Main Menu

Dr. Conspiracy, a liar and a fraud?

Dr. Conspiracy you are telling damned lies!

It was a slow news day as the Obama Conspiracy Theories odometer rolled passed 29,000 comments, so I hit Google for inspiration and stumbled on the article above. (They didn’t provide a link to my page, which is Birthers Trash McCain, in case you’re interested.) This sparked my curiosity (especially after the recent comments by Linda over at The Right Side of Life) who else might be calling me names. The items below may be comments left on the web site, not necessarily the position of the site itself (especially the last one!)

  • Hillary and Me: Dr. Conspiracy, Sorry, there’s no polite way to say this. I’m not sure, but I think your comment ranks up there with one of the two or three dumbest comments I’ve ever read.
  • Birthers.org: Dr. Conspiracy you are telling damned lies
  • NiggerObama.com: Theres [sic] this guy named Dr. Conspiracy at obamaconspiracytheories.com [sic] … What a Dumb ass. [The writer had a point this time.]
  • The Volokh Conspiracy: Clearly Dr. Conspiracy cannot research or make proper arguments.
  • RosettaSister: Me thinks Dr. Conspiracy is suffering from delusions of grandeur!
  • The Betrayal (link no longer working): If anyone is foolish enough to believe that Dr. Conspiracy (or his site) is a reputable or informed site as opposed to being part of the Flying Monkey crowd, I’ve got news for you … tain’t so.
  • Constitutionally Speaking: [Dr. Conspiracy’s blog, www.obamaconspiracy.org] present themselves as objective purveyors of truth, but they are Goebbels-style propagandists.
  • ObamaConspiracy.org: “So-CAlled Dr of All Obama Conspiracy Theory Busters EXPOSED as a FRAUD!”
  • Politico.com: Doc, stop being fraudulent.

And the winner is:

  • ObamaConspiracy.org: @#$% you, Dr. QUEER Russian Conspiracy, you’re a below no life piece of @#$% old line Marxist and I have connections that can have your wrinkled old ass indicted and convicted for treason and deported from this country – REGARDLESS OF YOUR CITIZENSHIP STATUS or IMMIGRATION STATUS or YOUR “CONNECTIONS”. I know more about you than your own family does, you @#$%ing old fool.

Well, either I’m better liked than I thought, or my searches missed a lot.

120 Responses to Dr. Conspiracy, a liar and a fraud?

  1. avatar
    richCares January 23, 2010 at 2:33 pm #

    Congratualtions, being on a wing nut hate list is a great honor. Give us more, keep it up!

  2. avatar
    G January 23, 2010 at 2:37 pm #

    They have to try to slander and discredit what they fear. That is all that they’ve got.

  3. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 23, 2010 at 5:51 pm #

    If you folks see something else, let me know. The list looks rather puny.

  4. avatar
    misha January 23, 2010 at 9:55 pm #

    Coming from that crowd, it’s a complimment – believe me.

    Even Orly is semi-literate in English.

  5. avatar
    Black Lion January 23, 2010 at 11:18 pm #

    Dr. C, they hate the fact that you use the truth to refute their lies…That is why they try their best to discredit you….

  6. avatar
    Black Lion January 23, 2010 at 11:27 pm #

    Dr.C, interesting article over at the tROSL regarding the Chrysler case…

    http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2010/01/23/chrysler-bankruptcy-donofrio-defense-distracting-over-psychoanalyzed-birther-allegations/#respond

    “Update: This particular bankruptcy suit — originally broke by Portland Civil Rights Examiner’s Dianna Cotter – involves 76 ex-Chrysler dealers who believe that the Judge involved with the case, Robert J. Gonzalez, committed an unintentional fraud by misinterpreting Fiat’s executive, Alfredo Altavilla’s statement that restructuring had to occur before the Fiat purchase of Chrysler could occur. However, Mr. Altavilla never actually stated that restructuring had to occur before the deal could close. In his rejection Opinion, Judge Gonzalez made it appear as if Mr. Altavilla did testify that rejections were necessary for the deal to close.

    As Leo Donofrio pointed out in an email to The Right Side of Life, the Defense decided to inject a bit of Alinsky-ite tactic by specifically referencing Messr. Donofrio’s and Pidgeon’s past litigation concerning presidential eligibility as the basis for why they have waited to bring such a petition now”

    It seems like Leo is upset regarding some of th language in the defense motion…For instance the motions says the following…Which is the truth but Leo doesn’t like it…

    “Birthers are launching yet another scheme to challenge President Obama’s legitimacy as President of the United States. The scheme involves a legal maneuver known as “quo warranto,” a prerogative writ requiring the person to whom it is directed to show what authority he has for exercising some right or power (or “franchise”) he claims to hold. This new attempt to get at Obama is a circuitous affair, centering on the Chrysler bailout, and Obama’s authority to use Troubled Asset Relief Program funds to bail out Chrysler. Former Chrysler dealers who lost their businesses as part of the restructuring of the automobile company are filing a legal challenge to that restructuring in bankruptcy court. . . . The attorneys of record are . . . Leo Donofrio . . . and Stephen Pidgeon.”

    Commentary by Phil over at tROSL…

    “my non-attorney view, the idea that the Defense would literally invent a basis for the rationale of why the Plaintiffs are coming forward at this point based on completely unrelated issues is indefensible and is very similar to the modus operandi of many “opposition” commenters on this blog. Really, it is akin to saying that one is incapable of holding a particular viewpoint because said petitioner has exhibited views that are considered unconventional, esoteric or out of the mainstream (in some cases, even worse pejorative-sounding language).

    While it is true that Messrs. Donofrio and Pidgeon have already announced their intentions to file a quo warranto petition in the District of Columbia, that fact is judicially irrelevant to this case and deals with a completely unrelated issue. In fact, this site has already documented the fact that the Chrysler bankruptcy petition will be resolved based solely and completely upon the dealers’ wishes, which, in theory, could involve a settlement (which would fly in the face of the concept that somehow presidential eligibility has any basis for pushing forward on a Chrysler bankruptcy case).”

    And of course the Post and Fail gets involved…

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/23/donofrio-pidgeon-defend-motion-for-reconsideration-in-chrysler-case/

    Any thoughts? It looks like Leo is upset that the defense is making the court take note of the fact that they are birthers and this may be part of a larger QW or birther lawsuit….

  7. avatar
    misha January 24, 2010 at 12:43 am #

    Remember, there are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics. (bada-bing)

  8. avatar
    brygenon January 24, 2010 at 2:58 am #

    I guess we can all see how much they’ve hurt poor Dr. C’s feelings.

  9. avatar
    Lupin January 24, 2010 at 3:01 am #

    The train of their insults, pulled by the locomotive of their stupidity and fueled by the coal of their racism, skids on the rails of your accuracy to stop at the station of our contempt.

  10. avatar
    BlackLion January 24, 2010 at 10:54 am #

    Even better is the new post over at tROSL.

    http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2010/01/23/the-curious-case-of-ellie-light/#comments

    “Recently, there has been a suspicious “letter to the editor” swirling around a number of different places across the country, all claiming to be from one “Ellie Light.” It speaks very highly of the President; you can see an example of such a letter at the Gainesville, GA-based Gainesville Times.”

    In other words the birthers are reviving the claim that we all all paid obots and all of the eligibility supporters are part of some sort of Alinksy tactic headed by Cass Sunstein….Really delusional stuff…

  11. avatar
    kimba January 24, 2010 at 11:49 am #

    Somebody wrote a letter to several papers. Geez, boo frickin hoo. Write a letter back.
    Better yet, call the Wahmbulance. tRSOL is barely on life support.

  12. avatar
    Ballantine January 24, 2010 at 1:47 pm #

    As someone who worked on both the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies, I don’t want to comment too much on this, but I really don’t get his quo warranto theory. Is he claiming that Obama was acting as a corporation without authorization? How is the government telling a corporation what to do as a condition of continued financing acting as a corporation. And even if there were, how are the dealers interested parties who would have the true authorization to act as such corporation. Does anyone understand this claim?

  13. avatar
    Bob Weber January 24, 2010 at 1:56 pm #

    I love that part of Ms. Cotter’s remark that Judge Gonzalez committed “unintentional fraud”. (!!!!) IANAL, but I know that the law requires intent in matters of fraud. God save us all if we could be convicted of “unintentional fraud”!

    There’s also the slight matter that it also requires intent to gain from one’s actions. That’s why the prankster who foisted the Bomford Kenya BC hoax on the birfers isn’t guilty of fraud – no intent for gain, just to help the birfers make fools of themselves.

