Main Menu

Archive | Selective Service

Obama’s Selective Service registration

“Complicity” doesn’t mean what you think it does, and other birther misapplications of the English language

lunaticSometimes I wish the birthers could hear themselves the way others do.1 I’m sure it would be a shock. 😯 Here’s a little bit of transcript from the Mike Volin “Where’s Obama’s Birth Certificate” Internet radio show yesterday talking about the delivery of his Sheriff’s Kit to members of Congress.

Caller: Hey Mike, I just wanted to mention that if we send these kits to like the TV stations, the news outlets, the papers and any other senators or congressmen, we should send them “certified” or “registered.” That way they actually have to sign for them. They actually have someone there, has to sign and acknowledge that they got the kit.

… doesn’t want to be on the wrong side of this – when it comes down, because anybody that is on  the wrong side and has notification of the evidence in hand are complicit with this crime, and that is one of the things that we need to keep these  congressmen and senators on their toes.  “You’re complicit with the crime that you have been made aware of.”

Some words don’t mean what birthers think they mean, and “complicity” may be one of them. Knowing about the commission of a crime and not reporting it is complicity. Where I think the first caller is mistaken, is in confusing complicity with being an accessory to the crime. Generally complicity is not itself a crime without significant subsequent involvement. Let me list some problems with calling anything here “complicity”:

  1. The Sheriff’s Kit never specifies exactly what the crime is. Even if the birth certificate is a fake, putting a fake document on the Internet is not a crime, and every President lies (well maybe not Jimmy Carter which was one of his problems). The birth certificate was never submitted to anyone as a legal document or used in candidate filings. Lying on TV is not fraud.
  2. Even if we did say that Obama’s selective service registration was forged, it happened more than 5 years ago and the statute of limitations has run out.
  3. Even if we did say that Obama’s birth certificate was forged, the Sheriff’s Kit doesn’t say who did it, when or where.
  4. Reading the Sheriff’s Kit does not give a member of Congress any personal knowledge of the commission of a crime. Indeed the compilers of the Sheriff’s Kit have no knowledge of the commission of a crime, only conclusions. The presentation is a narrative of arriving at conclusions, not evidence of a crime.
  5. Complicity implies failure to report a crime. The Sheriff’s Kit is public information, and law enforcement is already aware of it. The birthers actually think that the information they are plying on Congress actually came from law enforcement in the first place! There is noting left to report.
  6. The birthers want people to do something about a crime (whatever it is), but failure to do so is not complicity. TV stations, news outlets and papers have no legal duty to do something about a crime they are aware of—that’s not complicity.
  7. Congress has no role in prosecuting crimes. They can remove someone from office through impeachment, but not prosecute them for a crime. The decision to impeach or not is wholly up to the members of Congress and the failure to do so is not complicity.

Continue Reading →

Selective Service confirms Obama registration

Sometimes I get burned taking thing for granted. The other day I realized that the Obama Selective Service form formerly published in 2008 that has been criticized by the Cold Case Posse as a fake has never to my knowledge appeared from any reputable source. Was the published image completely authentic? I also wondered, would the best available copy of the selective service form possibly show more detail?

The short answers to those two issues are “yes” and “no.”

I filed my FOIA with the Selective Service System on September 2, and just 10 days later, I had my answer. I asked specifically of the images available were color, black and white or grey scale. They said:

A Xerox 😯 copy in black and white color is enclosed; it is the best copy available to us.

The image I received appears to me to be of about the same quality as what has been published before, and in particular large portions of the postmark are missing–not just the “19”, but  other text and parts of the year number as well. It is obvious on this image that the postmark didn’t reproduce well. There is just a tiny bit from the bottom of another form on my image, suggesting that it derives from a microfilm copy.

What was marginally interesting, from which this article’s title comes, was a sentence in their response letter to me, saying:

Mr. Obama did indeed register with Selective Service and was assigned Selective Service Number 61-1125539-1 on September 4, 1980.

So the President’s registration is confirmed by the agency in charge of selective service registrations, just as his birth in Hawaii is confirmed by the agency in charge of birth registrations in Hawaii.

I’m satisfied. Birthers, of course, have a different view.

Obama Selective Service Registration, FOIA, 9/10/1013

Orly sues the post office

I guess you can’t be a crusading attorney without an active lawsuit. Orly Taitz isn’t generating much buzz with her languishing case in Mississippi, and her not-so-sexy appeals, so here’s a new shiny object to garner attention, Taitz v. Donahoe et al.

Yes, dear reader, Orly Taitz has sued the Postmaster General. “Why,” you ask, and well you should. What did the Post Office do to warrant a 62-page complaint? They didn’t respond satisfactorily to a Freedom of Information Act request. Taitz had filed a complaint with the Postal Service’s Inspector General, claiming that Obama’s Selective Service registration was faked (these registrations are filed at post offices and received by postal personnel). The IG didn’t respond and Taitz filed a FOIA to find out what happened to her complaint. They didn’t respond to her FOIA request either, she says.

I have a lot of experience with non-responsive government agencies to FOIA requests, and I can appreciate Taitz’ frustration. What I can’t understand, however, is what she expects the Postal Service to do about an encounter between Obama and some unidentified postal clerk 30 years ago, an encounter that the birthers claimed never happened.

Taitz makes lengthy citations from the FOIA statutes and regulations. She then attaches a number of partially-illegible documents (Orly consistently fails to provide legible scanned documents in her court filings). She provides some images, ripped off from the Cold Case Posse, who in turn ripped off the research of Debbie Schlussel.

