Main Menu

Polarik declares Kenyan document a forgery

Cobbling together Internet criticisms of the Kenyan “birth certificate”, Ron Polarik races to get in front of the growing snowball of rejection and declares it a forgery in a post on The Free Republic forum, calling those who believe the document “lunatics”.

Polarik (aka Ron Polland) said:

I am amazed at the cluelessness of many people in this forum about the above obvious fake document. For instance: Kenya didn’t become a republic until December 1964; E.F Lavender is a common detergent in Kenya & the certificate# 44 0 47 is laughable: 47 = he’s the 44th US President, O = Obama & 47 = his age. Are all these coincidental you lunatics….

In 1961, Mombassa [sic] was in ZANZIBAR, not in Kenya.

Note, that E. F. Lavender was the name of someone from Australia in 1915.


Barack Obama with long-form birth certificate

Faked photo of Barack Obama with long-form birth certificate

Note, that E. F. Lavender was the name of someone from Australia in 1915. http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticleJpg/1536351/3?print=n

75 Responses to Polarik declares Kenyan document a forgery

  1. avatar
    misha August 2, 2009 at 11:25 pm #

    EF Lavender detergent commercial tagline:

    Out, damned spot. (sorry)

  2. avatar
    kimba August 2, 2009 at 11:30 pm #

    Well thank goodness. Now I can sleep.

  3. avatar
    Jack August 3, 2009 at 12:31 am #

    QUESTION:

    What happens to Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation as Supreme Court Justice if the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” Presidential eligibility requirement is subsequently determined applicable to Barack Obama on the basis of Article 2’s exclusion of dual citizenship birth (doesn’t matter whether Obama born in Hawaii since his dad was Kenyan/British citizen at the time)? It would seem prudent, if not dereliction of Constitutional duty in not so doing, for the United States Senate to defer voting on Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation at the very least until there is determination, now imminent, on standing in Kerchner v. Congress (USDC NJ) on that precise issue (Congressional failure to take up the raised and known constitutional ineligibility question prior to declaring a Presidential winner in the vote of the electoral college). For the full Senate now to proceed to vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor (an otherwise lifetime appointment) before then, would be a knowing and very substantial exacerbation of any inherent Constitutional crisis — compounding the previous Congressional dereliction. That is, the Executive Branch, as well as conceivably all actions of a Congress under a President determined ineligible, would leave the Supreme Court as an essential unfettered remaining Branch of the Federal Government, that is unfettered so long as Mr. Obama’s nominee to the Court is not yet confirmed by the Senate.

    Will not one Senator, let alone Republican Senator, raise this issue on the Senate floor? The nation is watching.

    Leave a Reply

  4. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 3, 2009 at 12:40 am #

    What happens to Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation as Supreme Court Justice if the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” Presidential eligibility requirement is subsequently determined applicable to Barack Obama on the basis of Article 2’s exclusion of dual citizenship birth (doesn’t matter whether Obama born in Hawaii since his dad was Kenyan/British citizen at the time)?

    1. Under the de Facto Officer doctorine, everything that Barack Obama has done will remain, including his appointments.

    2. Article 2 doesn’t exclude dual citizenship. If you want proof, Perkins v. Elg directly deals with dual citizenship, and declares Elg, who had both American and Swedish citizenship to be a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States.

    As far as the rest of your post, it’s completely incoherent and nothing more than a false rambling.

  5. avatar
    Mrs. Polly August 3, 2009 at 12:54 am #

    Poor Jack. This has been a blow, I’m sure. It isn’t as if nobody is going to notice that you were clinging to this latest fraud like a life preserver an hour ago and have now seamlessly switched subjects.

    Polarik certainly has been underwhelming, hasn’t he? What great wisdom do we get? That he reads the Internet, too. And was either way behind, or hanging back waiting to see which way the wind blew before weighing in. Between this and being outed, rough couple of days all round in birtherville..

  6. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 2:03 am #

    Are you out of your ever loving mind?

    You have posted the same entry on three different threads/forums on the site, within a short time frame.

    Take a good, stiff double scotch. Or put down several margaritas. We had to put up with 8 years of that half-assed tyro. Question for you: where are the WMDs? How many have died in Iraq, and how many are coming back missing eyes, limbs, with 3rd degree burns, and psych cases?

    I’m more interested in that, than the birthers’ asinine witch hunt. I’m sure the Republic will survive a black president, with a Muslim name. We survived Bush Jr, and Nixon. If we can handle those two jerks, we can handle anything.

