    Agreed: Arpaio did the right thing to unload the Motherlode. It is
    up to the Congress and the Military to act on the fake, fraud, forged
    BC. This could be part of the RICO complaint also by Taitz. In any
    event, even Pravda agrees that Obot is not a citizen and is a nat-
    ional security threat (Oct 2011). What are we to do then with this
    Manchurian candidate? Ship him to Guantanamo or where?
    IMO. Anywhere but the USA. JS
    PS/ Do not rely on AG Holder. IMO.

  194. Mort
    Posted July 19, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter…since FR is having problems, I hope you see what’s at this link:

    http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/07/obamas-kenyan-birth-records-discovered.html

  195. gorefan
    Posted July 20, 2012 at 7:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butter,

    What do you think of Zullo’s theory of the certificate numbers being assigned on a monthly basis? That’s different from how you’ve been describing the process.

    Also why would he not include the birth certificate for the girl born on August 23rd, 1961? WND published it and she was born at Kapiolani, were they afraid that its cert # doesn’ tfit their theory?

    • Posted July 22, 2012 at 11:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

      How do you know she was born at Kapiolani?

      • Posted December 11, 2012 at 2:04 am | Permalink

        Her LFCOLB says so. But, Corsi told me that it’s not legit. Or maybe just meant the cert #.

        Nordyke BC’s are also forged, in case you did not know that.

      • s
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

        why wasnt barrys birth cert requested BEFORE he became president? how could he of faked it then when he didnt have the executive power to do all you say he did to fake it? am i missing the point or is prevention better than cure…

      • Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

        It was. I don’t have my compilation of dates in front of me at the moment so this is just from memory but within the last week or so before the DNC Convention in 2008, Bill Clinton’s good friend Bill Gwatney – head of the Arkansas Democratic Party – agreed to present a petition calling for a 2nd round of voting at the Convention, which would release some Obama delegates from voting for him, and then the Clintons were going to present their evidence of Obama’s ineligibility. According to sources close to the Clintons who spoke to a couple PUMA’s who were involved with the campaign at the time, the plan had always been to wait until the last minute and then blow Obama out of the water.

        Trouble is, Bill Gwatney got blown out of the water. Some guy who was supposedly despondent from losing a job wandered into Gwatney’s office and shot him. The shooter was killed by the cops before any questions could be asked.

        So then Stephanie Tubbs said she would do it. Within days she died of a supposed brain aneurysm. I think it was the day after Tubbs died that Phil Berg, a Hillary supporter, filed his lawsuit against the DNC and Obama, presenting evidence of Obama’s documentation problem and saying that as a paid member of the Democratic Party he had a right to an ELIGIBLE candidate. The judge was treating it seriously and then all of a sudden – the day after Obama visited Hawaii – the judge did a 180 and said that it’s none of Berg’s business. He had no “standing”. And that’s been what nearly every judge has said since then. “It’s nobody’s business.”

        The ones who didn’t claim lack of standing claimed that 4 year’s worth of National Guard pay doesn’t meet the $500 minimum value to make a “case”. That decision was by the judge who slapped “frivolous lawsuit” charges on the plaintiff because the eligibility issue had already been legally resolved on Twitter; God knows we don’t need no stinkin’ courts or judges to look at real evidence. Don’t these plaintiffs know we’re Iran now? And the other one, Judge Malihi in GA, said Obama had to prove his eligibility but then ruled him eligible to be on the GA ballot with no evidence. He’s Iranian, and I guess he must have thought he was still in Iran, where women can be stoned to death for adultery without any evidence, just because the judge claims “judge’s knowledge”.

        The short-form BC he posted on the web is an obvious fake, but the courts in this land (with the exception of the 2 I just mentioned) have all said it’s nobody’s business. As long as we’re all equally screwed nobody has “standing” – because they have no PARTICULARIZED harm (harm over and above what everybody has). Military people who need to know how to fulfill their oaths have no standing. Electors have no standing. Opposing candidates have no standing. The courts have flipped us all the bird saying it is nobody’s business whether we have a usurper in office.