The problem for the Postal Service is that they apparently didn’t respond to the FOIA within the statutory time limit, which means (if I understand this) that the Court has jurisdiction and may instruct the Postal Service to respond. Their response will likely be,

image I know nothing, nothing.

Read the complaint here (at least the legible part):

Continue Reading →

Waiting for Zullo

Flying Commando Cody from the movie serial Radar Men from the MoonThis is a compilation of things promised by, or information reasonably expected from Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse, that we are still waiting for. While Zullo uses phrases like “ongoing investigation,” from the beginning the Cold Case Posse has chosen to make its case before the public, and not before a jury. Therefore, there are significant questions outstanding from the court of public opinion:

  1. A list of crimes President Obama allegedly committed in the jurisdiction of Sheriff Arpaio.
  2. Any charges filed against President Obama.
  3. The transcript of phone the conversation with Verna K. Lee.
  4. The report of handwriting expert Reed Hayes.
  5. Copies of any vital statistics manuals that support the race code sets claimed by the Zullo in the press conference and YouTube videos.
  6. What title Zullo held as a municipal policeman, and precisely how long he was in that job and what were his duties.
  7. How many Selective Service registration forms did the CCP examine in determining that two-digit years never appear.
  8. The results of tests of Xerox WorkCentre 7655 scanning a birth certificate compared to the White House PDF of President Obama’s certificate.
  9. A motive for the President to forge his birth certificate, when the State of Hawaii verifies everything on it.
  10. Explanation of why he considers the 1960 vital statistics manual materially different from the 1961 manual on the question of race coding.
  11. What was in the “secret” breakout session for the  Constitutional Peace Officers convention, and why it’s secret.
  12. Financial report of the income and expenses of the 501(c)(3) non-profit Cold Case Posse.
  13. Explanation of why the Cold Case Posse is not registered as a non-profit with the State of Arizona.
  14. Explanation of how Zullo has “personal knowledge” (as stated in his sworn affidavit) of things he only read about.
  15. Release of the conclusive proof that will “convince even the greatest skeptic,” “evidence beyond a reasonable doubt” he mentioned in January of 2013.
  16. Explanation of how Zullo had “verified” the Cold Case Posse findings
  17. Exactly who is on the Cold Case Posse “investigating” Obama’s birth certificate and what are their qualifications.
  18. A statement of how much money Zullo received for the book he and Corsi jointly wrote.
  19. A statement of how much of the Cold Case Posse reports were written by persons not on the Posse, and their names.
  20. An explanation of why Mike Zullo pressured Mark Gillar not to debate Frank Arduini on his radio show.
  21. An explanation of why Mike Zullo pressured John Sampson not to testify for Orly Taitz in Indiana.
  22. A disclosure of all financial dealings between Mike Zullo and WorldNetDaily.
  23. The results of interviews by the Cold Case Posse of the White House press corps members who personally viewed the President’s original long form birth certificate.
  24. Documentation of the foreign-born children of foreign nationals having Hawaiian birth certificates that Zullo claims to have.
  25. Results of the IRS investigation into the tax-exempt status of the Cold Case Posse as the result of the June 2012 complaint.
  26. The results of contacts between the CCP and the Hawaii Department of Health.
  27. The documentation of two children who were allegedly listed as newborns in the Honolulu newspapers who were actually 3 years old at the time.
  28. Documentation of the foreign born children listed in Department of Health birth announcements in the Obama birth time frame.
  29. What are the names and the credentials of the “computer graphics experts” and “forensic document examiners” consulted by the Posse in 2012?
  30. Why was John Woodman rebuffed when he offered to present technical information to the Posse?
  31. What was the response of the Postal Service regarding two-digit date images on postmarks?
  32. What was the response of the Selective Service regarding two-digit date images on postmarks?
  33. What was the response of the White House to Cold Case Posse requests as to the details of how the President’s long form birth certificate was scanned and processed for release to the public?
  34. Who is the investigation’s "person of interest?"

New (old) attack on Obama’s Selective Service registration

The signer of Orly’s latest affidavit sounds a little more expert than the usual birther volunteer document examiner, 20 years as a special agent with Homeland Security  and 20 years as an investigator with the Coast Guard. For some reason, though, Coffman has had a thing about investigating Barack Obama dating back at least to his Senate days in February of 2008.

I have to start off by saying that I don’t know if this Jeffrey Stephen Coffman has the qualifications listed on his affidavit. For the purposes of discussion, however, I will assume that he does. As with any expert testimony, a report is presented and the methodology is described, and it is the methodology that I will treat below.

Here’s the affidavit: Continue Reading →

Selective Service confirms: records not destroyed

In a letter to Mike Zullo dated May 10, Richard S. Flahavan, Associate Director for Public and Intergovernmental, confirms that original copies of Selective Service registrations (the “record copy”) on microfilm are maintained in a secure facility, as well as a working copy. A computer database is also maintained for registrants born after January 1, 1960.

We’ve seen images of the microfilm registration form, and a screen shot from the computer system obtained in 2008 for Barack Obama.

In what appears to be a jab at the Cold Case Posse, Flahavan said:

…access is available to law enforcement organizations with Federal jurisdiction that are conducting an authorized Federal investigation.

I.e., “not you, buddy.”

The inquiry that prompted this letter is based an a birther’s silly reading of a Federal regulation that permitted destruction of non-record copies of registrations that weren’t needed any more. See my article: “Obama’s draft registration: conspiracies simmer”.

2012-05-10 – Letter – SSS to Zullo – Flahavan