    Oh, Agnew too.

  7. avatar
    Welsh Dragon August 3, 2009 at 7:04 am #

    “In 1961, Mombassa [sic] was in ZANZIBAR, not in Kenya”

    This idea has been spreading around the web like wildfire since the latest fake certificate appeared. It seems to originate from wikipedia but while technically true it’s a bit misleading.

    From 1920 to 1963 Mombasa was part of the British’Protectorate of Kenya’ and any offical documents would have refered to that (or the more common ‘Kenyan Protectorate’) rather than Zanzibar.

    None of this affects makes the latest fake any more legitimate but bear it in mind if the next fake refers to birth in the ‘Sultanate of Zanzibar’

    As an aside on of the lawsuits (can’t remember which one- after a while all the garbage conjeals into one rotting pile) refers to the ‘East African Protectorate of Zanzibar’. Never was any such legal entity.

  8. avatar
    Loren August 3, 2009 at 7:49 am #

    I love his argument. He cribs some quotes from some other people, which he follows by saying “I also found a number of anomalies that shout, ‘Forgery'”, but he doesn’t bother to actually state what any of those anomalies *are*.

    Heck, just two weeks ago he had a long list of “anomalies” that he said firmly established the Obama letter to Kapaolani as an amateurish forgery. And none of those “anomalies” were actually unusual at all. Perhaps he just learned his lesson that it’s better to be very, very vague about such things.

  9. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 3, 2009 at 7:50 am #

    Jack, the answer is “nothing happens” vis-a-vis Sotomayor’s judgeship should it be proven that the moon is made of green cheese, err, Obama is not eligible to be president.

  10. avatar
    AdrianInFlorida August 3, 2009 at 10:02 am #

    Crap. If “Dr” Polarik says the “Kenyan BC” is fake, that must mean….It’s real.

  11. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 10:04 am #

    Look people, Orly would not make up anything, just like her compatriot Avigdor Lieberman. Those two are as pure as the driven snow.

    It’s the people in Hawaii who are co-conspirators. Kenya has one of the most reputable civil services in the universe.

    Really. I expected better from the people here.

  12. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 10:10 am #

    Uh, oh. My birth certificate is from the East African Protectorate of Zanzibar. Are you telling me it’s fake? The guy in the souk assured me his documents are internationally accepted. Now what do I do?

  13. avatar
    kimba August 3, 2009 at 10:19 am #

    Questions, because I’m a little confused. With my apologies for not keeping up:
    – Am I correct that Orly filed the picture of the document with her motion not the document itself? Is that acceptable to a court?
    – Did Orly say she actually has this document?
    – Did she get it from Ed Hale? Is this the thing Steve Pidgeon needed money for early in the year? Is Pidgeon working with Orly now? Last we heard, wasn’t he was about to be arrested by the men in the black SUV’s?

    It’s just so bizarre when birthers converge.

  14. avatar
    Lupin August 3, 2009 at 10:41 am #

    Hallelujah! Obama has been born twice! (Or is it thrice by now?)

    We are so blessed!

  15. avatar
    Black Lion August 3, 2009 at 11:27 am #

    Good Article from the Nutmeg lawyer blog regarding the birthers…

    “Now I am not suggesting that there is something wrong with New Jersey’s Attorney Mario Apuzzo, Pennsylvania’s Phil K Berg and California’s Dr. Orly Taitz. I do not mean to come off snooty. But whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, the argument regarding Obama’s birth seems well settled. Even Ann Coulter says it’s a dead issue. Newspaper accounts announced his birth, the state of Hawaii produced a birth certificate with a raised seal, the director of Hawaiian public health confirmed the birth, the Republican governor of Hawaii confirmed his birth, his mother was a US citizen, he underwent a strenous vetting process, and I am fairly confident Hawaii is a state. I think it’s the one where Magnum lives with Higgins. So what’s the debate about? Frankly, I don’t get it. Do these people really believe that there was a conspiracy for 40 plus years over several continents in a plan to someday make Barack Obama president. A conspiracy that would have to include planted birth announcements in the 60s, the bribing of the Republican governor of Hawaii, the destruction of Kenyan birth records and the State’s Health director and the deaths of all witnesses including Obama’s parents and the birth doctor. I take it back. What is wrong with these people?”

    http://thenutmeglawyer.blogspot.com/2009/07/saving-old-glory-from-obama-are.html

    You have to read the comments because our friend Mario Apuzzo decided to comment and was not happy with the response….Comedy…

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 3, 2009 at 11:33 am #

    1. Orly filed the picture with the court. It’s in their electronic filing database (link on the Docket here).
    2. I have not seen where Orly claims to have the original paper document. The statement filed with the court suggest she does not have it.

