In a big article authored by Alan Jones at the Washington Times Communities web site, further discussion of Barack Obama’s Selective Service System registration appears. The article is far too long and filled with WND-style innuendo and re-hashing of old grievances; however, there are two points I would like to single out for comment.
First, the author says:
Review of official documents posted on the websites of the Government Printing Office, NARA, and the Selective Service System confirms that if Obama registered for selective service in 1980, the original paper card would have likely been destroyed, but only after being transferred into original microfilm records, microfilm record copies, and computer storage systems.
Birthers seem to be averse to providing hyperlinks to government documents, but it wasn’t too hard to find and this information shows that demands to see original paper documents by various birthers are moot and in particular that Sheriff “Clueless Joe” Arpaio asked SSS director Romo to produce the original form.
The question then is reduced to whether the copy of the FOIA microfilm image of Obama’s registration issued by the Selective Service System in 2008 under the Bush Administration, is actually on the microfilm with all the other 1980 registrations.
The second point is an allegation/innuendo that the government changed the rules to allow it to destroy evidence. The article says:
The Selective Service System’s new privacy rules were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, September 20, 2011, four days after the September 16 announcement by World Net Daily that the Maricopa County (Arizona) Sheriff’s Office “Cold Case Posse” was opening an inquiry with full subpoena power into alleged forgery of several documents concerning Obama’s birth and draft registration.
The obvious response to this nonsense is that if the Cold Case Posse had the authority to subpoena Selective Service records, why didn’t they? They have no such authority. Further, folks had been spreading rumors about Obama’s draft registration since 2008! No one knew, when Sheriff Joe announced his investigation, that an issue that had been debunked two years before was going to be dusted off as a main character in the result.
The article claims that the status of microfilm copies of Selective Service applications has changed, that copies that once were required to be retained can now be destroyed. Copies that must be kept are “record” copies and those that may be destroyed are “non-record” copies. What I see in Jones’ article is the typical birther inability to read. The original microfilm record must be retained until the registrant reaches age 85. The change in the regulation simply clarifies that copies of the original microfilm are non-record copies (it didn’t say before whether they were record or non-record).
The article is full of information; the conclusions are just wrong.