  14. avatar
    Saint James January 24, 2010 at 2:13 pm #

    “I have connections that can have your wrinkled old ass indicted and convicted for treason and deported from this country – REGARDLESS OF YOUR CITIZENSHIP STATUS or IMMIGRATION STATUS or YOUR “CONNECTIONS”.”

    Dr.C, Can you request the court where you want to be deported and if that’s the case can you also request to tag along your friends?

    Please ask the court to deport you to HAWAII! Please tag some of us along as I,ve not been to Hawaii! Please! Please! pretty Please! Ha ha ha ha ha

  15. avatar
    misha January 24, 2010 at 3:11 pm #

    Joseph: “I have connections that can have your wrinkled old ass indicted and convicted for treason and deported from this country”

    Rush Limbaugh: ‘drug abusers should be stripped of their citizenship, and thrown out of the country.’ So when is he leaving?

    Hey Joseph: I want a trip to Amsterdam.

  16. avatar
    Black Lion January 24, 2010 at 6:20 pm #

    I guess Dr. C’s site is infected with a birther troll…They can be eliminated by using such terms as Wong Kim Ark and reminding them of the Barack Obama was born in HI statement by Dr. Fukino…

  17. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- January 24, 2010 at 8:15 pm #

    ‘NiggerObama.com’

    But birtherism has nothing to do about race! Really! Trust us!

  18. avatar
    kimba January 24, 2010 at 8:17 pm #

    Oh please, that “I’m going to declare your ass an enemy combatant and have you sent to Gitmo” crap is so last President.

  19. avatar
    chufho January 24, 2010 at 11:56 pm #

    infringment

  20. avatar
    NBc January 25, 2010 at 12:02 am #

    I see you also do not get it. I am not surprised as the approach chosen will fail even quicker than Orly’s failed attempt to initiate a Quo Warranto proceeding in CA Court or Mario Apuzzo’s hopes to initiate one in PA Courts.

    Without the involvement of the Government, no Quo Warranto can take place. And of course, there is no precedent to support the idea that QW can be used against a duly elected President and much evidence that goes against such a position.

    But that will never prevent them from trying, and failing.

  21. avatar
    misha January 25, 2010 at 3:25 am #

    Related: anyone know about Orly and the sanction? That would be a great name for a band. And now, for your listening pleasure, Orly And The Sanctions! Laurence Welk, step aside.

    Anyone ever see Orly and Carol Channing in the same room, at the same time? Amirite?

  22. avatar
    Bovril January 25, 2010 at 7:24 am #

    T-shirt franchise…?

    “My parents took me to court to see Orly oust the Usurper and all I got was this crappy t-shirt”.

    “Jurisdiction….we don’t need no stinking jurisdiction”

    “Wong rules….Birthers drool”

    “Any legal plan that includes calling the judge a traitor is a BAD plan”

    “I laugh at your $10,000 fine and raise you $10,000”

    “Have crayons will print birth certificate”

    “I was born here you Muppet”

    “Have PayPal will travel ….on your dime”

    “Facts happen…then you whine”

    “Vattel….Just say NO!”

    I’m sure there’s money in this one…..8-)

  23. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 25, 2010 at 7:36 am #

    NiggerObama.com is not a racist site. The blog title is sarcasm (something I didn’t realize when I first listed a link to it).

  24. avatar
    Black Lion January 25, 2010 at 10:16 am #

    Even funnier from our pal the infamous “Pixel Patriot”…

    Pixel Patriot says:
    January 25, 2010 at 9:38 am
    Orly may be running for office.
    Light at the end of the tunnel. She would enforce ALL of the laws, not a la cart. Give her any and all of the support that you can.

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

    Important
    Posted on | January 24, 2010 |

    Several of my supporters have recommended that I run for an office of the Secretary of State of Ca or Attorney General. As a secretary of State or attorney general I will have standing to try in court issues that were tabu to all of us as individuals. Here is a situation:

    1. we don’t need 50 secretaries of state or 50 Attorney Generals suing Obama. If only one sues and gets discovery, we are done

    2. in CA the democrat running for this office is an incumbent Deborah Bowen, who was worthless, didn’t check Obama’s records, and whom I sued on behalf of ambassador Keyes in Keyes et al v Bowen et al and on behalf of vice presidential candidate Gail Lightfoot in Lightfoot v Bowen. I reached the Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts decided to hear the case in the conference of all 9 justices on January 23, 2009. On January 21st, right after the inauguration somebody erased the case from the docket. they re-entered it on the 22nd and during the conference on the 23rd decided not to proceed with oral argument. Later, when I talked to Justice Scalia, he didn’t remember anything about the case.

    3. Republican running for office is Damon Dunn, who admitted to never even vote until last year. He was a football player and later he was in real estate. The only reason he was endorsed so far, is because he is an African American, and Republicans want to have an African American to show diversity. He admits to having no knowledge or experience with law, elections or election law

    4. In terms of the office of the Attorney General, incumbent Jerry Brown is not running. From both parties we have state legislators, who termed out and are looking for a new seat to warm. Considering billions of dollars of debt in CA, all of the state legislators are lousy.

    5. I will need to raise 3-4 thousand dollars to start with, probably I will need about 100,000 from start to finish

    6. I will need to set a separate account, I will need a campaign manager, volunteers.

    I need your input. you can e-mail me at dr_taitz@yahoo.com. put running for office in the heading

  25. avatar
    Saint James January 25, 2010 at 10:55 am #

    misha: I just quoted that from the birther attacker. It was meant to be a sarcasm! ha ha ha ha

    Why don’t we all join Dr.C? Let’s ask him where he prefers to be deported. I’d really go for Hawaii. Amsterdam is also a nice place but it get too cold in that place!

  26. avatar
    Scientist January 25, 2010 at 11:04 am #

    Interesting note. The President was summoned for jury duty back in Illinois this week, something only citizens are called to do. He informed them he is busy.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35051076/ns/politics-white_house/?GT1=43001

    I’m curious to know if any other President has been called to jury duty while in office and, if so, if any of them actually served. It would be pretty neat to see the Prez on a jury for some accident case. Watch out Mario!!

  27. avatar
    Saint James January 25, 2010 at 11:44 am #

    Secretary of State of California? Orly can’t even spell! Her discourse is nothing but gooblydegook and word salad!

    Attorney General of California? Oh my goodness!… a lawyer with a zero batting average?

    She should team up with Andy Martin and Ron Sinclair, Lucas Smith and Charles Lincoln…The Lunatic Party of America!

    The reality of all these is that Orly can’t tolerate to be out of the limelight. Her spotlight is now dimming. There is nothing she can do about the President’s legitimacy. She knows that she is boxed in and trapped. Her paypall donation is drying up! She needs to create a new gimmick to keep the money flowing!

    Orly needs some serious mental health intervention. Check in with her psychiatrist, get an electro convulsive therapy (ECT) and have her bipolar medications adjusted!

  28. avatar
    Black Lion January 25, 2010 at 11:51 am #

    Maybe she could get Charles Lincoln III to manage her campaign…And she could pay him with her “special talents” that are better than 90% of the younger women around….Can you imagine that dysfunctional campaign…

  29. avatar
    NbC January 25, 2010 at 12:18 pm #

    I thought only US Citizens have to perform jury duty 😉

  30. avatar
    Saint James January 25, 2010 at 12:59 pm #

    I’m sure… Orly can’t even win Rancho Santa Margarita. She just wants more paypall donations that’s it! Try to send an e-mail to Orly opposing her plan to run for public office, She will attack you! ha ha ha ha ha

  31. avatar
    thisoldhippie January 25, 2010 at 5:16 pm #

    On her site Orly has posted her “quo warranto” that she filed today. Man, is it some lousy writing.

  32. avatar
    NBc January 25, 2010 at 5:42 pm #

    Hilarious… She is soooo in over her head… It’s all about her her her… Her status, her sanctions, her distress,….

    Since she clearly lacks standing, the motion will soon be denied.

    Poor Orly…

  33. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 25, 2010 at 7:08 pm #

    How is the State of Illinois to determine the current citizenship status of an ex-patriot who immigrates back to America?

  34. avatar
    Scientist January 25, 2010 at 7:21 pm #

    Firts, the word is spelled expatriate, meaning someone who lives outside the country thet were born in. It has no effect on your citizenship. Millions of Americans live overseas. They vote in Federal elections (in some cases in state elections as well) and pay taxes (on their worldwide income). They may get called to jury duty, but living overseas is a reasonable excuse not to serve.

