Well, how do you read this?
Although it is not known yet who is responsible for Monday’s heinous bombings at the Boston Marathon that killed three and injured more than 100 people, a source within Iranian intelligence services told WND the Islamic regime was behind them and to look for trails through Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
Do you remember that crazy article at WorldNetDaily by Jerome Corsi about a 100-member White House Obot army under the direction of former Fannie Mae director James Johnson, AKA JimBot. Fogbow Foggy posted a couple of comments online that Corsi swallowed hook, line and sinker. That article was so loony that I thought WND would scrub it, but in that I was mistaken.
Among Obot circles, this nonsense has been the source of considerable fun and jokes at Corsi’s expense. It is wrong for two essential reasons: the online commenter JimBot is not the former Fannie Mae director, and there is no Obot army run out of the White House. The idea is so implausible that even my attempt at fiction about Obama-Campaign-directed Obots fell flat.
We had our laugh over how Corsi was punked a year ago, and I thought that peculiar pimple on the birther movement had dried up. Not so. Birther scanner guru Douglas Vogt revived it again today on the Orly Taitz blog [link to Taitz web site] saying of me:
It looks like you had lied to all of us by not honestly telling your audience that you were paid by the administration, most likely through Jim Johnson, to defend Obama no matter what falsehood the Obots would resort to.
No, Barack Obama will leave office peacefully in 2017, but not until having been sworn in 4 times. Recall that he was sworn in 2 times in 2009, and apparently he will be sworn in 2 times in 2013, once officially on the Constitutionally mandated date of January 20 (a Sunday), and once ceremonially on January 21.
The first two oaths were and presumably the second two oaths will be administered by Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court John Roberts. Now we presume that Justice Roberts has an opinion about what it takes in the way of constitutional qualifications for someone to be President.
The web site WorldNetDaily is hoping that Chief Justice Roberts will exercise his right to remain silent come Inauguration Day 2013, writing in an open letter to Roberts:
When you administered the oath of office to Barack Obama for his first term as president, you could have been excused for believing that Mr. Obama was qualified under the Constitution to hold the office of president, which he had sought and won. After all, Obama’s opponent, John McCain, never raised the issue of Mr. Obama’s qualifications. …
If you choose the easy course of ignoring our Constitution, it does not change the fact that Mr. Obama is barred by that same Constitution from acting as president. I am sure that if you turn your judicial mind to the ramifications of this fraud, both foreign and domestic, you will understand that the harm you will have done insures your impeachment and eternal dishonor at some point down the road: If not this House of Representatives, then the next, or the next, or the next.
So there you have it. If Roberts administers the oath of office to Obama, he’s rendering his decision that Obama is eligible. No escaping it this time.
One of the dumbest questions asked by birthers is “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” Amid unfounded rumors that candidate Obama’s middle name was “Mohammed,” his campaign released his birth certificate in June of 2008. Perhaps you’ve seen it?
Birthers have tried to deny this simple document ever since. First, they denied that the document even existed in paper form, and that it didn’t have the seal of the State of Hawaii. Staff from FactCheck.org actually took photos of the original paper document, but those were denied too.
In an article by Bub Unruh published yesterday at WorldNetDaily, a reader poll was included asking: “Is the question of Obama’s eligibility a dead issue?”
One must have an account and login at WorldNetDaily to vote in their polls, so these 874 respondents might be considered the “hard core” WND types. Essentially 100% (all but 5) said it was not a dead issue. The most popular answer (58%) said:
No, this is a question of vital constitutional significance – we ignore it at our peril
I left this comment:
The reader poll is a hoot. It says a lot about WorldNetDaily when essentially 100% of the respondents supported a nut-case conspiracy theory. Yes folks, the bottom of the barrel is right here.
You remember the Dementors from the Harry Potter books. They were the most vile of creatures—you might call them anti-life. They lived by feeding on horror and despair which they were very good at creating in the minds of their victims. They drained their victims of every good thought, every happy thought, ever decent thought, and left them with their worst experiences—before sucking the soul out of them.
In this Obama conspiracy business there are people who take on the role of Dementors, creating anxiety, fear, despair and anger for their livelihood. There was a very representative pair of them trying the suck the life out of the country by undermining respect for our democratic institutions that I stepped in today.
One is the online tabloid web site WorldNetDaily and the other was a particularly nasty fellow named Glenn Beck that they were reporting on. Beck put a figure of Barack Obama in a jar of what appeared to be urine and called it “Obama in Pee Pee” and tried to sell it on eBay for $25,000. It was reportedly removed from eBay.
WND is conducting a poll of reader reaction to what Beck did. WND readers overwhelmingly reacted positively. Their souls have already been sucked out at that vile place.
I’m a fan of Storage Wars, but I don’t know about Troll Wars. WorldNetDaily has put up an article, using a graphic featuring stylized Guy Fawkes masks, that talks about “pro-Obama ‘Trolls’ who post misinformation.” Yesterday’s article by Jerome Corsi takes on the Orwellian task of turning Internet censorship into freedom of thought.
Trolls are a problem and I have no doubt that WorldNetDaily gets their share of them. I commend the article for its general discussion of troll behavior and you might want to read that. What I do not commend is their conspiratorial approach to the topic, concluding that the trolls are paid.
They give one example of an anonymous post at a web site from someone claiming to be a paid troll. So was this a paid troll, or a troll whose gambit is pretending to be paid?
The WND article is somewhat muddled in its description of its troll detection process. It talks about names, email addressees and IP addresses, which it has available to it, but it also includes aggregate message counts from individuals at WND, CNN, Fox News and other sites. I find it hard to believe that CNN is sharing IP addresses with WorldNetDaily. The methodology is not disclosed.
Meanwhile, Orly Taitz has jumped on the anti-troll bandwagon. Reading her site lately, I found fawning praise of Orly in comments that are so over the top that I think the comments are actually making fun of Orly. She is always saying that someone is messing with her web site and this WND article is like gasoline on a fire for her [Link to Taitz web site]:
Obama’s operatives admit to being paid to defame and harass patriots on various sites. They are a part and parcel of a RICO conspiracy to aid and abet a criminal with forged IDs to usurp the U.S. Presidency by fraud
She’s citing the anonymous poster from the WND article, only that person claimed to be working for Republicans.
The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theories
Sometimes people leave comments designed to offend or outrage the reader, and invoke a firestorm of protest in response. These are the Internet trolls. Replying to them is feeding them and they will come back for more. Refusing to play their game encourages them to go away.
© 2013 Obama Conspiracy Theories. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress. Designed by 
Recent Comments