  17. avatar
    jtx August 3, 2009 at 11:37 am #

    misha & kimba:

    Take a deep breath and hold it for a few days, guys. Also step back and look at yourselves closely.

    On FreeRepublic the poster Polarik was merely repeating posts from many of the Flying Monkey Squadron and NOT saying the Kenyan BC Registration certificate was real or not – but that it needed more analysis.

    That’s really no different than what Orly is asking for in the legal action that brought the image of the document to light. The court verification should be definitive … as it should be WRT the various (and continually changing HI documents and statements).

    As I’ve said before neither this nor any other kangaroo court will settle the matter of the BC (if any from anywhere – he may have just been found under a rock as many know). That is merely one, or a few, pieces of evidence in the whole court proceeding.

    The read issue though is not the BC(s) but – ahem – whether or not the man is eligible under the laws of our countty to hold the office he now occupies.

    All of the babble by the Flying Monkey Squadron members as the try to protect their beloved Communist leader is nothing but that – babble.

  18. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 11:47 am #

    I read Taitz’s motion to say that she has only the picture, and needs the court’s help to produce the “original” from Kenya.

    1. The court can always say no if, say, there’s insufficient evidence of authenticity and reliability.

    2. Taitz specifically asks for leave to conduct what we’ll call “early” discovery. Discovery isn’t allowed until there’s an answer on file. Has Taitz even served the operative complaint?

    The judge could very easily deny the motion without prejudice until the discovery phase begins. That way, if the case never gets to that phase, the request will never happen. (And there’s no immediacy to get the “original” — if it exists today in some archive, it’ll be there next month too.)

    Which is logical: If there’s no case, the court isn’t going to facilitate getting this “original.”

  19. avatar
    jtx August 3, 2009 at 11:48 am #

    Black Lion:

    The “conspiracy” nonsense is something that you and your Flying Monkeys pals have made up in an effort to denigrate others.

    Please show us where the Kerchner lawsuit alleges and sort of “conspiracy”.

    The matter, however, is as Mario states – whether or not Mr. Obama is eligible under our laws to hold the office he now occupies. And it will be a court that makes that determination, not a bunch of Obots who would die to retain the guy in office, legal or not.

  20. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 11:57 am #

    Please show us where the Kerchner lawsuit alleges and sort of “conspiracy”.

    Who is this “us”? WE THE PEOPLE?

    The conspiracy is implicit: Either Obama forged his COLB (with complicity of many, including those in the Hawaiian government and the forgerers), or McCain and Hillary (and their respective brain trusts) “overlooked” a point of law that birfers claim is plain as day.

    And it will be a court that makes that determination

    For the 37th time: Which court? Which case?

  21. avatar
    Rickey August 3, 2009 at 12:08 pm #

    Court verification? Are you serious? Even if she can get past the procedural hurdles, before Orly could even get the document into evidence she would have to produce the original document AND have expert testimony to authenticate it. Then the defense attorneys would have the opportunity to have their own experts examine it and rebut. Then and only then would the court rule on whether the document is admissible evidence. No court is going to do Orly’s work for her. She seems to believe that all she has to do is wave a photograph in front of a court and the court is somehow going to issue a subpoena to the government of Kenya. Good luck with that.

    Your interest in the birth certificate baffles me, since you have said repeatedly that it doesn’t matter where Obama was born, that he isn’t eligible because his father wasn’t a U.S. citizen. I wonder if you could cite a single recognized expert on the Constitution who agrees with you.

  22. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion August 3, 2009 at 12:15 pm #

    Are you kidding? The entire birther movement hinges on conspiracy after conspiracy

  23. avatar
    Nullifidian August 3, 2009 at 12:16 pm #

    The “conspiracy” nonsense is something that you and your Flying Monkeys pals have made up in an effort to denigrate others.

    Please show us where the Kerchner lawsuit alleges and sort of “conspiracy”.

    You don’t have to find the keyword “conspiracy” in the lawsuit filings to know that the whole thing would require a massive conspiracy spanning multiple continents, including the participation of the registrar of vital statistics in HI, the director of the HI Dept. of Health, and the governor of Hawaii.