        That’s where we’re at as a nation. “Everybody go watch “Desperate Housewives” (or whatever else is on the boob tube) because nothing of any consequence is any of your business…” And the sheep do as they’re told…

  196. Posted July 21, 2012 at 8:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Other view: Crosby’s article is earth-shattering. IMO. We may be very near to the end of the impeachment road. My view, from my
    research was that the Obot files HAD to have been transferred to
    the Regional British Archives in Uganda, then shipped to London.
    I always suspected London as the final destination. Always. Now,
    it remains to be seen if Boehner and Cantor, et al., will at long
    last call for and demand a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. Every
    scandal, every Watergate, must come to an end. IMO. We owe a
    great debt to Dan Crosby, to the birthers, to the Tea Party, and
    to the BNA (British National Archives) if this all pans out. Also to
    all concerned citizens and patriots of the USA, even Ms. Butter too!

  197. Posted August 8, 2012 at 12:34 am | Permalink | Reply

    Thanks to Root: Wayne Root claims that Obot was a foreign transfer
    student at Columbia. And also at H. We long suspected he was
    claiming Indonesian citizenship. Corsi said as much. Now we know
    why the records are all hidden and censored. More criminal misconduct.

  198. Posted August 9, 2012 at 12:00 am | Permalink | Reply

    ALL: ORYR reports now that at least three (3) ex-students and
    friends of Obot claim he claimed Indonesian citizenship as a foreign
    transfer student. Totally outrageous fraud, treason, and grounds
    for impeachment as ILLEGAL ALIEN. IMO. We shall see.
    PS/ Taitz is hot as fire on his case now in Indiana hearing. Old
    birthers are speechless and breathless… IMO. JS

  199. Posted August 11, 2012 at 8:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Sun shines on: In Kentucky, a new ballot challenge to Obot by
    Dr. Todd House (MD) and the Sam Sewell group. Good work,
    birthers and others. Someone has to have standing and a strong
    case as plaintiff, if this is to be resolved. Good luck to our Kentucky
    gentlemen, on the new ballot challenge. IMO. JS

  200. Posted August 30, 2012 at 12:18 am | Permalink | Reply

    GO LINDA GO: way to go, Linda Jordan filed in court a challenge
    to Obot on the ballot in Washington state. Good move, because
    she HAS standing. She was answered by SSA earlier that, upon
    examination, Obot FAILED e-Verify test. Listed as a “no match” and proof problems (Obvious fraud by an Illegal Alien). IMO. JS

    PS/ Linda and Orly both proved that Obot has failed e-Verify.
    Total fraud, nothing is done. Felony & double felony. Why?

    • Posted September 1, 2012 at 9:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      General Exercise in Futility: Courts in Maryland and Alabama
      reject all Obot ballot challenges. Judges side with Obots, trolls,
      and zombies, etc. Deck is too stacked to believe. Birthers must
      get ready for November–and possibly for martial law and worse.
      IMO. JS

  201. Posted October 3, 2012 at 2:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    New Development: Tim Adams, former Hawaii Elections clerk and
    birther on the BC has NOW ENDORSED Obot for Prez. He was
    obviously threatened and blackmailed to do this, if he wanted to
    keep his college job at U of K. Sad day for the USA, IMO. Maybe
    IRS called him too. Obvious pressure and coercion. Typical of
    the thugs, trolls, obots, zombies, etc. IMO. JS

  202. Ray
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 4:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Greetings,

    Thanks for all that you are doing, and all that you have done in the past. I thought you had gone the way of Donofrio.

    Have you been following anything that Orly Taitz has been up to?

    She has a Temporary Restraining Order hearing on January the third in Superior Court in California.

    Just wondering….

    • Posted December 29, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’ve barely had time to do what I’ve managed on this (an average of maybe 4 hrs of sleep/night for quite a while now) so I’ve missed out on what anybody else is doing. Has any court granted standing?

      • Ray
        Posted December 30, 2012 at 4:51 am | Permalink

        Nothing with standing at this point. She has subpoenaed everyone under the sun, including Obama, Onaka, Astrue, and Isa.