    If and when they return to the US, they pick up their lives like anybody else. They are not “immigrating” but returning home.

  35. avatar
    SFJeff January 25, 2010 at 7:36 pm #

    I think he really meant ex-patriot, which of course means a person who used to belong to the Tea Party movement.

    Or maybe me meant a former member of the football team?

  36. avatar
    Saint James January 25, 2010 at 7:40 pm #

    “Or maybe me meant a former member of the football team?”

    ha ha ha ha ha ha!

  37. avatar
    Rickey January 25, 2010 at 7:44 pm #

    Orly also has filed this in the Liberi case. It is awash in irony, as she accuses Phil Berg of filing frivolous lawsuits and berates him for filing an affidavit from someone Orly alleges is a convicted forger – and she isn’t referring to her own favorite forger, Lucas Smith.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/25490625/LIBERI-et-al-v-TAITZ-et-al-RESPONSE-by-Appellee-Orly-Taitz-to-Motion-to-Expedite-and-MOTION-by-Appellee-Transport-Room

    In addition, we now have the transcript of the January 12 hearing in the Rivernider case during which Berg grilled Orly on the witness stand. What a sight that must have been.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/25787243/Rivernider-Jan-12-2010-Hearing-Transcript

  38. avatar
    Greg January 25, 2010 at 8:06 pm #

    The verb “expatriate” can be used in the law to mean the loss of citizenship.

  39. avatar
    misha January 25, 2010 at 8:26 pm #

    “How is the State of Illinois to determine the current citizenship status of an ex-patriot who immigrates back to America?”

    A state does not make a determination. It is decided by the Galactic Federation. Where were you in school?

  40. avatar
    Northland10 January 25, 2010 at 10:04 pm #

    Let see, returning to US…

    1. First stop – immigration
    2. When 18 – register for selective service (and have SSN, only one is necessary).
    3. Going to college – Financial aid forms require stating that you were registered with selective service (at least in the 80s and 90s – as I experienced that).
    4. Getting a job – then there is the I-9.
    5. Drivers License – Lots of IDs to present here, including a Birth Certificate or Passport (or naturalization cert or temporary resident card) and Social Security Card.

    This any many other items create a long paper trail. And yet, nobody has shown proof the he ever lost citizenship. He must be the envy of all past presidents, he can stop the constant leaks of politics. Nixon would have loved to be him.

  41. avatar
    Gordon January 26, 2010 at 12:22 am #

    I researched this last night. Could only find four presidents that had been summoned to serve on juries. Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama.
    Ron got a deferment, but was never asked again. Bill was excused. Bush didn’t show up (Actually Skipped), but was forgiven because he said he didn’t get it in the mail. Barack Obama was excused.

    In fact, no modern court has had a sitting president on a jury. Ronald Reagan came the closest when he was summoned in the 1980s by Santa Barbara County, Calif. He was granted a deferment until he was out of office”.

    “Former President Bill Clinton was willing to serve on a case involving a gang-related shooting when he was called in 2003, but the judge dismissed him. Then the defendant, convicted and sentenced to 18 years, appealed, claiming he was deprived of his rights because Mr. Clinton was excused”.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0110/p01s03-uspo.html

  42. avatar
    Bovril January 26, 2010 at 7:23 am #

    Yay,

    I made the Post and Fail “Out the Obot Brown shirt Fascist commie fellow traveler list”.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/26/outing-obamas-internet-brownshirts/

    Now if I was in fact such a nasty Obot I would use said declaration of (what they believe is correct) personal data to file a harassing DMCA take down notice on their web site.

    They really should be a little more aware…then again if they were they wouldn’t be birthers

  43. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 8:27 am #

    1) Immigration … the expat enters the country illegally. Shouldn’t be too difficult. Expat “forgets he renounced” his citizenship and acquires a certified copy of his BC and request a new SSN card using his new certified copy of his BC.

    2) How does the Selective Service Admin know the expat renounced? Why can’t the registrant use the BC and SSN issued to them before they renounced? Does the State Dept notify the SSA or SSS of renuncients?

    3) Getting a job … work for cash only, use certified copy of BC and SSN card issued before renouncement.

    4) Same story … use BC and SSN card issued before renouncement. How does DL bureau know BC and SSN card are not valid because petitioner renounced their citizenship a few years ago?

  44. avatar
    Greg January 26, 2010 at 9:42 am #

    Hey, Sven, still waiting for proof that Obama renounced.

    I’m not holding my breath – I’m not suicidal.

  45. avatar
    Black Lion January 26, 2010 at 10:10 am #

    Sven, you may want to look up the difference between fantasy and reality…No proof equals fantasy…I guess we should be happy that you have given up on you ridiculous Indonesian refugee and diplomatic consular passport theories…However unfortunately we are stuck with you pushing your even more ridiculous theory that a child under 10 renounced his US citizenship….And wihtout providing any proof that it happend or showing us even one instance of it happening at all…A minor renouncing is something we all know is vitually impossible to do….But you somehow think it happened. I guess you also believe in Area 51 and that the moon landing was faked…

  46. avatar
    Black Lion January 26, 2010 at 10:40 am #

    Charlton is a tool…But he is following the new birther script..Which is anyone that is pro Obama or anti birther is a paid operative…And if you happen to post on multiple sites or are prolific, then they want to “out you” as such…Over at tROSL Phil devoted an entire article to this…And basically made the same assumption…This is no different than when the birthers and Charlton attempted to wage a battle against the websites that were Pro Obama like Dr. C’s or Patricks…This reeks of desperation and fear by the birthers…Always blame some sort of conspiracy….

  47. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 11:02 am #

    Black Lion: Sven, you may want to look up the difference between fantasy and reality…No proof equals fantasy…I guess we should be happy that you have given up on you ridiculous Indonesian refugee and diplomatic consular passport theories…

    No!

    Barry Soetoro was provided with U.S. Travel documents by the U.S. State Department as an Indonesian Refugee in the early seventies.

    Shortly after that, B.O. Sr. appeared before a Hawaii Family Court to contest the Soetoro due to lack of consent by the birth father. The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr. and S.A.D. (a birth hospital or doctor’s attestation was not published because the record was created by Court Order through testimony and not an attestation by a hosptial admin. or delivery doctor).

    BO is stateless. The opportunity to recover his U.S. Citizenship closed when he was 18 years and 6 months old.

  48. avatar
    Lupin January 26, 2010 at 11:12 am #

    Well he sure wasn’t stateless when he visited France as an American tourist with an American passport in the 80s.

  49. avatar
    Greg January 26, 2010 at 11:21 am #

    Yawn. Just repeating the same nonsense without proof.

  50. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 12:16 pm #

    Lupin: Well he sure wasn’t stateless when he visited France as an American tourist with an American passport in the 80s.

    I wonder if Barry Soetoro forgot to tell the DoJ (Indonesia) the Soetoro adoption was voided. Would the Hawaii Family Court notify anyone in Indonesia one of their citizens is having their adoption voided in the U.S. because the Kenyan birth father objected in Hawaii?

    If Barry didn’t tell any official in Indonesia he was stateless due to having his adoption voided, how would they know? For that matter, did the Hawaii Family Court notify the U.S. Department they were voiding the adoption of an Indonesian citizen (minor) due to the objection of the Kenyan birth father? And finally, did the Hawaii Family Court notify any official in Kenya?

    Indonesian passports are issued to Indonesian citizens, whether living in Indonesia or overseas, for the purpose of international travel. It can also be used as a proof of nationality. They are issued by the Department of Justice and Human Rights, the Directorate of Immigration and the government’s immigration representatives overseas. A typical Indonesian passport is valid for a period of five years and has 24 or 48 pages.

  51. avatar
    Black Lion January 26, 2010 at 12:24 pm #

    Just provide us with some proof and we will believe you. What is much more probable was that a young Barack obtained a US passport in HI before moving to Indonesia….And since he visited HI on at least one occasion before he moved back when he was 10, he would have used said passport to travel. And when he returned for good, guess what, he used his US passport to return to the US. He mentions this in his book. So we have a plausible scenario, the President, being a US citizen, having a US passport, or a more improbable scenario, that somehow that a US citizen, who speaks no Indonesian, would be considered some sort of refugee. And even more hilarious is your contention that Obama SR, who wasn’t that interested in his child, would fly all the way to HI to contest some imaginary adoption. But never give us a reason on what said adoption occured. Your so called theory has more holes in it than swiss cheese….

  52. avatar
    Black Lion January 26, 2010 at 12:31 pm #

    How could something that never happened be voided? Indonesia never considered him to be a citizen. And under their laws he could not be one. Since he has a US passport why would he need a Indonesian one? And how would he get one? And how did he fly to Indonesia in the first place. He did not travel with his Mom so he had to travel on his own passport. And since he was not born in Indonesia, they would have never given him one adoption or no adoption. Especially when it would have been simple for him to just go down to the post office and get his US one. So he would not be stateless because he could not have lost his US citizenship, unless you can show us proof that the US has ever accepted a renounciation of a minor. And why would the Hawaiian government notify Kenya of anything. As far as they were concerned, Barack was an American. Your theory is so dumb it cannot connect any dots…You attempt to piece it together but fail. And here in America, we need something called proof. Please, just one piece that proves an adoption or a renounciation. Or that he had a passport of any other country than the US.

  53. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 1:16 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: No!Barry Soetoro was provided with U.S. Travel documents by the U.S. State Department as an Indonesian Refugee in the early seventies.Shortly after that, B.O. Sr. appeared before a Hawaii Family Court to contest the Soetoro due to lack of consent by the birth father. The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr. and S.A.D. (a birth hospital or doctor’s attestation was not published because the record was created by Court Order through testimony and not an attestation by a hosptial admin. or delivery doctor).BO is stateless. The opportunity to recover his U.S. Citizenship closed when he was 18 years and 6 months old.

    You simply contradicted yourself…your conclusion is not supported by your assumption. I’m almost tempted to prove that to you but, I’m giving you the opportunity to vendicate yourself here! Let me reiterate…your deduction is totally way off base! You shot yourself in the mouth so to speak!

  54. avatar
    SFJeff January 26, 2010 at 1:20 pm #

    “Expat “forgets he renounced” his citizenship and acquires a certified copy of his BC”

    I wouldn’t be surprised. If I renounced my citizenship as a 6 year old, I probably would forget it also.

    Sven is still writing his magnus: “The True Story of President Obama’s life as Imagined by me- A Novel of epic Delusions”

  55. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 1:57 pm #

    SvenMagnussen… What the heck…let me just put you out of your misery!

    Let’s assume for a minute that what you are saying has proof and you’ve posted as I quote…

    “The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    With the above quote…YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER when you concluded that Barack Obama is STATELESS!

    And why is that? READ THE QUOTE AGAIN and I quote…

    “A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    Let me reiterate this for EMPHASIS…

    YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER with your own word…”AFFIRMED”

    Obama was never STATELESS based on your own argument!

    It will behoove you to check and read Patrick McKinnion’s articles about Obama’s Indonesian citizenship myth. They are meticulous and scholarly written which will put all those fly-by-night birthers lawyer wannabees to SHAME especially the California Attorney General wannabee Orly Taitz.

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/birther-mythbusting.html

  56. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 2:17 pm #

    Saint James;

    Let me guess, you’re one of those “thinkers” who conclude a minor cannot renounce their citizenship because their parents, the dogcatcher, or a grocery store clerk taking a cigarette break cannot renounce the minor’s citizenship on their behalf.

    Sec. Clinton needs to rewrite the FAM because there is a whole section of policies and procedures to be followed when a minor wants to renounce his citizenship.

    I don’t know about you, but I think there might be 294 million Indonesian Nationals in Indonesia wondering why Americans think its so terrible to renounce their U.S. citizenship and naturalize as an Indonesian when their mother marries an Indonesian native and moves to their country.

    Buy yourself a clue, Saint James. Indonesian citizenship is not a step down.

  57. avatar
    NbC January 26, 2010 at 2:35 pm #

    Let me guess, you’re one of those “thinkers” who conclude a minor cannot renounce their citizenship because their parents, the dogcatcher, or a grocery store clerk taking a cigarette break cannot renounce the minor’s citizenship on their behalf.

    It’s not just a conclusion but one based on legal precedent.

    Your turn my dear ‘thinker’

  58. avatar
    NbC January 26, 2010 at 2:48 pm #

    The US Government’s position is

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.

    Of course, Obama could not gain citizenship in Indonesia until reaching the age of 18. He was too old to gain it through his step father.

  59. avatar
    NbC January 26, 2010 at 2:50 pm #

    Of course there is NO evidence that Obama renounced his citizenship and since by his own admission, he returned to the US as a US citizen, such claims require more than a pure hypothetical possibility.
    It is in fact doubtful that any US immigration officer would have allowed a 5-10 year old to renounce his US citizenship, especially when he would be unable to gain citizenship of the Country of residence.

  60. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 3:02 pm #

    SvenMagnussen…No No No! I will not allow you to go off tangent here. Don’t go off on your talking points!… LET ME SAY THIS AGAIN!

    YOU SHOT YOURSELF POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER IN THE MOUTH…WITH THE WORD “AFFIRMED”

    YOU MIGHT AS WELL ACCEPT THAT YOU DEBUNKED YOUR OWN STATEMENT!

    SvenMagnussen… What the heck…let me just put you out of your misery!

    Let’s assume for a minute that what you are saying has proof and you’ve posted as I quote…

    “The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    With the above quote…YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER when you concluded that Barack Obama is STATELESS!

    And why is that? READ THE QUOTE AGAIN and I quote…

    “A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    Let me reiterate this for EMPHASIS…

    YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER with your own word…”AFFIRMED”

    Obama was never STATELESS based on your own argument!

    It will behoove you to check and read Patrick McKinnion’s articles about Obama’s Indonesian citizenship myth. They are meticulous and scholarly written which will put all those fly-by-night birthers lawyer wannabees to SHAME especially the California Attorney General wannabee Orly Taitz.

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/birther-mythbusting.html

  61. avatar
    Expelliarmus January 26, 2010 at 3:21 pm #

    I suppose you believe that 6 year old’s should be allowed to vote, or should be required to register for the draft?

    The whole concept of being a “minor” is rooted in the concept that small children are not capable of understanding and appreciating the rights and responsibilities that go along with “citizenship”.

    At the time that Obama was born, the age of majority in the US was generally considered to be 21; subsequently it was lowered to 18.

    But however you look at it, he would have been too young to be making decisions about citizenship at the age he was when living in Indonesia.

  62. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 26, 2010 at 3:33 pm #

    Thanks for clarifying with your excellent example of fantasy.

  63. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 3:48 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Thanks for clarifying with your excellent example of fantasy.

    Lost in this discussion was the theory I presented for the justification of a valid HI COLB which does not list a hospital, doctor or midwife’s attestation or attestation from a hospital administrator.

    I wonder if cooler heads would prevail on both sides of the discussion if the Obots would admit the HI Family Court ordered the creation of the COLB based on sworn testimony heard in Court, thus the reason a hospital and doctor’s signature are not present.

  64. avatar
    NBc January 26, 2010 at 3:52 pm #

    Lost in this discussion was the theory I presented for the justification of a valid HI COLB which does not list a hospital, doctor or midwife’s attestation or attestation from a hospital administrator.

    What you incorrectly call a theory is more commonly known as speculation not grounded in any fact, or fantasy.

    You are attempting to create an atmosphere of distrust where the lack of evidence and facts is seen as evidence of some wrong doing.

    Your novel interpretation of the Constitution is well understood and rejected by it.

    Logic, reason and Constitutional reasoning all reject your attempt at fantasy.

    Luckily this Country has a Constitution which protects us against such foolishness, while of course under the concept of freedom of speech allowing any such fantasy to be shared but rejecting that such fantasies become relevant in law.

  65. avatar
    SFJeff January 26, 2010 at 3:58 pm #

    Sven,

    Still waiting for you provide one example of a 6 year old successfully renouncing his citizenship.

  66. avatar
    SFJeff January 26, 2010 at 4:00 pm #

    “the HI Family Court ordered the creation of the COLB based on sworn testimony heard in Court, thus the reason a hospital and doctor’s signature are not present.”

    I think all of us are waiting for you to provide some evidence- any evidence.

  67. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 4:04 pm #

    Oh NO! I will not let you get off the hook so easily! It’s either you concede or continue discussing your argument before allowing you to go to another talking point!

    HERE IT IS AGAIN!

    YOU SHOT YOURSELF POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER IN THE MOUTH…WITH THE WORD “AFFIRMED”

    YOU MIGHT AS WELL ACCEPT THAT YOU DEBUNKED YOUR OWN STATEMENT!

    SvenMagnussen… What the heck…let me just put you out of your misery!

    Let’s assume for a minute that what you are saying has proof and you’ve posted as I quote…

    “The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    With the above quote…YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER when you concluded that Barack Obama is STATELESS!

    And why is that? READ THE QUOTE AGAIN and I quote…

    “A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”

    Let me reiterate this for EMPHASIS…

    YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER with your own word…”AFFIRMED”

    Obama was never STATELESS based on your own argument!

    It will behoove you to check and read Patrick McKinnion’s articles about Obama’s Indonesian citizenship myth. They are meticulous and scholarly written which will put all those fly-by-night birthers lawyer wannabees to SHAME especially the California Attorney General wannabee Orly Taitz.

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/birther-mythbusting.html

  68. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 4:11 pm #

    Saint James: SvenMagnussen…No No No! I will not allow you to go off tangent here. Don’t go off on your talking points!… LET ME SAY THIS AGAIN!YOU SHOT YOURSELF POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER IN THE MOUTH…WITH THE WORD “AFFIRMED”YOU MIGHT AS WELL ACCEPT THAT YOU DEBUNKED YOUR OWN STATEMENT!SvenMagnussen… What the heck…let me just put you out of your misery!Let’s assume for a minute that what you are saying has proof and you’ve posted as I quote…“The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”With the above quote…YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER when you concluded that Barack Obama is STATELESS!And why is that? READ THE QUOTE AGAIN and I quote…
    “A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”Let me reiterate this for EMPHASIS…YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE MOUTH POINT BLANK AND DEAD CENTER with your own word…”AFFIRMED”Obama was never STATELESS based on your own argument!It will behoove you to check and read Patrick McKinnion’s articles about Obama’s Indonesian citizenship myth. They are meticulous and scholarly written which will put all those fly-by-night birthers lawyer wannabees to SHAME especially the California Attorney General wannabee Orly Taitz.http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/birther-mythbusting.html

    Do you understand a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN), a Statement of Understanding, and an Oath of Renunciation are on file for a person named “Barry Soetoro” at the U.S. State Department?

    When Barack Hussein Obama II was adopted, his name was changed to Barry Soetoro. Barry Soetoro is a U.S. Citizen when he moved to Indonesia. Barry appeared at a U.S. Embassy in Indonesia to renounce his U.S. Citizenship to become an Indonesian citizen because Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship.

    Barry Soetoro took his CLN to the Indonesian Immigration and Naturalization office and proved he had renounced his U.S. Citizenship. Barry began the process to naturalize as an Indonesian citizen. By the time he was in the second grade, Barry was an Indonesian citizen.

    In the early seventies, B.O. Sr. complained to a HI Family Court he did not consent to the Soetoro adoption. The Court agreed to void the adoption. The Court did not know or did not address the fact Barry Soetoro was an Indonesian citizen at the time B.O. Sr. was complaining he didn’t consent to the adoption.

    When the Soetoro adoption was voided, Barry Soetoro was stateless. The HI Family Court Ordered a new vital record created for Barack Hussein Obama II. To become a U.S Citizen after a CLN has been issued, Barack Hussein Obama II would have had to appear before sworn a Federal Officer authorized to administer an Oath of Allegiance to him. The HI Family Court is not authorized to administer Oath of Allegiance on behalf of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.

  69. avatar
    JoZeppy January 26, 2010 at 4:24 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: Do you understand a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN), a Statement of Understanding, and an Oath of Renunciation are on file for a person named “Barry Soetoro” at the U.S. State Department?

    Proof?

    Your delusions do not make it so.

  70. avatar
    Black Lion January 26, 2010 at 4:41 pm #

    Sven, you are coming off looking more delusional. Do you have proof such documents exist? Of course you don’t. You have been writing your delusional theories so long like Mario you are begining to believe in them. However here in the real world proof is required. You made up a theory that would be hard to believe even on “24” or in a Vince Flynn novel. And you defend it without one scrap of proof. Even the most hardcore birther wouldn’t believe in your fantasy. Prove me wrong. Send it over to Charlton over at the Post and Fail or post it on Orly’s website. Even her trolls would laugh at it and wonder what drugs you are smoking. But prove us all wrong…So us some proof…

  71. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 5:17 pm #

    SvenMagnussen, You apparently did not research the laws on citizenship! Let me quote you…

    “Barry appeared at a U.S. Embassy in Indonesia to renounce his U.S. Citizenship to become an Indonesian citizen because Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship.
    Barry Soetoro took his CLN to the Indonesian Immigration and Naturalization office and proved he had renounced his U.S. Citizenship. Barry began the process to naturalize as an Indonesian citizen. By the time he was in the SECOND GRADE, Barry was an Indonesian citizen.”

    I kind of wander where you pulled that speculation from? A lot of birthers pull theirs straight out of their asses! Here’s the law! There’s no way a child can renounce his citizenship nor parents could renounce the citizenship of their children!

    Nationality Act of 1940, Section 401:
    “A person who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by: (a) Obtaining naturalization in a foreign state, either upon his own application or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person: Provided, however, That nationality not be lost as the result of the naturalization of a parent unless and until the child shall have attained the AGE OF TWENTY-THREE years without acquiring permanent residence in the United States:…..”

    Nationality Act of 1940, Section 407:
    “A person having American nationality, who is a minor and is residing in a foreign state with or under the legal custody of a parent who loses American nationality under section 404 of this Act, shall at the same time lose his American nationality if such minor has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state: Provided, That, in such case, American nationality shall not be lost as the result of loss of American nationality by the parent unless and until the child attains the AGE OF TWENTY-THREE years without having acquired permanent residence in the United States.”

    “When the Soetoro adoption was voided, Barry Soetoro was stateless. The HI Family Court Ordered a new vital record created for Barack Hussein Obama II.”

    Let now assume that Obama was adopted (no proof of that) and it was voided (no proof of that). And even if a new vital record was created WITH THE WORD “AFFIRMED” REDACTED (no proof of that), Obama was NEVER STATELESS because he never lost his Natural Born Citizenship. He did not lost his citizenship through adoption. He can’t renounce his US citizenship as a minor. (refer back to Nationality Act of 1940, Section 401 and 407).

    “To become a U.S Citizen after a CLN has been issued, Barack Hussein Obama II would have had to appear before sworn a Federal Officer authorized to administer an Oath of Allegiance to him.”

    Obama did not have to appear before a Federal Officer…because he never lost his citizenship nor was he stateless at any given time.

    What about Indonesian Law? FORGET ABOUT THAT!!! AND HERE IS WHY!

    Hague Convention of 1930

    Article 1 It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals. This law shall be recognised by other States in so far as it is consistent with international conventions, international custom, and the principles of law generally recognised with regard to nationality.

    Article 2
    Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that State.

    In other words, the Hague Convention of 1930 states in the first two articles that it is up to each country to determine under their own law who is a citizen of that country.

    And under US law, Obama was and is a US citizen, therefore under the Hague Convention of 1930, it is US law that determines his citizenship.

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-citizenship-myth-part-2.html

  72. avatar
    Greg January 26, 2010 at 5:36 pm #

    Do you understand a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN), a Statement of Understanding, and an Oath of Renunciation are on file for a person named “Barry Soetoro” at the U.S. State Department?

    I don’t think anyone but you understands that. Since we’re not privy to your fevered hallucinations, how could we understand that?

  73. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 5:44 pm #

    SvenMagnussen, You apparently did not research the laws on citizenship! Let me quote you…

    YOU SAID:…“Barry appeared at a U.S. Embassy in Indonesia to renounce his U.S. Citizenship to become an Indonesian citizen because Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship.
    Barry Soetoro took his CLN to the Indonesian Immigration and Naturalization office and proved he had renounced his U.S. Citizenship. Barry began the process to naturalize as an Indonesian citizen. By the time he was in the SECOND GRADE, Barry was an Indonesian citizen.”

    MY ANSWER:…I kind of wander where you pulled that speculation from? A lot of birthers pull theirs straight out of their asses! Here’s the law! There’s no way a child can renounce his citizenship nor parents could renounce the citizenship of their children!

    Nationality Act of 1940, Section 401:
    “A person who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by: (a) Obtaining naturalization in a foreign state, either upon his own application or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person: Provided, however, That nationality not be lost as the result of the naturalization of a parent unless and until the child shall have attained the AGE OF TWENTY-THREE years without acquiring permanent residence in the United States:…..”

    Nationality Act of 1940, Section 407:
    “A person having American nationality, who is a minor and is residing in a foreign state with or under the legal custody of a parent who loses American nationality under section 404 of this Act, shall at the same time lose his American nationality if such minor has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state: Provided, That, in such case, American nationality shall not be lost as the result of loss of American nationality by the parent unless and until the child attains the AGE OF TWENTY-THREE years without having acquired permanent residence in the United States.”

    YOU SAID:…“When the Soetoro adoption was voided, Barry Soetoro was stateless. The HI Family Court Ordered a new vital record created for Barack Hussein Obama II.”

    MY ANSWER:…Let’s now assume that Obama was adopted (no proof of that) and it was voided (no proof of that). And even if a new vital record was created WITH THE WORD “AFFIRMED” REDACTED (no proof of that), Obama was NEVER STATELESS because he never lost his Natural Born Citizenship. He did not lost his citizenship through adoption. He can’t renounce his US citizenship as a minor. (refer back to Nationality Act of 1940, Section 401 and 407).

    YOU SAID:…“To become a U.S Citizen after a CLN has been issued, Barack Hussein Obama II would have had to appear before sworn a Federal Officer authorized to administer an Oath of Allegiance to him.”

    MY ANSWER:…Obama did not have to appear before a Federal Officer…because he never lost his citizenship nor was he stateless at any given time.

    MY QUESTION:…What about Indonesian Law?

    MY ANSWER:…FORGET ABOUT THAT!!! AND HERE IS WHY!

    Hague Convention of 1930

    Article 1 It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals. This law shall be recognised by other States in so far as it is consistent with international conventions, international custom, and the principles of law generally recognised with regard to nationality.

    Article 2
    Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that State.

    In other words, the Hague Convention of 1930 states in the first two articles that it is up to each country to determine under their own law who is a citizen of that country.

    And under US law, Obama was and is a US citizen, therefore under the Hague Convention of 1930, it is US law that determines his citizenship.

    MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU:…http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-citizenship-myth-part-2.html

  74. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 26, 2010 at 7:55 pm #

    Saint James: SvenMagnussen, You apparently did not research the laws on citizenship!

    You are confusing U.S. Code concerning citizenship issues for retention of U.S. Citizenship for persons living abroad, as opposed to persons who voluntarily renounce their citizenship.

    THE IMMIGRATION & NATIONALITY ACT

    Section 349(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(5)) is the section of law that governs the ability of a United States citizen to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship. That section of law provides for the loss of nationality by voluntarily performing the following act with the intent to relinquish his or her U.S. nationality:

    “(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state , in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State.”

    RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.

    Section 351(b) of the INA provides that an applicant who renounced his or her U.S. citizenship before the age of eighteen can have that citizenship reinstated if he or she makes that desire known to the Department of State within six months after attaining the age of eighteen. See also Title 22, Code of Federal Regulations, section 50.20

  75. avatar
    SFJeff January 26, 2010 at 8:02 pm #

    Sven- really doesn’t matter if he is posting the law rightly or wrongly, since you still haven’t brought forth one example of anyone under the age of 12 successfully renouncing his or her citizenship, or any other evidence.

    That you think it more likely that a consular official accepted a 6 year old renouncing his citizenship than that same 6 year old just retaining his U.S. citizenship explains your mindset.

    Come on Sven- admit it- you are just putting this out there so we will help you complete your novel about a fictional character named Barry Soetoro right?

  76. avatar
    Randy January 26, 2010 at 8:53 pm #

    NBC, nice to see JTX has found a new haunt, hasn’t changed anything but the neighborhood.

  77. avatar
    NbC January 26, 2010 at 9:12 pm #

    JTX is scary in his ability to stick a foot in his mouth so deep that all he can do in the end is to go into hiding.

  78. avatar
    G January 26, 2010 at 9:17 pm #

    Fascinating! Thanks for the research.

  79. avatar
    Benji Franklin January 26, 2010 at 9:35 pm #

    Dear Sven,

    Slay a lot of Dragons in your youth, did you? Overlooked by the cabal the runs the world? Really a step down for you isn’t it? – inept Presidential Eligibility Nay-Saying? After all the successes you imagined you had creating, summoning, and dismissing Gods?

    Still, you’re the Nay-Saying MAN and Obama is just President of The United States of America.

    I’ll bet you’re holding your trophy. With two fingers.

    No offense,
    Benji Franklin

  80. avatar
    G January 26, 2010 at 9:39 pm #

    Of course your just full of sh*t and made all that up.

    Either prove it or shut up.

    Go peddle your stupid fictional fantisies elsewhere.

  81. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 10:02 pm #

    Let’s make this perfectly clear before we move on to your next goal post! Since you did not refute, then you concede that the following are not supported by evidence.

    1. “The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”…No evidence of adoption and no evidence that a new record was created!

    2. “Barack Obama was never stateless because he never lost his US citizenship”….You did not refute this then therefore it is a fact!

    3. “Barry appeared at a U.S. Embassy in Indonesia to renounce his U.S. Citizenship to become an Indonesian citizen because Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship”…He could not have presented himself to renounce his citizenship”…there’s no proof of that!

    4. “And under US law, Obama was and is a US citizen, therefore under the Hague Convention of 1930, it is US law that determines his citizenship”….You didn’t refute this, therefore it’s a fact!

    Parents cannot renounce US citizenship on the behalf of their children, even if the US citizenship was obtained by the child being born in the US. Children must be at least FOURTEEN YEARS OF AGE and can fully demonstrate that they understand the consequences of renouncing US citizenship before they will be allowed to do so.

    http://www.requirementsforuscitizenship.com/renouncing-us-citizenship.php

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship. United States common law establishes an ARBITRARY LIMIT OF AGE FOURTEEN under which a child’s understanding must be established by substantial evidence. (From U.S. Department of State)

    http://immigration.findlaw.com/immigration/immigration-citizenship-naturalization/immigration-citizenship-naturalization-renunciation.html?DCMP=KNC-Immigration-Law&HBX_PK=renounce+us+citizenship&HBX_OU=50

    So with the above.info… Barack Hussien Obama was too old (6 yo) to have assumed the citizenship of his step father if he was adopted. He moved to Indonesia when he was 6 years old.
    And too young to have voluntarily renounced his US citizenship. Obama returned to the US when he was 10 years old.

    The law in question is Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, 62/1958 for short.

    Assuming an adoption took place, it would fall under Article 2 of this law.
    “Article 2.
    (1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.”

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-citizenship-myth.html

    So, do you want to move to your next goal post or shall we discuss if Obama renounced his citizenship?

  82. avatar
    Saint James January 26, 2010 at 10:05 pm #

    The above was to rebut…SvenMagnussen

  83. avatar
    G January 26, 2010 at 10:15 pm #

    Wonder all you want in your own little made-up world of hypothetical B.S. You might as well wonder about the course of events since the South won the Civil War. But of course, that didn’t happen either.

    So, why do you waste your time making up crap that isn’t even plausible in whatever delusional alternate reality in your head you apparently live in?

    Go off and find some slashdot fan-fic sight to peddle your nonsense, because that is all it is.

    This site is for facts and reality, not delusional stupidity.

    Bottom line, there is no known evidence that even supports anything close to your wild-*ss theories. You have to go to great lengths to spin speculation upon speculation “what-if” scenarios to even come close to supporting your ridiculous contentions, which is a meaningless exercise and waste of all our time.

    I’d say stick to facts and evidence, but you’ve proven you have none.

    So I’ll just simply say the advice you need most: Give it up.

  84. avatar
    JoZeppy January 26, 2010 at 10:36 pm #

    I noticed you didn’t include the part of the FAM that states, “Children under 16 are presumed not to have the requisite maturity and knowing intent” required to renounce their citizenship…but hey, you make things up as you go, sp why should we expect you to be honest about the regulations regarding revocation of citizenship?

  85. avatar
    G January 26, 2010 at 10:39 pm #

    Sven says: “I wonder if cooler heads would prevail on both sides of the discussion if the Obots would admit the HI Family Court ordered the creation of the COLB based on sworn testimony heard in Court, thus the reason a hospital and doctor’s signature are not present.”

    First of all, its a stupid “theory” and only a “theory” in terms of how lay people use the term when some wild-*ss idea pops in their head for no reason.

    Real theories have a string of strong, evidence behind them that form the foundation and basis for the conclusions they try to provide.

    You have none of this. So in answer, what do I think of your wild speculation? I think it is stupid.

  86. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 26, 2010 at 11:55 pm #

    Greg: I don’t think anyone but you [Sven] understands that.