    The matter, however, is as Mario states – whether or not Mr. Obama is eligible under our laws to hold the office he now occupies. And it will be a court that makes that determination,

    That’s a fairly optimistic assessment, considering that no birther lawsuit has ever met the basic requirements for a civil suit under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

    not a bunch of Obots who would die to retain the guy in office, legal or not.

    Let’s take a page from your book: who here, or anywhere, has said that they would die to retain Obama in office? Don’t project your fanaticism onto others.

    Speaking entirely for myself, I didn’t want Obama in office when I had an opportunity to vote on it. I couldn’t care less about defending Obama from anybody. Not that birthers are doing legitimate criticism anyway—though they may confuse their hatred of Obama for criticisms of his policies, the birthers are not engaged doing criticism but attempting to undermine his presidency.

    So why am I here? I’m here for the laughs. I love the bizarre, crazed, convoluted weirdness of it all. I love reading the twisted logic and massive misunderstandings of legal principles and procedures exhibited in their filings. I love seeing lawyers who refer to birth certificates that misplace Vancouver and are signed by Dudley Do-Right. In short, I’m here for the same reason that I loved reading Thomas Pynchon’s The Crying of Lot 49, although I think Pynchon would be hard-pressed to come up with anything as bizarre as birtherdom.

  24. avatar
    Nullifidian August 3, 2009 at 12:26 pm #

    On FreeRepublic the poster Polarik was merely repeating posts from many of the Flying Monkey Squadron and NOT saying the Kenyan BC Registration certificate was real or not – but that it needed more analysis.

    “I am amazed at the cluelessness of many people in this forum about the above obvious fake document.”

    In what world does calling the alleged Kenyan BC an “obvious fake” mean it “need[s] more analysis”? What would more analysis of an “obvious fake” accomplish? Confirmation that it’s a super-obvious fake? A triple-mega-deluxe-obvious fake?

  25. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 1:08 pm #

    jtx, Orly, Donofrio and their coterie contend that in order to qualify for president, a person has to have both parents as US citizens.

    Donofrio invented the fiction that since Obama’s father was a British subject, the 14th Amendment is not applicable to Barack Jr. Donofrio’s argument is that since Obama had British citizenship, through his father, he had dual loyalty and is therefore a “native born citizen,” but not a natural born citizen. Donofrio has invented two classes of 14th citizens, and it is only the class which has both citizen parents that meets the qualification for the presidency.

    Orly shouts this whenever there is a microphone within 15 feet, and jtx says this in every one of his posts. Donofrio’s suits have been dismissed, so he is trying again.

    They quote deVattel, an obscure 18th century Swiss philosopher as their authority.

  26. avatar
    Greg August 3, 2009 at 1:39 pm #

    She’s requested two methods of getting at the document, one of which is silly and won’t work, and one which is less silly, but won’t get her the document any time soon.

    She’s asked the court for a subpoena duces tecum for Hillary Clinton – a subpoena for her to provide documents. This cannot work for the simple reason that Hillary doesn’t have the birth certificate.

    The request for the court to command Hillary to issue a letter rogatory to Kenya, well, it’s silly. The request for the court to issue its own letter rogatory, well, slightly less silly. Generally, letters rogatory are simply approved by the court on motion. Then they’re sent to the State Department to be served on the judiciary in the other country through diplomatic channels.

    It generally takes at least a year to receive anything back from a letter rogatory, and up to 2 years for countries in Africa.

    So, in 2011, Kenya will reply to the letter rogatory saying they don’t have anything.

  27. avatar
    jtx August 3, 2009 at 3:28 pm #

    Rickey:

    I suppose you’re speaking to me but what an of-base comment!!

    I’ve always said (and have done so again on his thread) that the BC(s) are not the real issue – they are merely bits of fact for evidence in determining the truth as to whether the man is eligible to hold the office he occupies. He’s already told us many times that he was a Brit at birth.

    It will be interesting to see him try to prove that though he’s a Brit at birth he’s still a natural born citizen, don’t you think???

  28. avatar
    jtx August 3, 2009 at 3:31 pm #

    Nullifidian:

    You seem unaware of the evidentiary procedures in court. Statements like that are heardsay and are worth the paper (or electrons) they’re printed on.

    I’m quite willing to see the matter settled properly rather than in this sort of kangaroo court. Aren’t you???

  29. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 3:41 pm #

    You seem unaware of the evidentiary procedures in court.