        Case Number: 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD
        Filer:
        Document Number: 29(No document attached)

        Docket Text: MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by courtroom deputy for Chief District Judge, Morrison C. England, Jr.: The Court is in receipt of the Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Subpoenas (ECF No. 27). All counsel in this case are ordered to personally appear for the January 3, 2013 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Hearing at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 7. The Court will not entertain requests for telephonic appearances. The parties are further ordered to be prepared to discuss the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, as well as, any and all issue pertaining to the subpoenas. The parties are also reminded of the official court closure for the New Year Holiday (December 31, 2012 and January 1, 2013). (Deutsch, S)

        Here is a link to Orly’s Reply to Opposition to TRO

        She points out the fact that the judge picked January the third, knowing the fourth is a critical date.

        It is certainly worth the time to read.

  203. Ray
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 4:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here is Orly Taitz’ response to my asking her to read your post.

    dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    December 29th, 2012 @ 12:01 am

    there is no last name, no signature, no stamp.
    It cannot be used in court or anywhere else. How do you know that this was written by a police officer? How do you know that it was ever filed? For all you know it might be nothing, a hoax

    • Posted December 29, 2012 at 10:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

      What I’ve allowed the public to see here is redacted. The link I provided to the members of Congress has the unredacted version (with notary seal, signature, contact info, and full case number for the Nebraska criminal case file).

  204. Posted December 30, 2012 at 2:06 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, welcome back..we missed you. I’ve been sharing your info to my groups. Also, I am very encouraged by a new case here in Alabama. McInnish v Beth Chapman SOS, attorney Larry Klayman. I begged Larry Klayman to do this in Alabama because we’ve already had a Supreme Court judge here, Tom Parker, state in an earlier case (McInnish v Beth Chapman) that he had seen the documentation (Joe Arpaio’s investigation) and the issue of the forged birth certificates need to be taken seriously and examined in a court of law. In other words, we have a State Supreme Court judge asking for an eligibility case. Plus during the recent elections we elected chief judge Roy Moore to the bench, a very strict constitutionalist and someone who won’t put up with Obama’s BS.

    • Posted December 30, 2012 at 2:29 am | Permalink | Reply

      Keep getting the word out; research is my passion but I’m not much good at networking so this is where I sort of have to pass off the baton to y’all and watch you work your magic.

      Is standing still the legal snag for the lawsuits? I’ve not been able to keep up with all the suits. Very sickening to see the judge in FL throw out Klayman’s case even though standing was already guaranteed. The reasoning was so pathetic it really makes me wonder if it was done deliberately badly as a red flag to show that his decision was given under duress.

  205. Posted December 30, 2012 at 3:38 am | Permalink | Reply

    Standing hasn’t been an issue lately for some reason. There’s a case up for a hearing in the US Supreme Court on Jan. 4th. Cody Robert Judy v Obama. The house and senate just passed a bill changing the date for the electoral college from the 6th, which is a Sunday to the 4th instead of what should normally have been changed to the 7th. Could they be getting nervous? This case here in Alabama really looks good, standing should not be an issue. Plus Larry Klayman has quoted the states highest attorney (???) saying that with the evidence presented to our sec of state, there is no way Obama should have been allowed on the ballot.

  206. Posted January 5, 2013 at 9:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As of this time, FYI, Butter & All: The ORYR data and other sites
    at FREEP note and proclaim that Onaka in Hawaii has ruled that
    the Obot 2011 TV birth certificate is a Forgery. Quite a surprise!
    Onaka has turned on Obot, while Brian Schatz has sold out all
    and become Senator via Criminal games by Abercrombie, the
    Socialist Governor. Terrible crimes in Hawaii, disgrace to the USA.
    IMO.

    • Posted January 11, 2013 at 5:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Got anything to link Onaka’s statement?
      Otherwise hopefully a search will produce a link or two.

      • Posted January 11, 2013 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

        His statement is his certification that his letter of verification (which refused to verify AZ SOS Bennett’s submitted claims of male, Aug 4, 1961, Honolulu, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, or Barack Hussein Obama as the true facts of birth) is in compliance with HRS 338-14.3, which requires him to verify any submitted claim which he can certify as the way the birth really happened.

        IOW, Onaka certified that he verified everything he can, and he did not verify any of the birth facts that Bennett submitted to be verified specifically as being TRUE. The only lawful reason for Onaka to not verify those claims as true is if they are not claimed on a legally-valid record. Onaka did verify that those are the claims on their record, so the only lawful reason for him to not verify the claims as true is if the record itself is non-valid.