    Actually, since 1200 people in the WND poll believe that there is hidden evidence proving Obama ineligible, there may well be 1,199 other people like Sven in the world.

  87. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 26, 2010 at 11:57 pm #

    Black Lion: Sven, you are coming off looking more delusional.

    I still say troll, not delusional.

  88. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 26, 2010 at 11:59 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: Do you understand a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN), a Statement of Understanding, and an Oath of Renunciation are on file for a person named “Barry Soetoro” at the U.S. State Department?

    No, I don’t understand that. Could you explain how you got there?

  89. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 27, 2010 at 12:03 am #

    SvenMagnussen: I wonder if cooler heads would prevail on both sides of the discussion if the Obots would admit the HI Family Court ordered the creation of the COLB based on sworn testimony heard in Court, thus the reason a hospital and doctor’s signature are not present.

    Given that Barack Obama was born on Friday evening, and his COLB indicates he was registered on the following Monday, I really don’t see how there would have been time for a Family Court to schedule a hearing, hold it, send an order to the Health Department, and get the birth registered. Could you explain how such a scenario might work??

  90. avatar
    NBc January 27, 2010 at 12:07 am #

    Not just how did they get there but how come there is no evidence to support this…
    I bet you it is based on absence of evidence as evidence of something. Have they no concern for our Constitutional principles?

  91. avatar
    G January 27, 2010 at 12:45 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy says, re: Sven:

    “I still say troll, not delusional.”

    Personally, I think BOTH are true.

  92. avatar
    NBc January 27, 2010 at 1:25 am #

    In Sven’s rich imagination, the same way a certificate of renunciation of citizenship in the name of Barry Soetoro exists.

    Hint, just because you believe it, does not make it so. And lacking any evidence, Sven’s ‘arguments’ again lack in reason, logic and facts.

    But that has never stopped Sven and for that we love him.

  93. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 27, 2010 at 4:28 am #

    JoZeppy: I noticed you didn’t include the part of the FAM that states, “Children under 16 are presumed not to have the requisite maturity and knowing intent” required to renounce their citizenship…but hey, you make things up as you go, sp why should we expect you to be honest about the regulations regarding revocation of citizenship?

    You’re quoting current policy guidelines put forth at the discretion of the Sec of State.

    The policy guidelines of the mid-60’s was to encourage children to return to the country of their ancestors and renounce their U.S. Citizenship.

    That was policy was reversed in the early 70’s and Barry was offered a free plane ticket home and Indonesian Refugee status. Whoever told S.A.D. to void the adoption before Barry recovered his U.S. Citizenship did Barry a tremendous disservice.

  94. avatar
    Saint James January 27, 2010 at 5:17 am #

    SvenMagnussen…

    Let’s make this perfectly clear before we move on to your next goal post! Since you did not refute, then you concede that the following are not supported by evidence.

    1. “The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr.”…No evidence of adoption and no evidence that a new record was created!

    2. “Barack Obama was never stateless because he never lost his US citizenship”….You did not refute this then therefore it is a fact!

    3. “Barry appeared at a U.S. Embassy in Indonesia to renounce his U.S. Citizenship to become an Indonesian citizen because Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship”…He could not have presented himself to renounce his citizenship”…there’s no proof of that!

    4. “And under US law, Obama was and is a US citizen, therefore under the Hague Convention of 1930, it is US law that determines his citizenship”….You didn’t refute this, therefore it’s a fact!

    Parents cannot renounce US citizenship on the behalf of their children, even if the US citizenship was obtained by the child being born in the US. Children must be at least FOURTEEN YEARS OF AGE and can fully demonstrate that they understand the consequences of renouncing US citizenship before they will be allowed to do so.

    http://www.requirementsforuscitizenship.com/renouncing-us-citizenship.php

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship. United States common law establishes an ARBITRARY LIMIT OF AGE FOURTEEN under which a child’s understanding must be established by substantial evidence. (From U.S. Department of State)

    http://immigration.findlaw.com/immigration/immigration-citizenship-naturalization/immigration-citizenship-naturalization-renunciation.html?DCMP=KNC-Immigration-Law&HBX_PK=renounce+us+citizenship&HBX_OU=50

    So with the above.info… Barack Hussien Obama was too old (6 yo) to have assumed the citizenship of his step father if he was adopted. He moved to Indonesia when he was 6 years old.
    And too young to have voluntarily renounced his US citizenship. Obama returned to the US when he was 10 years old.

    The law in question is Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, 62/1958 for short.

    Assuming an adoption took place, it would fall under Article 2 of this law.
    “Article 2.
    (1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.”

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-citizenship-myth.html

    You also posted this…”The policy guidelines of the mid-60’s was to encourage children to return to the country of their ancestors and renounce their U.S. Citizenship.”…this is the most idiotic statement that you’ve stated so far!

    What happened to the Hague Convention of 1930?… You must be on drugs!

    Hague Convention of 1930

    Article 1 It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals. This law shall be recognised by other States in so far as it is consistent with international conventions, international custom, and the principles of law generally recognised with regard to nationality.

    Article 2
    Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that State.

    So, do you want to move to your next goal post or shall we discuss if Obama renounced his citizenship?

  95. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 27, 2010 at 7:03 am #

    Saint James: SvenMagnussen…He could not have presented himself to renounce his citizenship”…there’s no proof of that!

    The 14 years of age minimum standard is a recent policy guideline set by the Sec of State. The Sec of State has the discretion to set policy.

    The 14 years of age minimum policy for minors renouncing their citizenship was not in place during the mid-60’s.

    You made me laugh out loud …

    “2. “Barack Obama was never stateless because he never lost his US citizenship”….You did not refute this then therefore it is a fact!”

    You got me. Damn! I knew I should have refuted this right after it was posted.

  96. avatar
    Scientist January 27, 2010 at 9:40 am #

    Sven- Last I checked, Obama is President. Furthermore, Obama is the only person who won the election, which, as the birthers conveniently ignore, is just as much a constitutional requirement as being a natural born citizen. There is, therefore, no other legitimate claimant to the office, with the possible exception of Joe Biden, who seems not to be disputing Obama’s claim.
    So, in the real world, Sven, even if your ancient history were true (and it isn’t) it would be irrelevant.

  97. avatar
    JoZeppy January 27, 2010 at 10:03 am #

    Prove it. There never was any such policy. To be able to renounce one’s citizenship, a person has to show knowing intent to do so. A child of 6 years has never had the capacity to show requisite intent to renounce their citizenship. That’s not a question of policy. That a matter of law (I believe the common law puts the cut off at 10 or 12 and under that are incapable of showing knowing intent).

    It’s B.S. Prove it has even been possible for 6 six year old to show legal intent in anything, much less the ability to renounce their citizenship. Your changing guidelines have as much support as your claims of there being a record of renouncing his citizenship. It’s all a figment of your overactive imagination.

  98. avatar
    NBc January 27, 2010 at 12:36 pm #

    Sven still overlooks a simple fact:

    There is not a shred of evidence that President Obama renounced his citizenship.

    Nuff said, the rest is pure speculation and of no relevance.

  99. avatar
    NBc January 27, 2010 at 12:37 pm #

    Barry Soetoro was provided with U.S. Travel documents by the U.S. State Department as an Indonesian Refugee in the early seventies.

    Contradicted by facts, unsupported by any facts.

    Shortly after that, B.O. Sr. appeared before a Hawaii Family Court to contest the Soetoro due to lack of consent by the birth father. The Soetoro adoption was voided and Barry Soetoro’s vital record with the Hawaii DOH was sealed by Court Order. A new vital record was created affirming Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to B.O. Sr. and S.A.D. (a birth hospital or doctor’s attestation was not published because the record was created by Court Order through testimony and not an attestation by a hosptial admin. or delivery doctor)

    Repeating something does not make it true, and since you have failed to provide any evidence, your repetition has to be rejected as untruthful and counterfactual

  100. avatar
    Greg January 27, 2010 at 1:33 pm #

    The policy guidelines of the mid-60’s was to encourage children to return to the country of their ancestors and renounce their U.S. Citizenship.

    For proof, see Sven’s fevered wet-dreams.

  101. avatar
    G January 27, 2010 at 2:12 pm #

    Sven fantasizes: “That was policy was reversed in the early 70’s and Barry was offered a free plane ticket home and Indonesian Refugee status. Whoever told S.A.D. to void the adoption before Barry recovered his U.S. Citizenship did Barry a tremendous disservice.”