    Oh, the irony.

  30. avatar
    AdrianInFlorida August 3, 2009 at 3:55 pm #

    “So, in 2011, Kenya will reply to the letter rogatory saying they don’t have anything.”

    Which serves Orly’s purposes just fine. Draggin this out is as good as being right (Obama born in Kenya).

    She’ll stay in the news, countless hundreds of birthers will keep donating to the ‘Fight’, and she’ll be happy till 2011.

    Then, when Kenya informs her and the court that there is nothing on file to back this forgery up, she’ll move on to the mysterious COLB from Iceland with President Obama’s name on it.

    It’s a never ending cycle for these loons. Time for “loser pays” in these suits.

  31. avatar
    nbc August 3, 2009 at 4:10 pm #

    ’ve always said (and have done so again on his thread) that the BC(s) are not the real issue

    And since the courts have ruled that children cannot lose their US natural born status due to dual allegiance, your position is as usual lacking in support.

  32. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 3, 2009 at 4:11 pm #

    It would be much more interesting, in the sense of bringing to light what was totally unknown before, to see someone prove that he is not.

  33. avatar
    nbc August 3, 2009 at 4:14 pm #

    I’m quite willing to see the matter settled properly rather than in this sort of kangaroo court. Aren’t you???

    Translation. I do not have any arguments or evidence but heck, if I can get standing contrary to the Constitution, perhaps I can uncover some dirt.

    Too bad that no court is going to give JTX or Kerchner a chance in court.

  34. avatar
    nbc August 3, 2009 at 4:24 pm #

    There is no credible evidence that he is not a natural born citizen

  35. avatar
    Sutekh August 3, 2009 at 5:33 pm #

    Isn’t Orly a foreigner? Why should we believe her? She sounds like a commie to me when you see her on tv. Once and enemy, always an enemy. Also, all of her degrees are fake. She downloaded them from the internet. She’s not really a lawyer, since she didn’t attend a ABA accredited law school. Unlike Obama who graduated from Harvard Law and was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. She should be arrested and deported for practicing law without a license. Also, Obama sounds like an American, and he has an American parent, so it doesn’t matter where he was born, even though it was in Hawaii, America’s 50th State. It’s where Pearl Harbor is! He also happens to have been elected president of the United State of America in a landside. Millions of Americans showed up for his inauguration in Washington, DC, which is the capital of the US of A. The sooner you accept reality the better off you’ll be.

  36. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 6:50 pm #

    Taitz on MSNBC.

    Popcorn time.

  37. avatar
    Rickey August 3, 2009 at 7:01 pm #

    “It will be interesting to see him try to prove that though he’s a Brit at birth he’s still a natural born citizen, don’t you think???”

    That’s easy. There is no legal authority for the proposition that his British citizenship has anything to do with his natural born citizen status in the United States. It is United States law, not British law, which is controlling. Obama doesn’t have to prove anything, nor is there any law which requires him to prove anything. He was born in Hawaii, so he is a natural born citizen.

    As I pointed out in my prior note, you have yet to cite a single recognized Constitutional scholar who agrees with your position on this issue. It’s no accident that the only attorneys willing to take these cases are mail-order lawyers such as Orly Taitz and ambulance-chasers such as Mario Apuzzo (although Apuzzo also handles DUI/DWI cases, which surely qualifies him as an expert on the Constitution). Orly Taitz has proven over and over again that she is incompetent and an embarrassment to the California Bar. I wouldn’t hire her to defend me on a traffic ticket.

  38. avatar
    kimba August 3, 2009 at 7:10 pm #

    Thanks all. I guess it didn’t make sense because I wasn’t looking at it through my Orly-vision goggle!

  39. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 7:11 pm #

    OK, everyone. Here we go:

    Q: How do you drive a Birther mad?
    A: Put him in the oval office and tell him the President’s Kenyan Birth Certificate is hidden in the corner.

    Q: How do you tell who is the groom at a Birther wedding?
    A: He’s the guy wearing the clean wifebeater.

    What does it say on the bottom of Coke bottles sold in the South?
    “Open other end.”

    Q. What’s the solution to the Birther problem?
    A. Live ammo for Civil War reenactments.

    Q. Why did the Birther stare at the Orange Juice carton?
    A. Because it said “CONCENTRATE”.

    Q. What do you call 100 Birthers at the bottom of the ocean?
    A. A good start.

    Q: What’s wrong with Birther jokes?
    A: Birthers don’t think they’re funny and other people don’t think they’re jokes.

