Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
So what were the revelations?

More crap about layers, some nonsense about the census code used to mark the race of Obama's father, and the big bombshell was that Hawai'i passed a law in 1982 which allowed for the registration of out-of-state births (something which has literally been known and debunked since pretty much the beginning of birtherism - it was brought up in this very thread way back in October of 2009), so that (according to Zullo, Corsi's BFF on the Cold Cuts Posse) all Hawaiian birth certificates are suspect, not just President Obama's, and this is a "national security issue".

Here's WND's dutiful regurgitation of these "shocking new discoveries".
 
Last edited:
We now take you live to Washington, DC, for the official White House response to Arpaio's and Zullo's allegations.

Obama-Laughing-on-AF1-1.jpg
 
More crap about layers, some nonsense about the census code used to mark the race of Obama's father, and the big bombshell was that Hawai'i passed a law in 1982 which allowed for the registration of out-of-state births (something which has literally been known and debunked since pretty much the beginning of birtherism - it was brought up in this very thread way back in October of 2009), so that (according to Zullo, Corsi's BFF on the Cold Cuts Posse) all Hawaiian birth certificates are suspect, not just President Obama's, and this is a "national security issue".

Here's WND's dutiful regurgitation of these "shocking new discoveries".
Well on the one hand I am completely shocked that I have devoted as much time to debunking this conspiracy theory as I have, and on the other actually confused as to how suddenly a 1982 law makes someone born in the 60s suspect?

Then again...this is just becoming political theatre specifically trying to create FUD before an election. Painfully obvious given Jerome "swift boater" Corsi is involved in all this.
 
Well, I managed to completely forget all about this historic pressser, and instead enjoyed a day out as a tourist in Copenhagen :)
 
It seems that even now, the Cold Cuts Posse's "researchers" aren't actually doing any research of their own, instead relying on information and lies fed to them by other Birther sites.

For instance, the claim that the notation of "9" for Obama's father's race standing for "not stated" (so that the box should be blank and "African" is a forged addition) originated with Birther site The Daily Pen. Doc Conspiracy wrote an article debunking their lies about this way back in March.

Essentially, "9" being "not stated" comes from the 1969 coding manual (which the Daily Pen photoshopped images of to falsely present it as being the 1961 manual). Doc Conspiracy dug up and examined the actual 1961 coding manual here - "9" stands for "Other Nonwhite", and there is no code whatsoever for "not stated".
 
What would it matter if the father's race was "not stated?"

Since there was probably a relative dearth of African men on the island at that time wouldn't this make the idea of an African birth even less likely than in their fantasies?
 
What would it matter if the father's race was "not stated?"

Their argument is apparently that since the coding says the information was "not stated", but the fields have information in them meaning the info was stated, the discrepancy proves forgery (in the usual sort of Birther anti-logic way).
 
Their argument is apparently that since the coding says the information was "not stated", but the fields have information in them meaning the info was stated, the discrepancy proves forgery (in the usual sort of Birther anti-logic way).

Because, of course, nobody ever fills in a form incorrectly. Right.

Dave
 
Turns out that the "shocking revelations" about Hawaii's birth records law that represent such a threat to national security have also been debunked by a website before. By Joseph "WND" Farah's Western Journalism Center. In 2009!

In discussing the Certification of Live Birth that the Obama campaign claims was posted on the web, Orly Taitz also asserts that “Hawaii has statute 338 that allows foreign-born children of Hawaiian residents to get Hawaiian birth certificates.” What she is referring to here is the 1982 amendment of the vital records law. Under Act 182 H.B. NO. 3016-82, state policies and procedures could accommodate even “children born out of State” (this is the actual language of Act 182) with an original birth certificate on record. But though Act 182 does provide children born out of state with a birth certificate it does not provide them with birth certificates that say that these children were born in Hawaii or at a specific location in Hawaii. Consequently these birth certificates cannot engender Certifications of Live Birth which state that the subject was born in Honolulu, as the purported Obama Certification of Live Birth does. So if the Obama Certification of Live Birth was not forged, it could not have been engendered by an Act 182-authorized birth certificate for “children born out of state”. And if it was forged, the false information on it was not based on anything that could be on an Act-182 authorized birth certificate. So Orly Taitz’ assertion that “Hawaii has statute 338 that allows foreign-born children of Hawaiian residents to get Hawaiian birth certificates” is irrelevant.

Typically for a Farah website, however, now that his puppet Arpaio has claimed otherwise, more recent articles on Western Journalism now pretend that the above article never happened:

The key to understanding this controversy is understanding practices for granting birth certificates in Hawaii in 1961. The media has failed repeatedly to seriously investigate this issue. Mike Zullo finally got to the heart of the issue.

In 1961, forty percent of Hawaiian births were not in hospitals. Natives and Japanese citizens routinely had children at home. After a home birth all you had to do was send in a form reporting the birth to obtain a birth certificate. You would also get the much heralded birth announcement by sending in this form because the department of health was the source for those announcements.

Routinely in 1961 children born abroad were given Hawaii birth certificates as a result of these forms. Arpaio has numerous examples of children born in Japan who today have birth certificates attesting to birth in Honolulu. Obama’s Grandmother or Grandfather could have easily filed this form even if Obama was born in Kenya or anywhere else. It is likely they wanted to protect his American citizenship which would not have been automatic in 1961.

The kicker? The same guy, Floyd Brown, wrote both articles!
 
It's Arpaio's theater of the absurd: "Waiting for Old Joe" starring Mike Zullo as Vladimir and and Arpaio as Estragon, with a special appearance by Jerome Corsi as Lucky.
 
I assume everyone has seen this already but I'm posting it just in case:

Fox News: Sheriff Joe Arpaio says Obama birth record 'definitely fraudulent,'

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...efinitely-fraudulent-sheriff-joe-arpaio-says/

God bless Joe Arpaio and all who sale upon this crazy, racist, and vindictive ship!

The reaction in Tucson has been, "Isn't he going on trail for all those crimes he is accused of soon?" and "What is wrong with Maricopa county?"

I saw somewhere that something like 80% of his campaign funds this time around have come from out of state.

ETA: TRIAL - uggghhhh
 
Last edited:
Shurf Joe has got to go. No question. The problem is, there is a large contingent of retirees who just love him. To them, he can do no wrong.

I originally thought Joe might lose this election, but it's starting to appear less likely. He just keeps dodging questions about the 400+ cases of sexual assault and abuse that were virtually ignored by his department. And everyone is forgetting that he goes on trial for his racial profiling allegations this week. It's like we're living is some crazy dictatorship. Welcome to the Prickly-Pear republic run by Col. Joe Arpaio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom