Main Menu

Obama Conspiracy Theories blog calls for WND to correct the public record

In an email sent today by Doctor Conspiracy (not a real doctor) to Joseph Farah, publisher of the WorldNetDaily web site, documentation was provided that WorldNetDaily publishes a story claiming that there was a travel ban for US Citizens to Pakistan in 1981, and documentation was provided that this claim is completely false. Dr. Conspiracy called on Farah to correct the public record by publishing a retraction.

The Obama Conspiracy Theories blog is dedicated to the proposition that a well-informed public is essential to democracy. Its purpose is to correct misinformation and faulty reasoning wherever it is found on the subject of conspiracy theories involving Barack Obama. Many rumors and false claims have been debunked by the site, including the widely-repeated travel ban to Pakistan. In fact, American citizens could travel freely to the tourist-friendly country of Pakistan in 1981.

Joseph Farah, in an e-mail replied that the article in question is commentary and not reporting. [The text of Farah’s reply has been removed because I discovered after scrolling down that it had a boiler plate statement on it that the sender intended the message to be private and confidential.]

I understand the difference between reporting and commentary. This blog has comments of all kinds from all points of view, and they are often factually false. However, this blog’s format would never leave anyone for a moment confused between the site’s edited content and visitor comments. WorldNetDaily does label its commentary as such, and Janet Folger Porter’s piece where she makes several false statements including the fake travel ban to Pakistan is labeled commentary; however, one has to look for it and I think it likely that many readers of WorldNetDaily readers lack the critical thinking skills to make the distinction.

Indeed WND not only published the commentary containing Porter’s lies, but its reporter, Bob Unruh, later quoted the lie in a news article and it also appears quoted on another unattributed page not labeled as commentary. [Thanks Rickey for pointing these out.]  I think that puts to rest any question as to the integrity of WND reporting.

119 Responses to Obama Conspiracy Theories blog calls for WND to correct the public record

  1. avatar
    richCares February 8, 2010 at 1:03 am #

    good luck! Farah and his site have no ethics, very unlikely he will retract!

  2. avatar
    aarrgghh February 8, 2010 at 1:25 am #

    more than likely, farah will post an “editor’s note” backpedaling the travel ban statement, much like the note he attached to his paper’s validating of obama’s birth certificate after he realized what a golden goose the birthers would become:

    “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s certification of live birth utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.

    (Editor’s note: WND’s investigation into the certification of live birth did not include inspecting the actual document, but only asking experts to evaluate the online image. Those experts, therefore, could not “prove” the document’s authenticity. The experts told WND merely that many of the forgery claims made against the image were inconclusive or falsified, leaving them no evidence that would cast doubt on the image’s authenticity.)”

    the same story also cites the travel ban:

    A WND investigation could not find any proof Obama used an Indonesian passport to travel to Pakistan. However, WND noted that Pakistan in 1981 was under military rule and that it was difficult for U.S. citizens to travel to the country without assistance – meaning, it would have been easier to enter Pakistan on an Indonesian passport.”

  3. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 8, 2010 at 7:42 am #

    While some folks have made a big deal of WND’s “authentication” of the birth certificate, I have not cited it as evidence because I knew that they hadn’t really authenticated anything to any recognizable forensic standard. Forensic document Sandra Lines was right when she said that one couldn’t authenticate a document from an image on the Internet (at least not from the type we have seen). Their standards in authenticating the document were just as shabby as those applied to their reporting on the other side.

    WorldNetDaily has published some useful information, including an image of a “real” Kenyan birth certificate, and the photo from the Honolulu city directory corroborating the accuracy of the address in the Obama newspaper birth announcement.

    I generally avoid the WND web site because it, like all misleading propaganda, offends me.

  4. avatar
    Black Lion February 8, 2010 at 8:47 am #

    I think it was less about how WND “authenticated” the COLB and more that they wrote an article making a claim that it was authentic and then wrote articles for a year implying that it was a forgery. I was more about catching WND in the obvious lie to discredit them when the birthers attempted to use a WND article as a source for their misinformation…

  5. avatar
    aarrgghh February 8, 2010 at 8:57 am #

    doc, rolling his eyes:

    “While some folks have made a big deal of WND’s “authentication” of the birth certificate, I have not cited it as evidence because I knew that they hadn’t really authenticated anything to any recognizable forensic standard.”

    in the small pond that is the birfer movement, i consider it a big deal not because it “authenticates” anything — farah’s and his paper’s stained reputations makes its stamp of approval exceedingly dubious if not completely worthless. it is evidence not of the colb’s validity but of joe farah’s willingness to change course on any subject as long as it suits his agenda and fits his preferred narrative, which exposes this self-proclaimed “truth-seeker” as just another cheap propagandist.

    it also makes a great cup of stfu for those birthers who like to tout wnd as a credible source of anything.

  6. avatar
    brygenon February 8, 2010 at 8:58 am #

    aarrgghh: more than likely, farah will post an “editor’s note” backpedaling the travel ban statement, much like the note he attached to his paper’s validating of obama’s birth certificate after he realized what a golden goose the birthers would become:

    “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s certification of live birth utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic.

    The also altered that story, months after posting, it to call the document Obama’s “certification of live birth.” The original version read “birth certificate”.

  7. avatar
    brygenon February 8, 2010 at 9:08 am #

    Here’s another WND howler: They claimed “However, Obama’s ‘citizenship’ was never the question raised during the campaign or after the election.”
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=100451

    False. WND itself had reported the allegation that Obama is not a citizen, once headlining a story, “Eligibility lawyer argues for president’s deportation”, with subhead “Berg seeks proper treatment for ‘illegal alien'”. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=90079

  8. avatar
    misha February 8, 2010 at 9:14 am #

    I just sent Berg a THIRD version of my famous birth certificates!

    I hope he appreciates my efforts.

  9. avatar
    misha February 8, 2010 at 9:18 am #

    Don’t forget all those fine products Farah is shilling. I’m waiting for Miracle Magnets Cure Everything – click here.

  10. avatar
    John February 8, 2010 at 9:19 am #

    Does anyone know exactly when Obama visited Pakistan? (Date?)

  11. avatar
    misha February 8, 2010 at 9:24 am #

    I don’t have my Galactic calendar in front of me, sorry. But I think it was the same year Captain Kirk left Earth. Just go to googe and type in “Obama Kirk Enterprise.”