    Q: How do Birthers form a car pool?
    A: They meet at work.

    Q: What does a Birther have in common with a beer bottle?
    A: They’re both empty from the neck up.

    A Liberal walked into a bar and asked the bartender, “Hey, have you heard the latest Birther joke?” The bartender replied, coldly, “No. And I’ll have you know I’m Birther.” That’s O.K.,” said the Liberal, “I’ll talk slow.”

    How to confuse Birthers? Hand them a spade and a shovel and ask them to take their pick.

    Did you hear about the Birther that refused to go to Canada because he couldn’t speak the language?

    Isn’t it a shame how 99% of the Birthers give the whole movement a bad name?

    I just had to take my Birther neighbor to the Hospital. He broke his leg when he tripped over his cordless phone.

    A Birther comes home and finds his wife packing.
    “Where are you going?” He asked.
    “I’m leaving because I just found out that you’re a pedophile!”, she said.
    “That’s a mighty big word for a kindergartener!”, he replied.

  40. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 3, 2009 at 7:12 pm #

    Why not, Rickey. If you win, you win. If you lose, you raise incompentant counsel, and get a new trial…

  41. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 7:31 pm #

    Orly is from Moldova. She was a refusenik, an first immigrated to Israel, where she got her DDS degree at Hebrew University, in Jeruslem. She now lives in Orange County, CA. She has dual US/Israel citizenship.

    She has a law “degree” from Taft University, an unaccredited correspondence outfit. She managed to pass the CA bar; CA is one of the few states which allows law reading in lieu of school. From what I have read, there are dental malpractice suits against her pending.

    She is doing this because she feels Obama is bad for Israel, and she thinks she can drive him from office if she makes enough noise.

    Note: I am also Jewish and a Zionist, but unlike her, the neocons, and evangelicals, I believe Israel’s Arab citizens should be treated with dignity, and unlike them I do not advocate ethnic cleansing.

  42. avatar
    misha August 3, 2009 at 7:32 pm #

    How many birthers does it take to change a lightbulb?

    Ten. One to change the bulb, and nine to explain the conspiracy why the filament didn’t last as long as it should have, because Obama and liberals sabatoged the factory.

  43. avatar
    aarrgghh August 3, 2009 at 7:50 pm #

    jtx:

    i’m quite willing to see the matter settled properly rather than in this sort of kangaroo court. aren’t you???

    translation:

    i’m quite willing to have a million bucks fall from the sky into my lap. aren’t you???

  44. avatar
    kimba August 3, 2009 at 7:56 pm #

    Who has the Ted Olsen paper link? I’d say Ted Olsen writing that Barack Obama is eligible, is a pretty renowned constitutional expert supporting the position.

  45. avatar
    Rickey August 3, 2009 at 8:09 pm #

    The there is some irony to be found in the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Ark, of course, was born in the United States but both of his parents were Chinese citizens and were never U.S. citizens. The Supreme Court ruled that 14th Amendment made it clear that it didn’t matter what the citizenship of his parents happened to be. If Ark was born in the U.S. he was a U.S. citizen.

    The irony is to be found in the dissenting opinion of the two justices who did not believe that Ark was a citizen, Justice Fuller and Justice Harlan (the dissent was actually written by Fuller, and Harlan concurred). The dissent complained that the majority ruling not only gave Ark citizenship, it also made him eligible to be president. Fuller wrote that the decision meant that “..the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the presidency…”

  46. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 8:26 pm #

    That’s not irony.

    That demonstrates the dissenters understood the significance of the majority’s opinion, and birfers still don’t, over a hundred years later.

  47. avatar
    IzMeBee August 3, 2009 at 8:36 pm #

    two things…

    Dr. C.. Am I the only one having Internal Server Error 500??

    I am getting them quite a bit. Just a FYI.

    and the other

    http://www.bomford.net/worcestershire/images/DavidJeffreyBomfordBirthCertDoc65.jpg

    Book em Danno

  48. avatar
    June bug August 3, 2009 at 8:52 pm #

    I’m getting that a lot too. I suspect site traffic is really high – similar probs are showing up with pj.

  49. avatar
    Nullifidian August 3, 2009 at 8:59 pm #

    You seem unaware of the evidentiary procedures in court.

    At the risk of pointing out the obvious, we’re not in court. You claimed that Polarik’s view was that the fake “needed more analysis”. However, Polarik claimed that it was an “obvious fake”. And…then you started babbling about court.

    Did you think you had a point, or was it all misdirection after being caught out misrepresenting Polarik’s statement?

    Statements like that are heardsay and are worth the paper (or electrons) they’re printed on.

    If you’re going to position yourself as some sort of legal ‘expert’, it would help to know how to spell “hearsay” and how to define it. Guff posted on the internet doesn’t meet the level of hearsay. Hearsay is a “statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.”

    Can you point to the trial or hearing in which this discussion is being conducted? Nor am I using Polarik’s words to establish anything about whether the alleged Kenyan BC is real or fake.

    I’m quite willing to see the matter settled properly rather than in this sort of kangaroo court. Aren’t you???

    I’m quite willing to see your lot keep on trying. It’s a rich vein of comedy.

    But the truth of the matter is that you’re not willing to see the matter settled properly. There are established procedures for challenging the eligibility of candidates on a state-by-state basis before the election takes place. It’s not impossible to do. The 2008 election provided us with an example of just that. The Socialist Workers’ Party nominated Róger Calero, a naturalized citizen born to Nicaraguan parents, as their candidate for president. He was challenged as ineligible, so his running mate’s name was substituted in those states where the SWP appears on the ballot.

    Thus there are safeguards to ensure that ineligible people do not get on the ballot. You are not guaranteed a do-over for a previously vetted candidate just because you didn’t like the outcome of the election.

  50. avatar
    milspec August 3, 2009 at 9:32 pm #

    Wow…just wow… care to think about having your teeth worked on by her.

  51. avatar
    nbc August 3, 2009 at 9:43 pm #

    Is this the smoking gun?

    An Australian BC with much of the same information

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×6212205

  52. avatar
    IzMeBee August 3, 2009 at 10:00 pm #

    my link earlier goes to the actual host for the bc in question.

  53. avatar
    nbc August 3, 2009 at 10:18 pm #

    Politijab, ObamaComspiracy are all overloaded now that Politijab has found the smoking gun.
    And the internet archives show that the jpg existed already in 2006

  54. avatar
    Bob August 3, 2009 at 11:41 pm #

    That Bomford certificate is the tell.

    Morans.

  55. avatar
    Kitau August 4, 2009 at 12:09 am #

    I happen to be Kenyan. I was born 1 month before Obama at Mombasa medical center. I am a teacher here at the MM Shaw Primary School in Kenya.
    I compared my birth certificate to the one that has been put on by Taitz and mine is exactly the same. I even have the same registrar and format. The type is identical.
    I am by nature a skeptical person. I teach science here and challenge most things that cannot be proven.
    So I went to an official registrar today and pulled up the picture on the web. They magnified it and determined it to be authentic. There is even a plaque with Registrar Lavenders name on it as he was a Brit and was in charge of the Registrar office from 1959 until January of 1964.
    The reason the date on the certificate says republic of Kenya is that we were a republic when the “copy” of the original was ordered.
    I stress the word “copy.”
    My copy also has republic of Kenya.
    So what you say is true about Kenya not being a republic at the time of Obama’s birth, however it was a republic when the copy was ordered.
    The birth certificate is genuine. I assure you it will be authenticated by a forensic auditor.
    We are very proud Obama was born here.
    We have a shrine for him and there are many people who remember his birth here as he had a white mother.
    They are being interviewed now by one of your media outlets. Fortunately they even have pictures of his parents with him immediately after his birth at the Mombasa hospital with the hospital in the back ground. It will be a proud day for us when it is proven that he was born here and a Kenyan became the most powerful man in the world.
    I encourage anyone to come here and visit.
    I will be happy to take you and show you the pictures at the hospital myself as well as my document and many others that are identical to what Taitz posted.
    God Bless.
    Kitau

  56. avatar
    srini August 4, 2009 at 12:14 am #

    I never thought birth of Obama will become such a big discussion topic. I am following this closely to see where this conspiracy ends. Meanwhile I have collected some good articles and sites related to Barack Obama (more than 200 sites or articles). If you are interested take a look at the below link
    http://markthispage.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-do-i-get-information-about-barack.html

  57. avatar
    catbit August 4, 2009 at 12:56 am #

    …wait! Where’s the part where you tell us that Barack Obama Sr. left 2 million US dollars at the hospital in your diapers, and if we provide our bank account/routing number, you will deposit the funds in our account if we promise to return it to Obama Jr?

    (Nicely written – can I use this somewhere?)

  58. avatar
    Rickey August 4, 2009 at 1:12 am #

    Considering that you’re a teacher, it’s odd that you misspelled the name of your school. It’s M.M. Shah Primary School, not M.M. SHAW Primary School.

    http://wikimapia.org/2178855/M-M-Shah-Primary-School

    A mere typo? Not likely, considering that the same bogus note with the same misspelling is being posted elsewhere on the Internet.

    Bye-bye, Kitau.

  59. avatar
    Kevin Bellas August 4, 2009 at 1:15 am #

    Ok Klattu

    How it’s going being Zanibar (Tanzania)? I say that since Mombasa was part of Tanzania til 1963. Wow you don’t even know what country you were born in.

    You birthers get dumber and dumber as the day gones by.

    Goodbye ya! moron

  60. avatar
    misha August 4, 2009 at 1:33 am #

    As long as everyone is getting on the Kenyan birth certificate train, MY Kenyan BC is here and here.

    I can’t tell you how proud I am to have been born in Mombasa. The souk there is fascinating.

  61. avatar
    NBC August 4, 2009 at 1:45 am #

    I happen to be Kenyan. I was born 1 month before Obama at Mombasa medical center. I am a teacher here at the MM Shaw Primary School in Kenya.

    Liar liar pants on fire… Post your certificate. Is it the same as the australian one which was found to be the ‘template’ for Obama’s fake Kenyan one?

  62. avatar
    Cee Cee August 4, 2009 at 1:47 am #

    Can we please stop giving any kind of credit to Ron Polarik. The man is a con artist himself. It doesn’t matter if he believe it’s a fake or not. He is a nobody and should be treated as a nobody.

    He is only trying to dig himself out of the hole he dug. So please lets not give him a hand coming out.

  63. avatar
    Expelliarmus August 4, 2009 at 1:50 am #

    Fascinating family, those Lavenders….
    http://www.bomford.net/worcestershire/images/DavidJeffreyBomfordBirthCertDoc65.jpg

  64. avatar
    sponson August 4, 2009 at 1:54 am #

    The origins of the “Kenyan” birth certificate forgery have been located, the forgers used an internet image of a 1964 Australian birth certificate from a genealogy web site as their template, the Australian certificate from 1964 even has Lavender and Miller as registrars. Also a number used on the document is identical. You can see the excellent internet sleuthing job, and the Australian birth certificate copied to make the forgery, here at this link.

  65. avatar
    wendy August 4, 2009 at 6:31 am #

    at this point… Orly should be PRAYING that she never makes it in front of any judge. She will be ripped to shreds.

  66. avatar
    Bob August 4, 2009 at 8:13 am #

    Has the operative complaint in Keyes v. Bowen been served yet?

  67. avatar
    Jeff R August 4, 2009 at 8:22 am #

    Seen this, yet?

    http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2646009.htm

  68. avatar
    AdrianInFlorida August 4, 2009 at 8:45 am #

    Wow that’s great, Kitau, you wouldn’t mind posting some links to photos/scans of your proof, would you? Didn’t think so.

  69. avatar
    AdrianInFlorida August 4, 2009 at 8:47 am #

    That’s probably why’s she’s in Israel right now, trying to avoid the inevitible arrest for filing fraudulent docs in a court case.

  70. avatar
    misha August 4, 2009 at 9:22 am #

    Congrats, Orly. I don’t know if I should award you this year’s Darwin Award, or Schmuck Award.

    In other news, Orly is going to be brokering kidney sales. (bada-bing)

  71. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2009 at 11:18 am #

    I was attempting to sow dissension among the birther ranks with that article.

  72. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2009 at 11:29 am #

    Yes. Notice of service to the defendants was posted on the District Court ECF web site on July 30, 2009. They look official and signed by the recipients.

  73. avatar
    Bob August 4, 2009 at 11:43 am #

    If you could it to the docket page, that would be most excellent.

  74. avatar
    dmon August 4, 2009 at 3:52 pm #

    Wouldnt you think a teacher would be able to spell the four letter name of the school she works at?

    http://photos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs139.snc1/5935_128462297159_778812159_3166595_3036672_n.jpg

    The school is M.M. Shah primary school….not Shaw

  75. avatar
    Cae January 31, 2010 at 8:32 am #

    Democrat Barack Hussein Obama

    ILLEGAL ALIEN