        Bennett asked for some other things to be verified “from the birth record”. Given that Onaka already revealed that the BC is non-valid, his verification of those items cannot be verifying the TRUTH of them, but must be a verification that they ARE “from the birth record” (IOW, verification that those are the claims made on the non-valid BC).

        The whole “matching” thing is irrelevant. If I have a $2 bill, the information on it will match the information on any other $2 bill but it will still be legally worthless. Onaka has revealed that the HI BC is legally worthless (like a $2 bill) so it doesn’t even matter what claims are on it.

        The documentation for all this can be seen in the letter Attorney Larry Klayman sent to DNC Counsel Bob Bauer, posted at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf

  207. Posted January 12, 2013 at 2:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    Thanks…
    Pretty interesting!
    I hadn’t seen the letter sent to Bauer although I had seen everything else.

    Although perhaps the analogy about the $ 2 bill should be changed to a $ 3 bill or changed to that you have a picture of $ 2 bill. A $ 2 bill is legally worth $ 2.

    • Posted January 12, 2013 at 5:37 am | Permalink | Reply

      Do they have $2 bills now?

      • Posted January 12, 2013 at 7:24 am | Permalink

        Yup I have a couple stored away that are still legal tender.

      • Posted January 12, 2013 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

        I sit corrected then, and learned something new today. I’ll use $3 bill instead of $2 for this analogy.

  208. Posted January 12, 2013 at 5:10 am | Permalink | Reply

    thanks Butter, this letter explains it perfectly. I’m passing it on to my groups.

    • Posted January 12, 2013 at 5:43 am | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks. Hopefully we can keep getting the word out.

      If TPM Muckraker was given a copy of the 2nd page of Bennett’s request, they would also have received a copy of the 1st page. To knowingly edit out that page from the reporting is journalistic malpractice. And for AZ Central to publish the verification without bothering to find out what was requested or what rules Onaka had to follow when responding…. is also journalistic malpractice. I tried contacting the author of that article and she would not return my call.

      These sources reported the exact OPPOSITE of what Onaka actually verified. That’s how low the media has sunk. And we have to try to scream loud enough to be heard over their inaccurate racket.

  209. Posted January 16, 2013 at 1:37 am | Permalink | Reply

    New!: Lawyer Taitz has a Feb 15 Scotus conference to finalize
    a legal review and court case on obot ‘s eligibility. Could be big
    case. But I do doubt that Kagan or Sotomayor will recuse their
    selves. Could still arrive in SCOTUS hearing case, but seems
    very doubtful. IMO. I cannot trust John Roberts and his tricks.
    IMO. We shall see, whatever. By then, the swearing in will be
    over. To agree to hear a case at such a late date seems a joke, a
    trick, unlikely. We shall see.

  210. Posted January 19, 2013 at 8:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    SSN forgery by Obot now linked to 1890 census data on Harry
    Bounel in NY & Connecticut. Scandal grows, forgery and fraud and
    major felony detected by OT & AH work on the SSN case. See ORYR. Total E-Verify failure confirmed. IMO.

  211. Posted January 20, 2013 at 6:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Despite all the evidence in the public domain, the media still plays eyes-wide-shut.

    Surely, with all the information available now, including through FOIA requests, a more coherent timeline can be developed. Maybe we need a moderated “Forgery-Gate” wiki.

    The best way forward is not secrecy, but light. Let’s continue to get the word out. The MSM is not interested, yet. It’s up to the People to uncover the facts for now.

  212. Paul Marko
    Posted April 11, 2013 at 4:25 am | Permalink | Reply

    In the second paragraph of “Back to the Beginning,” is there a mistake in not listing the name of the original parents of Norman and Nathan Asing when you state: …”Norman’s birthday as August 4, 1961 – the same day as Mr. & Mrs. Norman Roloos were listed in the newspapers as having a son,” since it would have been the Asings that would have placed the announcement?

  213. Antoinette
    Posted January 18, 2014 at 12:19 am | Permalink | Reply

    Bengazi Attack Leader released from GITMO with help from Holder Law Firm–

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/far-left-us-law-firm-represented-libyan-gitmo-detainee-before-he-murdered-us-ambassador/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 102 other followers

%d bloggers like this: