Main Menu

Tag Archives | Lord Monckton

I demand that birthers stop filing lawsuits (writ of mandumbass)

One ticks off failed birther lawsuits, but as the losses mount (including just recently Orly Taitz’ appeal in the Colvin case), new ones fill in the void.

A writ of mandamus is an  order issued by a court that a public official must do something that they are legally required to do. It is an extraordinary action, and not at all common. In this instance a birther named Richard David Hayes has filed what he calls a “Criminal Complaint and a Writ of Mandamus” with a parish court in New Iberia, Louisiana.

The lawsuit names state officials, including Governor Jindal, as well as Louisiana’s Congressional delegation. Of course state officials have no jurisdiction to take any action regarding Obama’s eligibility, and the members of Congress have no obligation to take any action (impeachment being the obvious one). A court is certainly not going to order a member of Congress to impeach anyone—it would be an egregious violation of the separation of powers.

As for the criminal complaint, that’s not possible from a private citizen.

The suit has been reported by Gerbil Report ™ with some details of the complaint, which I think is based on Cold Case Posse stuff and Lord Monckton stuff from  2012.

The suit will be thrown out sooner or later, having no basis in law. The only interest for me is what birthers think is important in proving their theory.

 

Richard David Hayes added to Birthers from A to Z.

8

It’s my flag too!

MyFlagThe United States was a grand experiment and like all human endeavors, it did some things right and some things wrong. As an American, I tend to focus on what we did right and paint in my mind a tradition of positive evolution from the Founding Fathers to the present (with just missteps from time to time).

I consider myself patriotic. The last time I pledged allegiance to the “flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands” was this past July 6  and I expect to pledge at least once more this month. When I make that pledge, my allegiance is directed to the goal of making the United States a “more perfect union.”1

I admit that I typically don’t make a big deal of patriotic images and I don’t wear my patriotism on my sleeve (or my lapel). I have a flag on display in my study, as shown in the photo above and my father’s burial flag is also in a place of honor. MonktonInFlagThere is also a flag on the right sidebar of this blog.4 That flag is on the blog for the same reason that this article is being written, to assert that it is my flag, and that the American flag is not is owned by any faction, particularly the extreme right wing, who like to paint themselves as the only true patriots, and to wrap TaitzFlagScarfthemselves in the flag. I don’t suppose Lord Monckton1 would consider himself an American patriot, but even he plays dress-up with the American flag. Orly Taitz3 is perhaps more tastefully dressed for an anti-immigrant protest at Murrieta, California, this past July 4, but Taitz is not exactly following American founding tradition. The United States, as originally envisioned by our Founders, did not have an illegal immigration problem. In fact it was not 1875 that the United States even had an immigration law. Up until that time, anybody could come without restriction. After that time prostitutes and convicts were no longer welcome. Soon to follow were restrictions on the Chinese.

From the start, America had it’s share of conspiracy theorists, anti-government activists, and political dirty tricksters5, so I can hardly say that the birthers and others I oppose are unentitled to their own piece of that American tradition. I just want the country to move in a nobler6 and more enlightened direction than they do. My own desire is that we find liberty and justice for all, and not just for some.


1Preamble to the United States Constitution.

2Monkton interview following address to Tea Party meeting in Phoenix, Arizona in 2012.

3This photo is cropped from a series of photos that originally appeared at the Taitz web site, but were subsequently deleted.

4While I really like the flag image on the blog, I am looking to replace it with some photo I took myself.

5See, for example, The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory.

6Part of the Civitan Creed (I’m a member) states:

MY PLEDGE: to practice the Golden Rule and to build upon it a better and nobler citizenship.

The Zullo enigma

The birthers seem to think that every time I write about Mike Zullo, it is in anxiety over some impending universe-shattering event, any day now, that will not only bring down the President but also anyone who supports him and folks like me, who they call O-Bots1. In fact, for someone who blogs about birthers, Zullo is about the only game in town. Even the birthers don’t believe Shrimpton, and most have realized that Orly Taitz is wholly incompetent to accomplish anything with a lawsuit and Larry Klayman isn’t much better. Apart from Zullo, birtherism is over except for Zullo and his Zu-Bots™.

The birthers are right that their opponents are interested in Zullo, but they are mistaken that the focus is his repeatedly promised, but never delivered, decisive evidence. Zullo has proven wholly incompetent to develop real evidence, and he lacks the resources to come up with a real scandal, if there should really be one. No, what’s interesting is whether there is a scandal in the Cold Case Posse (CCO) itself.

There really is a Maricopa County Sheriff’s Cold Case Posse, Inc. You can find it registered with the State of Arizona. It has a Tax ID number. It has an organization, a membership, and it raises money. Beyond a few details associated with the organization and a massive quantity of self-generated publicity, we really don’t know a lot about the Posse except that they have identified some bloggers as their enemies, they think there’s something wrong with President Obama’s identity papers, and they have generally proven to be incompetent and dishonest.

Brian Reilly has provided a rare inside view of the CCP though the anecdotes in his recent article here, but lots of big questions remain. My two biggest questions are: 1) What sort of money flows in birther organizations? and 2) Is Mike Zullo a con man or a true believer? In my mind, after Reilly’s Part 1, neither of those questions gets answered. Reilly says at one point that he was convinced that Zullo really believed some crazy Lord Monckton/MI-6 story, but con men are very good at convincing others of their sincerity. What Reilly saw and heard is helpful but what he believed about Zullo is less so.

Unquestionably Zullo says things that aren’t true, and this is an objective point of evidence; however, people say things that aren’t true for various reasons:

  1. They believe they are being truthful
  2. They lie for a nefarious purpose
  3. They lie to support what they believe is a greater truth

In Zullo’s case, I think we can rule out number 1. While Zullo may have said false things that he thought were truthful, he certainly knows now that they weren’t, and his silence becomes intentional deception.

Would you tell a lie if it meant saving the lives of others? I think I would. Does Zullo believe so firmly that Obama is literally destroying the country so that any number of lies, false promises, and failure to correct past mistakes is justified by the greater truth of how evil Obama is? If this is the case, then the obvious flaw is that one ends up lying to oneself, and becomes incapable of telling truth from fantasy. Lies are consuming.

On the other hand, Zullo may be a simple con man, and the Zu-Bots his victims. This is why details about CCP finances are so critical to understanding the birthers.

Zullo is an enigma, and I’ll keep writing about him until I figure it out.


1For some time I have been tolerant of the label O-bot, taking it to be a synonym for “anti-birther.” Further research indicates that my usage is not general, and therefore I’m no longer going to use the term approvingly. Anti-birthers are not in general Obama supporters: some are and some are not.

Bug-eyed British Peer: 7 Steps to jail Obama

This article is a bit late in coming, but I should mention the story for completeness as it is finally making the rounds of re-publication on the Internet.

imageLord Monckton (pictured right – and here, and here and here), a British eccentric, has inserted himself into the American birther movement several times. He’s put forward crank math, crank document forensics and now just plain crank in his WorldNetDaily article, “7 Steps That’ll Land Obama in Jail.”

No impeachment

Monckton says there are probably not enough votes in the House to impeach President Obama over his “Donald Duck birth certificate” (look who’s calling something “Donald Duck!”) and I would agree. Monckton says that the “rabbits” in the House are afraid that their reputations would be trashed—I agree with that too—trashed and rightly so.

The steps

Step 1 is to “stop being panty-waists.”

imageWell, I don’t know that panty-waists want to stop being whatever they are. Hoping someone will do what they are are not doing just because Monckton writes it at WND doesn’t seem to be much of a plan, more like wishful thinking. What Monckton probably longs for is “real men”™, like the one pictured right, in Congress. (Does anybody else think that the watch Vladimir Putin wears looks remarkably like the one that Obama wears?)

That photo is more significant than you might realize, given that I found it using Google image search for: Lord Monckton panty waist.

Step 2 continues in the “lets you and him fight” category with a plan for Congress to investigate why real officials ignore birthers. For example this egregious dereliction of duty:

The attorney general of Hawaii. Following a complaint from a former state senator, Hawaii Five-O forwarded a report to the AG, who, faced with a credible and detailed allegation of the greatest seriousness from an impeccable source, did not even reply.

The lack of a reply is not surprising, given that Hawaii Five-O is a TV show and not a real Hawaiian law enforcement agency. Monckton then details other officials who don’t take birthers seriously, albeit real agencies this time.

Step 3 is for Congress to go talk to Mike Zullo. You have to go to Mike Zullo because Zullo keeps all his real evidence secret, lest it, uh, well, err, get looked at.

Step 4 is to repeal every law Obama signed. There goes my tax cut! Damn!

Step 5 competes with the Hawaii Five-O gaffe for the “clueless” award. After noting that arresting Obama while in office is unlikely, Monckton says:

However, in 2016 Mr Obama will no longer be protected by the office to which he is not on any view entitled.

Obama leaves office in January of 2017, not in 2016.

Step 6 is basically a call for mob rule. Monckton says:

Give private citizens the right to bring prosecutions without the consent of the states’ attorneys general.

Yeah, and let’s also let the anti-birthers prosecute all of the birthers for wasting the country’s time. And while we’re about it, how about citizens extradition so we can get Monckton in the dock.

And finally there is Step 7, which really isn’t about getting Obama in jail, but  about he fact that six is a sucky number to end with. Step 7 says:

If you think all of the foregoing is mad, just watch and learn.

I do think that what Monckton wrote is mad. I’m looking–what am I supposed to see? I certainly don’t expect to see Congress taking any of Monckton’s advice.

Questioned birth certificate

Fair is fair. If the birthers are going to question Barack Obama’s birth certificate by comparing it to another “authentic” one, it seems only fair that the birthers should provide some authentication for theirs.

The Hawaii Department of Health says:

On April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth.

I have authentication for Obama’s birth certificate. What do the birthers have for this one?

Click for original version

Birthers don’t even say where that redacted image came from, much less provide any authentication.

A number of purported Hawaiian birth certificates have surfaced over the past 5 years, but only Obama’s has any official provenance–and yet Obama’s is the only one called into question by birthers. That seems backwards reasoning to me. The photo above came from a British eccentric, Lord Monckton of Benchley via WorldNetDaily, who never says where he got it. Monckton labeled it “authentic;” however, Vogt labeled another birth certificate (one Jerome Corsi at WorldNetDaily called “authentic”) a forgery. If the birthers cannot even agree on what’s fake and what’s not, why should others have confidence in their judgment about any of them? Continue Reading →

LSU math professor backs junk calculation in Monckton paper

WorldNetDaily continues to push crank analysis of the President’s birth certificate. I wrote in my article “Miscalculating the odds” about Christopher “Lord” Monkton’s silly foray into probability theory, where he calculates the probability that President Obama’s birth certificate is legitimate at 0.0000000000000000000016. The analysis is so totally goofy that I largely dismissed it after pointing out the basic mathematical fallacies.

I was terribly disappointed today to find out that the Associate Chair of Mathematics for Instruction at Louisiana State University, Dr. Charles N. Delzell, backs Monckton’s analysis in an affidavit. Despite four and a half pages of text, praising and validating that one irrelevant thing after another in Monckton’s paper is right, I was hard pressed to find anything saying that what Monckton concluded is either correct or valid in approach. The best I could find is this from paragraph 8:

It seems very unlikely that any of the irregularities specified in Monckton’s list of probabilities could possibly have occurred by inadvertence as often as this.

and this in paragraph 9:

For these reasons, and subject only to the fact that I have not verified the forensic investigators’ results, Monckton’s conclusion, based on those results, that the relevant documentation is nearly-certainly forged necessarily follows, mathematically speaking.

I just sent the following letter to Robert Perlis, Chair of the Department of Mathematics at Louisiana State University.

An affidavit signed by Prof. Charles Delzell came to my attention today. In this affidavit, Prof. Delzell examines a statistical analysis done by an English eccentric, Lord Monckton, that purports to prove that the birth certificate released by the President of the United States is a fake.

I hold a Masters Degree in Mathematics, earned under some distinguished graduates of LSU, and I can say without a doubt that the analysis and statements in the affidavit are total and complete junk as far as probability theory goes.

I would suggest that to prevent the University from becoming a laughing stock, that you refer these papers to someone qualified in probability theory to verify that they are junk, and then take the appropriate damage control action.

Delzell affidavit:

http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/11/DelzellAffidavit.pdf

Monckton paper:

http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/11/monckton_affidavit.pdf

Update:

I received an email reply from Dr. Perlis at LSU. I generally treat the emails that I receive as private and so I will only repeat what I am confident that he would want said and that is that Delzell was writing as a private individual and that the Mathematics Department at LSU is not involved.