  12. avatar
    John February 8, 2010 at 10:21 am #

    the Pakistan Ban might actually be true. It all depends on what date Obama visited Pakistan. News accounts indicate that Pakistan allowed US citizens to travel in the beginning of summer of 1981. The Travel Advisory was released in the summer of August of 1981. If Obama had visited Pakistan in early 1981, he might have in fact went there not withstanding the travel ban that was in place. Interesting enough, the eariest travel ban advisory from the State Department was in the summer of 1981. This might suggest that a ban was in place before 1981 and in early 1981. In any event, just because US citizens could go to Pakistan in the summer of 1981 does’t mean it was an easy process. I would certainly like to see Berg’s evidence however that Pakistan was a ban list prior to the summer of 1981.

  13. avatar
    Dave February 8, 2010 at 11:29 am #

    You seem to be confusing “advisory” and “ban.” The advisory discusses visa requirements, make it sound like getting a visa to visit Pakistan at that time was a heck of a lot easier than most countries I’ve traveled to.

    A copy of the travel advisory, dated Aug 17, 1981, can be found here so you can read it for yourself (h/t factcheck.org):

    http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/travel/cis/southasia/TA_Pakistan1981.pdf

  14. avatar
    Greg February 8, 2010 at 11:29 am #

    News accounts indicate that Pakistan allowed US citizens to travel in the beginning of summer of 1981.

    You seem to be suggesting that this was a new development. If so, I’d ask, what news accounts? I haven’t seen any evidence that there was ever any ban on US Citizens traveling to Pakistan at any time, ever. Indeed, my research shows that from 1965 on, the Pakistani government was following plans to develop foreign tourism. It drafted those plans in concert with French consultants. After the coup in 1977, President Zia continued to promote tourism.

    In 1981, Pakistan began promoting outdoor tourism by sponsoring the International Trekking Convention held in Rawalpindi. Linda Richter of Kansas State University has studied, in detail, the development of tourism in Southeast Asia. She writes about how the Pakistani Tourism Development Corporation (PTDC) was in constant existence from its inception in 1965. From 1977 to 1982, it was suffering from declining or flat foreign arrivals, so reorganized. Nothing about a travel ban.

  15. avatar
    Scientist February 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm #

    What evidence do you have that he has ever been to Pakistan?

  16. avatar
    SFJeff February 8, 2010 at 12:50 pm #

    When I was travelling in Europe in 1980, I met quite a few Americans who had travelled through Pakistan while trekking across Asia. As I recall, the only issues were getting from India to Pakistan. I never met anyone who said they had difficulties as Americans going to Pakistan.

  17. avatar
    Bob Weber February 8, 2010 at 4:07 pm #

    There was never, ever, any Pakistan travel ban. It’s just another birfoon confabulation, or in Anglo-Saxon terms, a filthy lie.

    The closest thing to a “ban” on Pakistan travel was a State Dept. warning in the mid-1980s that the Khyber passs area was becoming dangerous due to fighting.

  18. avatar
    Rickey February 8, 2010 at 4:22 pm #

    I sent this e-mail to World Net Daily a year ago:

    To: letters@worldnetdaily.com
    Subject: Obama’s Trip to Pakistan in 1981
    Date: Feb 1, 2009 8:13 PM

    I am perplexed by the fact that WND continues to report that travel to Pakistan by U.S. citizens was not permitted in 1981. Not only is there not a shred of evidence that travel to Pakistan was not permitted, an August, 1981 State Department travel advisory has been located. The advisory reminded Americans who were traveling to Pakistan that 30-day visas for American tourists were available at Pakistani airports. The advisory number is 81-33A. It should be obvious to anyone that the State Department would not have issued such an advisory if travel to Pakistan was not permitted.

    They never acknowledged the e-mail, but shortly thereafter they stopped saying outright that there was a “ban” but instead starting claiming, without evidence, that it was “difficult” for Americans to travel there in 1981 and (again, without evidence) that it would have been “easier” to travel there with an Indonesian passport.

  19. avatar
    Rickey February 8, 2010 at 4:43 pm #

    John says:

    the Pakistan Ban might actually be true. It all depends on what date Obama visited Pakistan. News accounts indicate that Pakistan allowed US citizens to travel in the beginning of summer of 1981.

    Not a chance. How many ways can the travel ban story be disproved? Let’s see.

    1. On June 14, 1981 the travel section of the New York Times ran an article about traveling to Pakistan. The author, an American named Barbara Crosette, had been there earlier in the year with her husband. No mention of a travel ban, then or at any other time.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1981/06/14/travel/lahore-a-survivor-with-a-bittersweet-history.html

    2. The August, 1981 State Department travel advisory is just that – an advisory, not a warning, not a ban. It simply advised people about visa requirements, how long they could stay in Pakistan, etc.

    3. Pakistan International Airlines had regularly scheduled flights from JFK airport in New York to Pakistan throughout 1981. The PIA website has a photograph of one of its jets on the tarmac at JFK on August 20, 1981 (it’s the photo of the Boeing 707-323C):

    http://www.historyofpia.com/unusualaircraft.htm

    4. Obama traveled to Pakistan with a college classmate in the summer of 1981, during summer vacation.

    It is clear from both the New York Times article and the State Department advisory that there was no ban on travel to Pakistan during the time that Obama visited the country. There also is no evidence of a travel ban to Pakistan at any other time, but that is neither here nor there because Obama didn’t travel to Pakistan at any other time.

  20. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 8, 2010 at 5:13 pm #

    John, I’m sorry. Could you go back and explain the part about why you think there ever was a travel ban?

  21. avatar
    NbC February 8, 2010 at 5:14 pm #

    WND said so…. Others have asserted there was. Surely John is not in the business of actually verifying these accounts…

    Come on Doc… Be serious.

  22. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 8, 2010 at 5:16 pm #

    If the question of Obama’s citizenship was not raised during the election, then why did Obama post his birth certificate on his web site in June of 2008?

  23. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 8, 2010 at 5:41 pm #

    Please note updates to the main article.

  24. avatar
    misha February 8, 2010 at 5:50 pm #

    “Come on Doc… Be serious”

    Farah is the finest journalist money can buy.

  25. avatar
    Scientist February 8, 2010 at 7:54 pm #

    Doc-The key distinction is not that between commentary and reporting, but rather the difference between statements purporting to be factual and those that are solely opinion. “Barack Obama is ruining the country” is an opinion. One that I believe is completely wrong, but one to which the holder is entitled, as long as they don’t mind clearly displaying their lack of functioning neuronal synapses. “Americans were banned from travelling to Pakistan” is untruth pretending to be fact, and is thus toxic waste to any who would claim the title of journalist (or commentator).

    As the late Sen Moynihan said, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own set of facts.”

  26. avatar
    John February 8, 2010 at 9:20 pm #

    Investigators declare, “Obama never attended Columbia College”
    February 8th, 2010

    American Grand Jury has archived extensive records over the past year which we used in our jury hearings. We now believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama is not a “natural born” citizen and it is even possible that he may be an illegal alien.

    We also have records showing the Democratic National Convention fraudulently declared Obama constitutionally eligible while never vetting the “natural born” requirement with the electorate.

    Now, new evidence has come to light whereby Dr. James Manning has declared that Obama never attended Columbia College thereby adding insult to injury.

    Dr. Manning has hired a team of investigators to comb over every bit of available evidence to validate his declaration.

    The investigators say they can conclusively state that:

    1) Columbia College will not divulge whether the “alleged” diploma issued was in the name of Barry Soetoro or Barack Hussein Obama. No public record exists regarding the diploma.

    2) Obama alleges he attended Columbia in 1982, 1983. The investigators have been UNABLE to turn up a single shred of written documentation for the years 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 that show Obama appeared on a school roster, register, faculty memo, bulletin board, school awards, dean’s list; that Obama’s name appeared in a yearbook, club record, fraternity record, extra curricular activity member roster, student newspaper, student radio or tv activity; that Obama appeared in any records as a worker, employee, laborer in or about Columbia College; that Obama enrolled in any sports activity or program.

    3) As a graduating senior in 1983 he does not appear in any Political Science (his major) or Granduating Class yearbook or invitation records.

    4) There is absolutely no documentation of any kind to show Obama attended, lived, worked or played at Columbia College during the investigated 4 years.

    5) Interviewed professors, college employees, students (who were at Columbia during the years in question) have failed to turn up a single person that can remember Obama. This is irrefutable evidence. Think about your own situation if Obama had attended your college? A “now-famous” person went to your school? Many would be able to say, “of course I remember.” At Columbia, not a single person has been able to say he or she remembers Obama.

  27. avatar
    NbC February 8, 2010 at 9:27 pm #

    Weird as Foggy has been able to find several examples of evidence that show that Obama did attend Columbia.

    Oh John, Oh John, how does it feel to be so easily manipulated into making yourself look foolish?

    Have you not pride?

  28. avatar
    NbC February 8, 2010 at 9:41 pm #

    See this link

    Another major FAIL by our friend John

  29. avatar
    Dave February 8, 2010 at 10:14 pm #

    So you’re one of American Grand Jury guys. I’m curious, what is the basis for believing that a bunch of people can get together and call themselves a grand jury? I read Donofrio’s thing on your website, and he never says a bunch of people can spontaneously make themselves a grand jury. What do you think should be done with your “presentments”? Do you think the DoJ should be required to prosecute them? How would you enforce that requirement? If a bunch of left wing wackos all got together, called themselves a grand jury, and indicted Sarah Palin, do you think the DoJ should be required to prosecute her?

  30. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 8, 2010 at 10:17 pm #

    Scientist, you took the words right out of my mouth. In fact I was going to say something similar in reply to Farah, but I decided in the end that it would be a waste of electrons.

    I think Joseph Farah and Mario Apuzzo should start a club.

  31. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion February 8, 2010 at 10:33 pm #

    Considering that the Fantasy Tiddlywinks League has never once presented any credible evidence to back up a single one of their claims, and indeed just continue to spew out the same old tired bilge, I wouldn’t put much stock into their latest pack of lies.

    Case in point, an article from Obama’s roomate at Columbia

    http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/jan_feb09/alumni_corner

    Manning has had a hate-on for Obama since he beat Hillary Clinton in the primaries. And a lot of his brand of racism dovetails nicely with the Fantasy Tiddlywinks League’s racism.

  32. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- February 8, 2010 at 11:24 pm #

    American Lynch Mob whines why nobody takes them seriously, Obama still President. No film at 11.

  33. avatar
    Loren February 9, 2010 at 12:03 am #

    5) Interviewed professors, college employees, students (who were at Columbia during the years in question) have failed to turn up a single person that can remember Obama. This is irrefutable evidence.

    I believe you’re confusing “irrefutable” with “false.” To cite just one example, NBC News spoke with one of Obama’s Columbia professors a year and a half ago.

  34. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 12:41 am #

    LOL! I love how John comes here and brags about how his Fantasy Grand Jury supposedly spent all this time looking into Obama’s time at Columbia and couldn’t find one single shred of evidence that anybody can ever remember him attending there…

    …and then within a matter of a few hours, people here are able to give links to articles from both his college roommate and the professor who graded his thesis!

    Boy John, you and your Fantasy Jury folks really look like fools or liars now!

    So…which is it?

  35. avatar
    NbC February 9, 2010 at 12:45 am #

    You got mud on your face you big disgrace
    Somebody better put you back into your place
    We will we will rock you, sing it
    We will we will rock you

  36. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 12:53 am #

    Awesome link NbC!

    So there John, you’ve now been completely proven to be an utter FOOL and LIAR!

    Within NbC’s link article, there are a multitude of supporting links that show not only people corroborating that they remember and went to school with Obama, but ALSO photos from the time and even more impressive, an article Obama himself wrote in one of their school papers.

    Check it out for yourself, you brazen fool:

    http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamaessay.html

    Gee. archived Sundial paper, dated March 10, 1983. Right there on page #2, “Breaking the War Mentality” by “Barack Obama”

    Notice it says “Barack Obama”, John? Not this “Barry Soetoro” crap you idiots keep trying to peddle.

    And how about all of the PHOTOS from the time, including lots of details of Barack’s time at Columbia, right from their own website:

    http://www.wikicu.com/Barack_Obama

    So John, are you going to admit that you, your Fantasy Grand Jury folks, and the hate-monger Rev. Manning are TOTALLY WRONG on this???

  37. avatar
    NbC February 9, 2010 at 1:06 am #

    John to admit he has allowed others to make him look foolish?
    It’s a life style.

  38. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 1:27 am #

    John: I have just been indicted by my cat for not changing his litter box yesterday.

    Please notify your bowling league.

  39. avatar
    richCares February 9, 2010 at 1:42 am #

    John continually proves he is an idiot (or at least a stooge), curious as to why birthers adhear to “he didn’t attend Columbia” when there is so much proof that he did. John must have very large hands, so he can cover his eyes and ears at the same time to avoid seeing evidence. He must look very silly covered in bull pupu.

  40. avatar
    chufho February 9, 2010 at 1:46 am #

    way to go john you got them all sqirming now you can tell by the way they try and degrade you, all these people are working for obama to try and sway you but it wont work, more and more people are asking everyday about his natural born citizenship
    holly sh-t somebody just ran over a cat

  41. avatar
    chufho February 9, 2010 at 1:48 am #

    are you saying he never went by the name barry soetoro, your the fool

  42. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 1:51 am #

    “your the fool”

    It’s “you’re.” And you are a fool.

  43. avatar
    Gordon February 9, 2010 at 3:14 am #

    The WooWoo Credo

    2. Always favor the conspiracy angle over the boring angle. Mundane explanations (like saying that Roswell was a balloon) are for dullards and government drones.

    6. If you’re cornered and asked for proof of something, always tell the person that they “can’t disprove” your claims. Many of them will just walk away shaking their heads, which of course means they agree with you. A side-to-side head shake could be the same as a vertical nod. Anything is possible, after all.

    12. Always claim that the other guy is “closed-minded” and that you’re as free-thinking as a newborn baby.

    http://www.insolitology.com/tests/credo.htm

    Remind you of anyone?

  44. avatar
    Scientist February 9, 2010 at 7:30 am #

    Anyone who can get into Harvard Law without attending, let alone graduating from, an undergraduate program, is the type of brilliant, highly motivated person I want as President.

  45. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- February 9, 2010 at 8:34 am #

    You could rename the whole thing the Birther Credo. Woo-woo indeed.

  46. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 8:44 am #

    @Scientist: I know. I mean, here is someome born in Kenya, got into Harvard Law without a BA, AND got to be president of the US. Wow!! I’m impressed. Way to go Barry Obama!!

  47. avatar
    Mike February 9, 2010 at 9:11 am #

    Speaking of liars – the Kreeper is at it again…

    http://wecogitate.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/appellate-brief-filed-obama-must-produce-evidence/

  48. avatar
    Black Lion February 9, 2010 at 9:12 am #

    Prove to us that he did go by the name Barry Soetero here in the United States. If you can’t then you are the fool. And don’t give us the so called Indonesian school record. Dr. C has already addressed that…

  49. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 9, 2010 at 9:38 am #

    It is not unusual for a child to “go by” his step father’s family name. But what relevance is this to presidential eligibility?

  50. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 10:39 am #

    Obama addressed this in his book. When he and his mother moved to Indonesia, Lolo took to introducing Obama to people as his son. Lolo felt that Obama would have an easier time assimilating if he did that. So it was only natural that the Indonesians he met knew him as “Barry Soetoro.”

    However, we know that at Occidental College he was enrolled as “Barack Obama” and was known to his teachers and fellow students as “Barry Obama.” As Snopes reported:

    Jim Tranquada, Occidental’s Director of Communications, said: “Contemporary public documents, such as the 1979-1980 freshman ‘Lookbook’ (a guide distributed to incoming freshmen) published at the beginning of President Obama’s first year at Occidental, lists him as Barack Obama. All of the Occidental alumni I have spoken to from that era (1979-1981) who knew him, knew him as Barry Obama.”

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/occidental.asp

    And here is a link to a page from his high school yearbook where he is identified as…Barry Obama!

    http://refrigeratorlogic.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/barack-obama-high-school.jpg

    So there remains not a shred of evidence that Obama ever, by his own volition, went by the name “Barry Soetoro.”

  51. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 10:55 am #

    And Kreep is just as dishonest as the rest of the birthers. He makes this claim:

    Did you know that John McCain had a lawsuit filed against him, to force him to establish his citizenship (Hollander v. McCain) during his campaign for President! After he produced evidence and official documents, and after Congressional hearings (!), the U. S., by Senate Resolution 511, John McCain was recognized as a “natural born citizen.” If he had to go through these “hoops”—why didn’t his presidential opponent have to do the same??

    The truth, of course, is that the Hollander lawsuit didn’t force McCain to do anything – it was dismissed for lack of standing, just like all the others. And McCain never produced “evidence and official documents” about his birth to anyone. He never went through any “hoops” and there were no hearings.

    However, I am sure that there are many gullible birthers who are eagerly contributing to Kreep.

  52. avatar
    Montana February 9, 2010 at 11:51 am #

    We won the election and now these sore losers will continue to spew your hate with lies. The way our courts work is that you get a competent lawyer, verifiable facts and present them to a judge, if the facts are real and not half baked lies, then, and only then, you proceed to trial. The Birthers seem to be having a problem with their so called facts that they present. Let’s face it no one will go along with you until you guys win a case, but until then, you will continue to appear dumb, crazy or racist, or maybe all three. Keep plucking that chicken.

  53. avatar
    nbc February 9, 2010 at 12:20 pm #

    It’s a non-issue my dear friend.

  54. avatar
    ballantine February 9, 2010 at 12:33 pm #

    Of all the silliness in birtherdom, the American Grand Jury is my favorite. If we had tried our hardest, we could not have come up with something that would have made the birthers look more foolish. I would never have believed that we could go on wingnut websites and convince anyone that they could re-name their next klan meeting a super, duper grand jury and start handing out actual indictments. I now believe those sayings that 30% of Americans can’t find Canada on a map.

  55. avatar
    nbc February 9, 2010 at 1:29 pm #

    Don’t forget the Jaghunter (Fitzy) and Monroe County Grand Jury… Another hilarious case.

  56. avatar
    bob February 9, 2010 at 1:42 pm #

    Anyone seen the actual brief?

  57. avatar
    SvenMagnussen February 9, 2010 at 1:46 pm #

    Rickey: Obama addressed this in his book. When he and his mother moved to Indonesia, Lolo took to introducing Obama to people as his son. Lolo felt that Obama would have an easier time assimilating if he did that. So it was only natural that the Indonesians he met knew him as “Barry Soetoro.”However, we know that at Occidental College he was enrolled as “Barack Obama” and was known to his teachers and fellow students as “Barry Obama.” As Snopes reported:Jim Tranquada, Occidental’s Director of Communications, said: “Contemporary public documents, such as the 1979-1980 freshman ‘Lookbook’ (a guide distributed to incoming freshmen) published at the beginning of President Obama’s first year at Occidental, lists him as Barack Obama. All of the Occidental alumni I have spoken to from that era (1979-1981) who knew him, knew him as Barry Obama.”http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/occidental.aspAnd here is a link to a page from his high school yearbook where he is identified as…Barry Obama!http://refrigeratorlogic.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/barack-obama-high-school.jpgSo there remains not a shred of evidence that Obama ever, by his own volition, went by the name “Barry Soetoro.”

    How can someone assimilate to a new country when they don’t intend to seek citizenship?

    Barry and his mother permitted Lolo to change Barry’s last name, enroll him in a private school and public school in Indonesia, encouraged him to learn the language and study the religion most prominent in the nation; yet, we’re supposed to believe Barry had no intention of obtaining citizenship?

    What would be the purpose of maintaining his U.S. Citizenship when his mother is making plans to spend the rest of her life in Indonesia? What was Barry going to go back to in the U.S that Indonesia couldn’t offer?

  58. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 1:50 pm #

    “What was Barry going to go back to in the U.S that Indonesia couldn’t offer?”

    US president.

  59. avatar
    nbc February 9, 2010 at 2:05 pm #

    How can someone assimilate to a new country when they don’t intend to seek citizenship?

    Citizenship is a small part of ‘assimilation’ into a new country. Studying customs, history, language and submersion into the culture are the most effective ways. Citizenship is just window dressing.

    How many citizens do we know that have
    failed to assimilate into the Country’s society? Not necessarily personally but we have all heard to stories…

    Citizenship is no reliable indicator as to the intent to assimilate into a culture.

    yet, we’re supposed to believe Barry had no intention of obtaining citizenship?

    Speculation at best. And since President Obama would have had to wait until the age of 18, the answer is simple: Even if Obama may have had an intention to pursue Indonesian citizenship when reaching the age of 18, his return to the US at age 10, as a US citizen, prevented this hypothetical scenario from happening.

  60. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 2:07 pm #

    Hey, Sven: What’s the difference between an incontinent dog with food aggression, and a birther?

  61. avatar
    SFJeff February 9, 2010 at 2:14 pm #

    Barry and his mother permitted Lolo to change Barry’s last name… we’re supposed to believe Barry had no intention of obtaining citizenship?

    I doubt 6 year old Barry really had much of a firm concept of what citizenship really means, let alone a firm intention of obtaining citizenship in a new country.

    Have you ever even been around a 6 year old? Or even a 10 year old? My daughter just turned 11, and I am quite proud of her. We talk about the news and current events, and she has opinions. But being an 11 year old her ability to make decisions that will affect the rest of her life is not developed yet. Even if she wanted a tatoo today, that doesn’t mean she has the judgement to understand the implications of that decision as an adult.

    “What would be the purpose of maintaining his U.S. Citizenship when his mother is making plans to spend the rest of her life in Indonesia?”

    As a parent, even if I were to choose to change my citizenship, I wouldn’t presume to make that decision for my child- even if it were possible. I think that you presume that Ann Durham hated America as much as you do, and that she would give up her American citizenship as willingly as you would.

    You still have yet to provide one example of a 6 year old or 10 year old successfully disolving their U.S. citizenship.

  62. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 2:35 pm #

    Hmmm…

    I noticed how Sven and Chufho have “conveniently” been totally silent on John’s AGJ utter fail on the whole Columbia College claims that we easily dismantled.

    …Of course, give it a few months and you’ll hear them try to flog that dead horse again.

  63. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 2:39 pm #

    SvenMagnussen says:

    How can someone assimilate to a new country when they don’t intend to seek citizenship?

    People do it all the time. My brother-in-law was born in Italy, came to the U.S. when he was 5 or so, obtained permanent resident status but he has never become a U.S. citizen. He is now 61 years old and is fully assimilated into the culture of America — in fact, he just bought himself a huge flatscreen TV for Christmas. He even speaks a little English.

    …we’re supposed to believe Barry had no intention of obtaining citizenship?

    I don’t know what intentions he formed while he was between the ages of 6 and 10, but intentions are irrelevant. When I was that age I intended to become a player for the New York Yankees, but oddly enough my name doesn’t appear anywhere in the team’s records.

  64. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 2:43 pm #

    It’s possible that the court hasn’t received it yet, or it hasn’t been logged in. I’ve been looking for it on Scribd but no sign of it yet.

  65. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 2:59 pm #

    Hmmm…

    After reading through Kreeps latest crap-pile of nothing new, the only thing that stood out was the FIVE, yes FIVE mentions throughout for people to donate money to his “cause”.

    That’s what this is really all about folks. Just another two-bit huckster suckering gullible fools to part with their money.

    The only thing that Kreep has succeeded at is coming up with his own version of a Nigerian bank scam and stoking irrational fears and hatreds in order to emotionally fleece his victims.

    I find it hilariously weak that his whole “iron clad” argument and claims of “injury” to his client Alan Keyes, etc is that they seek relief by having all the Obama/Biden votes declared null & void. ….Hmmm…and that would still result in Keys electoral vote total being still nowhere closer to winning the election than before.

    Alan Keyes (America’s Independent Party) received 47,768 total votes; listed in three states: Colorado and Florida, plus California (listed as American Independent), and also had write-in status in Kentucky, Ohio, Texas, and Utah.

    He did not even have enough ballot access to win 270 electoral votes under ANY scenario and there is no way they could argue that his inability to get on a ballot is in any way the fault of any other candidate out there except himself.

    Even if Kreep somehow also nullified all of McCain’s votes, then Nader would have been the next highest in line (736,804 votes). After that it went Barr, Baldwin and McKinney, respectively.

    In summary, Keyes never had a snowball’s chance in hell and the results prove it. His ability to try to claim injury with a straight face is as big a joke as Kreep himself is.

  66. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 3:01 pm #

    I’m suspicious that there even will be a filing. The true goal is to fleece the foolish to fill his own coffers.

  67. avatar
    Bob February 9, 2010 at 3:15 pm #

    It is on the docket for the California Court of Appeals.

    California courts aren’t on PACER (and don’t use something similar); that’s why someone hasn’t grabbed it and put it online yet.

  68. avatar
    SvenMagnussen February 9, 2010 at 3:25 pm #

    Does Indonesia allow permanent residency for children in the mid-60s?

    Wouldn’t a 6-year-old’s goals be that of his mother when the birth father is absent? And wouldn’t a newlywed married to an Indonesian want to become an Indonesian National after moving to his home country?

    Since Lolo was working as a professional and S.A.D. graduated college, isn’t it reasonable to assume there were private discussions about family planning, nationality, and other family issues? We can look back and see Lolo and S.A.D. had a daughter together in Indonesia, isn’t it reasonable to think S.A.D. would want Barry and his sister to have the same nationality of the country they are living in?

    Ask yourself, WWOD? What Would Orly Do? Besides a successful dental practice, marriage, a home in Laguna Nigel, CA and three wonderful children, she wanted to become a U.S. Citizen. S.A.D. and Orly have a lot in common.

  69. avatar
    richCares February 9, 2010 at 3:31 pm #

    “she wanted to become a U.S. Citizen”

    no evidence that she has become a citizen, in fact no record of her voting. Show me her proof of US citizenship or STFU!

  70. avatar
    milspec February 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm #

    Wow 5 “click here to donate” lines.

  71. avatar
    June bug February 9, 2010 at 3:45 pm #

    Sven wrote: “Ask yourself, WWOD? What Would Orly Do?”

    Oh yes. Every morning when I get up, the first I do in preparation for my day is ask myself “WWOD”. /snark

  72. avatar
    G February 9, 2010 at 3:55 pm #

    Gee Sven, I see you’re back to your pathetic speculative concern trolling.

    You can fantasize all the “what if” BS you wish to, but nothing changes the fact that US Law prevents parents from being able to strip their child’s US citizenship.

    What part of that don’t you understand? None of your fantasies can get around that little legal hurdle, so keep on failing.

  73. avatar
    Black Lion February 9, 2010 at 4:17 pm #

    You forgot become a stark raving lunatic….But again Sven no proof? In the time you have been posting here you have never once provided any proof to support your theories. No matter what SAD might have done, it wouldn’t have affected Barack. As a matter of fact she sent him back to HI to visit on occasion and used to go to the American club so that he could experience his culture. So that doesn’t sound like someone that did not want her son to be American. As a matter of fact it sounds like she wanted him to keep in touch with his American roots…

  74. avatar
    aarrgghh February 9, 2010 at 4:27 pm #

    good catch!

  75. avatar
    SFJeff February 9, 2010 at 4:29 pm #

    “Wouldn’t a 6-year-old’s goals be that of his mother when the birth father is absent?”

    Your question is exactly why a 6 year old can’t give up his U.S. citizenship- he is not capable of making that informed, independent decision.

    “And wouldn’t a newlywed married to an Indonesian want to become an Indonesian National after moving to his home country?”

    One of my best friends married a lovely Aussie gal, and they moved to Sydney. 15 years later he is still a U.S. citizen. Why would you assume that just because you would be so willing to give up U.S. citizenship that everyone else is?

  76. avatar
    June bug February 9, 2010 at 5:18 pm #

    From Sven: “Ask yourself, WWOD? What Would Orly Do?”

    Oh yes. Because I know whenever I have a decision to make, the first thing I do is ask myself, “Now WWOD?” /snark

  77. avatar
    SvenMagnussen February 9, 2010 at 5:30 pm #

    WWOD, Black Lion?

    Orly taught her kids Russian, yet they are Natural-born citizens with two US citizen parents.

  78. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- February 9, 2010 at 5:52 pm #

    And now we see that Sven has adopted Orly as a Messiah.

    PROTIP: Stay away from the grape flavor-aid.

  79. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 6:04 pm #

    SvenMagnussen says:

    Does Indonesia allow permanent residency for children in the mid-60s?

    Indonesia law is irrelevant. The only law which matters is U.S. law.

    Wouldn’t a 6-year-old’s goals be that of his mother when the birth father is absent?

    Also irrelevant. A 6-year-old has no choice but to adhere to his or her parent’s wishes. My father wanted my oldest brother to become a doctor, but when my brother got to be old enough to decide for himself he decided that he didn’t want to be a doctor. So much for my father’s goal.

    And wouldn’t a newlywed married to an Indonesian want to become an Indonesian National after moving to his home country?

    Maybe, maybe not. There is no record of Stanley Ann ever weighing in on the possibility of becoming an Indonesian citizen, so we have no way of knowing what she thought about it. All we know for sure is that there is no record of her becoming a citizen of Indonesia, and even if she did it would have no bearing on Obama’s citizenship.

  80. avatar
    Saint James February 9, 2010 at 6:20 pm #

    SvenMagnussen…give it a rest.You already lost the Indonesian citizenship myth…A LONG TIME AGO! You sound like a broken record. Your talking point is trite!

  81. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 6:22 pm #

    I just noticed that the website on which Kreep’s grab for cash was posted is full of anti-Semitic links, including once called “Jew Watch.”

  82. avatar
    richCares February 9, 2010 at 6:29 pm #

    “Orly taught her kids Russian, yet they are Natural-born citizens with two US citizen parents.”

    There are no records to show Orly is a citizen. In fact she has never voted in California, probably because she is not a citizen.

  83. avatar
    Rickey February 9, 2010 at 6:33 pm #

    Ah, I didn’t realize that this appeal was Keyes v. Bowen. I mistakenly assumed it was Kreep’s appeal in Keyes/Barnett v. Obama.

    Of course, even if the state court in California invalidated California’s votes for Obama, he would still win the electoral vote with room to spare, so it’s all an exercise in futility. The real goal, as we know, is to try to find something embarrassing about Obama.

  84. avatar
    Whatever4 February 9, 2010 at 6:37 pm #

    The intentions of a 6-10 year old run more to playing games with friends and eating everything in sight than to issues of citizenship. Besides, he couldn’t renounce his citizenship until at least 16.

    What did US citizenship give that Indonesian didn’t? Given the extremely violent recent history of the country, it provided safety. In the event of further coups or purges, a US citizen had a better shot of leaving the country than did an Indonesian child.

    Besides — Obama’s mother kept her citizenship.

  85. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 7:10 pm #

    “Kreep’s grab for cash was posted is full of anti-Semitic links, including once called “Jew Watch.”

    There are at least 10 vicious anti-Semitic links. That’s why I can’t understand why Orly and Berg have anything to do with that crowd. And there are Republican Jews…

    WTF?

  86. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 7:12 pm #

    “In fact she has never voted in California, probably because she is not a citizen.”

    Like 99.9% conservatives, she is a hypocrite.

  87. avatar
    Northland10 February 9, 2010 at 7:18 pm #

    I believe at least one of her sons would have been born before she was a citizen in 1992. Therefore, he was not born to 2 citizen parents. In the birther’s book, he is not natural born.

    So by your rules, can he become a natural born citizen later? If Orly had left before she was a citizen but he still grew up in Orange County, just as now, would he not be a natural born citizen?

    What’s the difference here?

  88. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 7:22 pm #

    “with two US citizen parents”

    Please prove she is a US citizen. Links please. I can tell you that as a refusenik, and given subsidized housing and tuition, she became an Israeli citizen. She may be a dual US/Israel citizen, but I do not know; she may only have a green card.

    I don’t care, except that as a refugee, she is making a lot of noise. She’s what we call in Yiddish, a grubber yung.

  89. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny February 9, 2010 at 7:28 pm #

    Because there was a claim his middle name was not Hussein, but Mohammed. Some right-wing blogger suggested that Obama should post his birth certificate to disprove that claim, “editing out the registration number to stop identity theft”.

    Though I found that page when I was still on the BBC blog about the US elections, I forgot whose blog that was. The source must be on Politijab somewhere.

    The claim that Obama was born in Kenya was born out of the claim that he was a Muslim.

  90. avatar
    Saint James February 9, 2010 at 7:29 pm #

    SvenMagnussen, Orly is not a US Citizen, she belongs to a sleeper cell Stalinist Russian Provocateurs. She must show her birth certificate that is written in Chinese. Any other proof that she presents will prove that she is a Stalinist Russian Provocateur and therefore need to be tried for treason.
    Now Sven, why don’t you prove that she’s not.

  91. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 7:44 pm #

    My understanding is that Axlerod made the suggestion to post his BC, to prove his middle name was not Mohammed. From what I know, the ‘born in Mombasa’ was started by Philip Berg, a Clinton supporter who was trying to derail Obama. He lives in suburban Philly.

    Paul: I sent Berg my cat’s Mombasa birth certificate.

  92. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 7:58 pm #

    @Saint James: I thought Orly was a White Russian sympathizer/provocateur. Plus, she’s schtupping the help.

    This is a deeper conspiracy than I thought.

  93. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny February 9, 2010 at 8:02 pm #

    Orly was a sleeper cell, recruited by the KGB when they were scraping the barrel. Putin wanted Obama to win. 1)McCain has links to Georgia 2) Russia’s economy, built on oil exports will collapse if ordinary Americans have no money to buy that oil, so Putin wants a Keynesian FDR type to run the American economy – for eight years. He wakes up sleeper Orly and orders her to support birferism. Orly is so stupid she has no idea she is being used as an agent provocateur, to discredit the Republicans. Only thing Putin got wrong: he never thought 20% of the Americans would be so gullible as to follow Orly. Hm, somehow I think you may be right.

    But I would also want Sven to explain why Orly went to live in Romania after she married her later husband. Did she defect to Ceaucescu? She could dispel that by producing her Romanian dental diploma. I am sure she has got one of those somewhere.

  94. avatar
    Benji Franklin February 9, 2010 at 8:06 pm #

    Dear Misha,

    Let me take this one for Gooli; he has no concept of the currency required by the answer I’m thinking of!

    You asked:”Hey, Sven: What’s the difference between an incontinent dog with food aggression, and a birther?”

    … and I believe the answer you’re looking for is:

    The difference is that an incontinent dog with food aggression will generally only consume ONE ethicist.

    BenjiFranklin

  95. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny February 9, 2010 at 8:07 pm #

    Confusion here: “after she married her later husband” -> “after she MET her later husband”. The chronology is a bit doubtful, but it seems that the move to Romania preceded the marriage.

  96. avatar
    Bob Weber February 9, 2010 at 8:27 pm #

    Rickey,

    I think it’s more to get contributions from birfoons.

  97. avatar
    Bob Weber February 9, 2010 at 8:37 pm #

    Sven, learning the language and customs of the land in which you reside, even if only temporarily, is just good sense and good manners. Something birthers generally lack.

  98. avatar
    Bob February 9, 2010 at 9:23 pm #

    Well, to Kreep’s defense, he didn’t post it on that site.

    But, yeah, birfers travel in many of the same circles as anti-Semites.

  99. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 9:50 pm #

    “Well, to Kreep’s defense, he didn’t post it on that site.”

    Sorry, he maintains that cesspool. He is listed on the main page as “Executive Director, United States Justice Foundation.” Orly and Berg make common cause with that reptile.

    Here are some gems from HIS site:
    -Jew Watch
    -The Synagogue of Satan
    -Rothschild’s Choice
    -Israel’s Deliberate Attack On the U.S.S Liberty
    -Zionism and Christianity: UNHOLY ALLIANCE
    -Real Zionist News “I wish to warn how Jews are destroying Christianity throughout the world.”
    -an exposé on the myth of Auschwitz

    I repeat: the conservative movement is a haven for white nationalists, anti-semites, theocrats, anti-tax rebels, and assorted other kooks like Orly, and Leo.

    And don’t forget Andy Martin: He had named his campaign committee for his 1986 congressional run “The Anthony R. Martin-Trigona Congressional Campaign to Exterminate Jew Power in America.”

    In Martin’s motion for the 1983 bankruptcy case, he called the judge “a crooked, slimy Jew who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race.”

    In another motion that year, Martin stated, “I am able to understand how the Holocaust took place, and with every passing day feel less and less sorry that it did.” He went on to say that “Jew survivors are operating as a wolf pack to steal my property.”

  100. avatar
    Saint James February 9, 2010 at 9:59 pm #

    misha,”Let meee finish, let meeee finish…I’m tellingg the truuuth!” ha ha ha ha ha…Orly was neeeverrr a Menshevik, she only claimed being part of the oppressed few. She is a full red blooded Bolshevik provocateur. Her babushka was Stalin’s concubine. Now if she schtups her mission, she might end up east to the gulag of Nobosibirsk!

  101. avatar
    misha February 9, 2010 at 10:22 pm #

    I supported Sharansky until he went off the deep end. What’s with that crowd?

  102. avatar
    Expelliarmus February 9, 2010 at 10:49 pm #

    Well, to keep things accurate, it seems to me that Orly has made it very clear that she absolutely detests Kreep — she objected to his presence in court and certainly hasn’t been flattering in her blog rants.

  103. avatar
    Mary Brown February 10, 2010 at 12:07 am #

    1.His mother was not stupid. 2.Again specualtion about the way people should reason,not proof. 3.Why would she change his citizenship? 4.How could she? Again, she did not have that right. An adult cannot do that for a minor. You are really dense.

  104. avatar
    Mary Brown February 10, 2010 at 12:13 am #

    Many people marry foreign nationals and maintain their citizenship. I have met foreign military wives who did so. One was a very good friend who was always a Scot to the core.(Yes, I know she would have a British Passport.) She always joked about going in a different line when the family came back from a visit. Again, you speculate on how you BELIEVE someone might feel. They also might feel that their nationality is not something they would want to change, marriage or not. Live a real life, Sven, or whoever you are.

  105. avatar
    Mary Brown February 10, 2010 at 12:17 am #

    Thank you. But then you know, Obama was bred to become the President. So, as Sven might say, you never know. Good grief, what kind of kool aid do these people drink?

  106. avatar
    nbC February 10, 2010 at 12:35 am #

    Wouldn’t a 6-year-old’s goals be that of his mother when the birth father is absent?

    Two problems:

    1. Indonesia Law does not allow a child of 6 years of age to become an Indonesia Citizen

    2. US law does not allow a child of that age to renounce his citizenship.

    Poor Sven

  107. avatar
    OldNorse February 10, 2010 at 1:23 pm #

    To clarify a litte to Sven:
    “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.
    http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
    (Section F)

  108. avatar
    nbC February 10, 2010 at 1:49 pm #

    Very well said. But Sven does not deal in fact, he’d rather be speculating

  109. avatar
    Passerby February 10, 2010 at 4:45 pm #

    I’m going to rant for a moment, without even reading any of the other comments first (I’ll check them later.) But this happens to be something that really pisses me off, and not just about this particular publication.

    That something is classified as “commentary” is no excuse for including statements that are factually incorrect. No excuse.

    If your facts are incorrect, then your commentary based on those false statements is useless. Even if your larger point should happen to be true, it’s still useless. If your larger point is true, you should be able to find some true facts that support it.

    I hate it that this has become acceptable. And not just at the WND, either. Many newspapers and magazines have used this same rationale, and it’s total BS.

    Sorry, had to get it out of my system.

  110. avatar
    G February 10, 2010 at 6:33 pm #

    Well said Passerby and you’ve made a very important point about how a lot of standard media (lets include TV and radio news as well as print) have really fallen in their standards and used the same false rationale.

    I truly think this is a big part of the problem of how and why such bogus lies, speculative BS and kooky conspiracy crap have been able to take such a hold and flourish, despite how often they are completely discredited by actual facts and logic.

  111. avatar
    Black Lion February 11, 2010 at 8:43 am #

    Do we know for sure that Orly is a US citizen? You are just taking her world for it. She has never provided any documentation to back up her claim…

  112. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 11, 2010 at 3:08 pm #

    She is, if you can trust WorldNetDaily.

  113. avatar
    misha February 11, 2010 at 5:58 pm #

    “if you can trust WorldNetDaily”

    Trust them?!
    Hahahahahohohohohahaha (gasp) don’t do that to me, especially when I’m drinking coffee.

    (puff of albuterol)

    Whew, I caught my breath…

  114. avatar
    Mary Brown February 11, 2010 at 6:35 pm #

    “Barry and his mother”? A six year old had a very deep conversation with his mother about changing his name and citizenship? Get a life here. Six year olds taken away from their home, in a strange place, just do what they are told is best for them. They do not have the capacity to form intent about their citizenship or anything else besides play, friends at school and learning to read. Again, Sven or whoever you are, speculation about his mother’s intent is crazy enough. But speculation about a six-year-olds is fiction.

  115. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 11, 2010 at 7:50 pm #

    Hey, it took me 3 minutes to type that phrase because of all the irony I was packing into it.

  116. avatar
    Northland10 February 11, 2010 at 10:43 pm #

    In using the date, I just used the OC Register as a source. For my point it was sufficient and, absent any other evidence, I do not have reason or interest in questioning it.

    Now, if I were a birther… she has not shown me evidence that she is a US Citizen and that she is not a Moldovan/Russian/Israeli/Latvian (husband)citizen. Therefore, she must be illegal. Even if she has a supposed naturalization certificate, isn’t she still a dual citizen? blah blah blah…

  117. avatar
    Joyce February 13, 2010 at 10:17 am #

    Bob Weber: Sven, learning the language and customs of the land in which you reside, even if only temporarily, is just good sense and good manners.Something birthers generally lack.

    Particularly for an anthropologist doing research.

  118. avatar
    Kathryn N February 15, 2010 at 3:45 pm #

    That’s funny. I recall reading an article written by Barack Obama that was published in the Columbia University student newspaper.
    Also, I read an interview with a professor who taught Obama at Columbia. He declared that Obama was one of his brightest students.
    So the claim that President Obama never attended Columbia is untrue. The certifiable crazy James Manning can “declare” all he wants, but he’s just blowing hot air.

  119. avatar
    nbC February 15, 2010 at 4:19 pm #

    Hours after the news that there was NO evidence that Obama had attended Columbia people had found several examples to debunk this story.

    No much of a researcher…