Main Menu

Open Questions

Following are open questions that I have about the evidence for things I read on the Internet. If you have an answer, leave it in a comment. Comments with valid sources for their information will be will be included here in the main article.

  1. What evidence is there for a travel ban existing in 1981, preventing US citizens from visiting Pakistan?

    Thanks to comments below, we know that there was no travel ban to Pakistan in 1981
  2. According to a report, Philip Berg’s assistant Linda Starr said that Berg had served subpoenas to Hawaiian hospitals to get Obama birth information. What court issued these subpoenas and in what case? Where can documentation be obtained?Berg himself issued the subpoenas, not the court. They are documented as attachments to Berg v. Obama et al. Thanks to an email response from a reader.

  3. It has been reported that President Obama’s paternal step grandmother discussed the President’s birth in Kenya with friends and neighbors. What is the source of this report?
  4. Was the mother of Vice President Charles Curtis a US citizen?
  5. When, if ever, did Barack Obama say in which Hawaiian hospital he was born?
  6. Was it necessary for an American to have a passport when visiting Kenya in 1961?
  7. Was Philip J. Berg ever a member of the NAACP? Philip Berg made this claim in an interview published on America’s Right.

, , , , , ,

15 Responses to Open Questions

  1. TRUTH January 21, 2009 at 8:26 pm  (Quote) #

    The PREZ is gonna CREATE new Jobs is he? Here is one persons spin on that.

  2. George Orwell III January 22, 2009 at 3:41 am  (Quote) #

    Do you already have this PDF found on THIS site for the Pakistantravel ban thing from 1981?

  3. mimi January 22, 2009 at 3:51 am  (Quote) #

    Shows was not banned. It won’t matter to the birthers anyway. But, amazing how each and every point gets blown away.
    I see there was a new suit filed on the 20th. The guy Kerchner might be a geneology guy who has been dealing with DNA for geneology purposes. I guess they want blood now? Another might be a lawyer. And another might be a Paultard. Not sure though.
    If they really want blood, I’m gonna LMAO.

  4. mimi January 22, 2009 at 3:59 am  (Quote) #

    How is that relevant to anything here? Of course people have different opinions about the Stimulus Plan. Your guy, or Pulitizer Prize Winner Paul Krugman? hmmmmm.

  5. Dr. Conspiracy January 22, 2009 at 8:02 am  (Quote) #

    George, wonderful! I didn’t have this, but I will add it to the article.

  6. Adam Kolasinski January 22, 2009 at 8:21 pm  (Quote) #

    FYI, Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize winner. There are no Pullitzer prizes in economics.

    Also, FYI, his area of expertise is international trade, not macroeconomics, so IMHO his opinions on the stimulus don’t carry all that much weight.

    At least not as much as those someone like Ned Phelps, who won the Nobel prize for his work in, yes, Macroeconomics.

  7. George Orwell III January 22, 2009 at 8:45 pm  (Quote) #

    I see you’re ramping up and getting busy with that nugget. I’ve been holding it close since I found it hoping I could locate a second copy somewhere else online for insurance. Three things I should also cover.

    First the Travel Advisory’s true document designation is No. 81-33A. The 81 indicates the year issued and the 33A basically means its the 33rd release in that year of all Travel Advisory releases regardless of country or zone. The numbering sequence does seem specific to Travel Advisory’s onlyand should not be confused or numbered along with Travel Warnings or Consular Information Sheets (CIS). Note that it is not the 33rd issuance that is only specific for Pakistan. The prior advisories as well as the ones that followed for 1981 could be any nation or region besides Pakistan with no apparent numberingformat being followed.

    Second, don’t bother with the”Department Publication M-264″ mentioned in the Advisory itself. It is an ongoing and frequently updated guide for visa and similar procedures issued for the benefit of travelers. It’s content has absolutely no bearing on the information given in the Advisory and is much akin to being a standard footer for all these types of State Department issued documents.

    Finally somebody wrote “State 209063 – 8-7-81” in the lower right corner at some stage of the transfer from film to image to PDF. I have no idea what it means other than the obvious date 8-7-81 (or maybe 8-17-81?) after State 209063.

  8. Dr. Conspiracy January 22, 2009 at 9:41 pm  (Quote) #

    GOIII, it was a beautiful find. It is a smoking gun and Linda Starr walked right in front of it with her claim that she had confirmed the travel ban with OUR OWN State Department. It’s one of those moments when the planets align, the flowers open all the same time, the birds take wing and we all start singing: “Zippity Doo Dah!”

    I consider this the equivalent of the discovery of TechDude’s stolen credentials.

  9. bogus info January 22, 2009 at 9:49 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. C.,

    You could take Linda Starr into the Hawaiian Dept. of Health, show her Obama’s BC and she still would not believe it was real.

    These people don’t want to know/see the truth. They only see what suits them.

  10. Angi January 25, 2009 at 2:29 am  (Quote) #

    Re: VP Curtis.
    Native Americans were not granted citizenship until 1924. But (pre-1860) his mother would more than likely have become a citizen through her marriage.

  11. Dr. Conspiracy January 25, 2009 at 8:11 am  (Quote) #

    Generally, women did become citizens when the married a citizen during that period, but the law that makes this so has an exclusions for cases when the spouse was not eligible for citizenship otherwise, and this may be the case for Curtis’ mother. The Supreme Court in the Elk case seemed to be saying that Indians could not become citizens. I still have this as an open question.

  12. Angi February 11, 2009 at 1:44 am  (Quote) #

    I found a bit more information on the question of citizenship via marriage for Native Americans.

    A Nationality of Her Own from Chapter 1, around pgs 16/17.

    Basically, the Naturalization Act of 1855 set up derivative citizenship for women who married citizens, but only if they would have been otherwise eligible for naturalization.

  13. thisoldhippie September 22, 2009 at 10:43 am  (Quote) #

    I have a couple of open questions:

    1. What’s Leo up to now with this Hawaii amended Obama’s records?

    2. WTF is this left on Orly’s blog? Can we get any more delusional??

    casper 9-21-09

    There were rumors and rumblings last night OBAMA had been given until noon today to resign, then WE heard it was extended till 6p.m. tonight.

    WE now hear the Supreme Court and the World Court have today ruled that OBAMA is to be charged with 36 counts of theft, embezzlement, fraud, etc. including TREASON, a Capital Offense. And, that we will return to the Constitution and Article III Courts at midnight tonight. And, that the Corporation is dissolved and no longer exists.
    WE hear that OBAMA has been notified he is no longer President.

    WE hear OBAMA told both Courts to kiss his ass and that he would claim its all about race.

    WE hear the Supreme Court will make announcements tomorrow.

    casper 9-21-09

  14. Bob September 22, 2009 at 10:51 am  (Quote) #

    As to the first question, I think Leo likes the attention. He’s repeatedly said he’s done with all this, yet comes up with something different.

    As for the second, I care not to plumb the depths’ of the birfer mind; the creativity, however, is impressive.

  15. thisoldhippie September 22, 2009 at 10:57 am  (Quote) #

    My eyes are beginning to burn and I feel my brain turning to mush reading this stuff. Is this the beginning of becoming a birfer?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.