    Indonesian Refugee Status??? Really? Puh-lease! As with most of your B.S., here’s just another stupid story that you completely made up out of whole cloth, with not a shred of evidence to support it, other than your twisted delusions.

    Your fictional fantasy scenarios aren’t even good. They are so far out on a limb you might as well start babbling on about Obama being from a distant part of the galaxy and tell us all about his intergalactic travels in a solar powered flying bagel. That at least would be somewhat entertaining and about as accurate as the silly crap you come up with.

  102. avatar
    Black Lion January 27, 2010 at 2:14 pm #

    Of course he can’t Dr. C. That would take logic…Sven is more interested in stirring things up than defending his ridiculous theory…

  103. avatar
    Saint James January 27, 2010 at 2:47 pm #

    SvenMagnussen you said: “The 14 years of age minimum standard is a recent policy guideline set by the Sec of State. The Sec of State has the discretion to set policy.

    The 14 years of age minimum policy for minors renouncing their citizenship was not in place during the mid-60’s.”

    Since the age requirement for a minor’s qualification to renounce citizenship is covered under the US Common Law

  104. avatar
    Saint James January 27, 2010 at 3:04 pm #

    *note: disregard the above incomplete response, I pressed the wrong key.

    SvenMagnussen you said: “The 14 years of age minimum standard is a recent policy guideline set by the Sec of State. The Sec of State has the discretion to set policy.

    The 14 years of age minimum policy for minors renouncing their citizenship was not in place during the mid-60’s.”

    Answer: The age requirement for a minor’s qualification to renounce citizenship and the age of majority is covered under the US Common Law, therefore these requirements constantly change. Age of majority has changed from 25 to 21 to 18 as proven through different amendments to US Codes and there are proof to that. However, try as you may, there is no proof that the minimum age requirement for a child to be allowed to renounce citizenship at age fourteen has changed! Therefore, your claim that Obama renounced his US citizenship in Indonesia…is DEBUNKED!

    7 FAM 1254.1 Minors
    a. Sections 403(b) NA provided that persons could not divest themselves of U.S.
    nationality before attaining age 18. However, there is no legal minimum age under which
    renunciation is not permitted. Common law establishes an arbitrary limit of age 7 below
    which a child is incapable of understanding. An arbitrary limit of age 14 is set under which
    a child’s understanding must be proven by substantial evidence. Posts should always
    inquire of the Department (CA/OCS/CCS) in advance of a determination of loss when
    dealing with a potential renunciant who is under age 18. The consular officer must be
    satisfied that the minor fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of
    renunciation. The consular officer must also be completely satisfied that the minor is acting
    entirely voluntarily rather than under duress imposed by parents or guardians. When
    possible, the minor should be interviewed privately with only another officer or Foreign
    Service national employee present as an added assurance against parental pressure.

    http://cyberatlantis.com/library/citizenship/renounce_us/us_renounce.pdf

  105. avatar
    SFJeff January 27, 2010 at 3:48 pm #

    There is more evidence that Santa Claus is real and delivers presents on Christmas Day than there is to support any of Sven’s fantasies.

  106. avatar
    misha January 27, 2010 at 7:20 pm #

    “There is more evidence that Santa Claus is real and delivers presents on Christmas Day than there is to support any of Sven’s fantasies.”

    Oh, yeah? Then who exactly was on my roof, trying to get in?

  107. avatar
    Saint James January 27, 2010 at 7:54 pm #

    Misha don’t be fooled… it’s Lucas not Santa, Lucas tries to get in to find the Kenyan Birth Certificate hidden in your attic! ha ha ha ha ha

  108. avatar
    Northland10 January 27, 2010 at 8:30 pm #

    “a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.”

    A child under 10 is going fully understand what he is doing and is not subject to duress. Yeah, right…

    Now Sven, you want to convince me or have me convince others. Show me credible proof. Now’s your chance. I’m waiting….

  109. avatar
    Mary Brown January 27, 2010 at 11:36 pm #

    Yes and I know a record of George Bush accepting citizenship in Saudi Arabia exists. Produce the document Sven or be quiet. Proof requires more than a vivid imagination.

  110. avatar
    NbC January 27, 2010 at 11:46 pm #

    Historically under common law, children under 7 cannot make decisions for themselves, and between 7 and 14 only under very specific guidance.

    Given the rulings on renunciation of citizenship, I doubt that even under the fully imaginary scenario of Sven, President Obama would have been able to renounce his citizenship.
    We do know by his own word, that he returned to the US as a citizen.

    Furthermore since Obama could never have gained citizenship under Indonesia law until he had reached the age of 18 years old, since he was older than 4 when he arrived in Indonesia, the case by Sven is build on wishful thinking at best.
    I feel generous in assigning motives to Sven… That he continue to make them is somewhat disconcerning to me but so far he does not seem to have convinced much of anyone of his fantasies.
    That should say something 🙂

  111. avatar
    Greg January 28, 2010 at 1:05 am #

    I’m not a big believer in banning posters, and I have been known to feed the energy creatures, despite explicit warnings not to, however, I nominate Sven/Dick for entry into the tiny category of banned posters.

    His contributions are clearly creative writing attempts. His continued refusal to support anything substantive with citation (he knows how to cite support for the irrelevant stuff) has gone beyond silly.

    So, Dr., I respectfully request that Sven/Dick be put into the cage. Let him out if he attempts to give something more to his Indonesian fantasy than his wild fantasies. He can either take the banning as a final incentive to come up with the support that would make his arguments worth engaging, or he’d take his creative writing to a fanfic site where it would be more appropriate.

  112. avatar
    SvenMagnussen January 28, 2010 at 7:35 am #

    Mary Brown: Yes and I know a record of George Bush accepting citizenship in Saudi Arabia exists. Produce the document Sven or be quiet. Proof requires more than a vivid imagination.

    I’m an Obot now. Didn’t you see? Saint James made a statement and I didn’t refute it (Actually, I didn’t see it. But excuses are for the weak.)

    So, all of my theories on Barry Soetoro have a CLN on file with the U.S. Department of State, Barry Soetoro being recognized as a Indonesian Refugee by the U.S. State Department, the voiding of the Soetoro adoption, have BHO II being left stateless after his adoption was voided have been “DEBUNKED.”

    I’m an Obot and it feels kind of funky.

    I feel like Rielle after she whispered to John, “I love you.” And John said, “Me too.”

    I feel like Kerkorian after he tries to open the hyperbaric chamber only to find out the door has been locked on the outside.

    I feel like Gary Kreep after Orly told him she hasn’t made a decision on which way she is going to go, but she’s leaning toward Charles.

    I feel like Larry Sinclair after Obama asked, “Are you still here?”

  113. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 28, 2010 at 7:56 am #

    I think the better alternative to banning Sven is just not to reply to things that don’t deserve a reply. I only ban folks when they essentially “take over the discussion” and I don’t think Sven (and his sock puppets) have done that.

  114. avatar
    thisoldhippie January 28, 2010 at 11:26 am #

    I can’t help but think of Don Quixote tilting at windmills when I read anything Sven writes. Or Orly Taitz for that matter. Only, I liked the Don.

  115. avatar
    Expelliarmus January 28, 2010 at 11:32 am #

    I find Sven’s creativity somewhat amusing. He’s the only birther that keeps on inventing new stuff, while the others just keep repeating the same old stuff endlessly.

    I mean, Sven has sort of created a new genre of birther fan fiction.

    Is there some type of wordpress widget that you can install that would let us tag posts as fiction? Maybe with a rating so we can vote for the best literary effort?

  116. avatar
    misha January 28, 2010 at 1:39 pm #

    Actually, I’m hoping for a new installment from Tralfamadore.

  117. avatar
    G January 28, 2010 at 3:22 pm #

    Actually Sven, I thought your humor in this post was quite funny and entertaining and got a good chuckle out of it. Good for you!

    Now please try better in the future to bring up actual issues instead of just present us with your latest fanfic.

  118. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion January 29, 2010 at 11:42 pm #

    And thank you for the complement. Though Berg’s paralegal might disagree with you. *smile*

  119. avatar
    Saint James January 30, 2010 at 1:08 am #

    “Though Berg’s paralegal might disagree with you”

    I don’t wander why Berg keeps losing cases…I bet he’ll lose this latest..about the revernider case…I mean CEL3 is going to be sanctioned for forgery!

  120. avatar
    misha January 31, 2010 at 12:50 am #

    @Sven: I feel like I went through the looking glass, after I read any of your comments.