No evidence (save fakes, frauds and anonymous affidavits) has c0me out of Kenya to show Barack Obama was born there. In order to explain this fact, Obama denialists have invented a story of government gag orders and “top secret” status for Obama’s birth documents.
So it was not at all surprising that one of the premiere denialist web sites, The Post & Email has use the language “Kenyan parliament web site scrubs…” to describe some changes in their web site as relates to a couple of documents of interest where Kenyan parliamentarians used language in one case about Obama’s Kenyan heritage (“son of the soil”) and another that more explicitly says that the American President was born in Kenya.
The Hansards from dates both before and after March 25, 2010 are still available by clicking on their respective links from the Kenyan Parliament website. So why has the March 25, 2010 document been removed?
Let’s deal with this one first, a story reported here on Obama Conspiracy Theories on April 12, 2010. The link to the Kenyan Parliament web site originally published in that article for March 25, 2010, has indeed stopped working. It is, in my mind, a bad thing for Internet links to stop working. (See Cool URIs don’t change.) I daresay that there are hundreds of hyperlinks on this web site that point to things that have moved. There are technical means to redirect links to new locations, but they are not used as frequently as they should be. But this is no reason to think the Internet has been scrubbed as part of some worldwide conspiracy to hide President Obama’s birth place. The Kenyan Parliament minutes with Mr. Orengo’s comments are not “scrubbed” but simply moved here: http://www.parliament.go.ke/parliament/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=24&Itemid= and for all I know, it might be moved again.
As for the older 2008 minutes, it appears that all the minutes for 2008 (and 2009 also) are presently off line. My guess is that they’re being moved as part of the web site re-organization. We’ll just have to wait a while and see. (This is where they should appear: http://www.parliament.go.ke/parliament/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89&Itemid=82). But if someone is trying to hide something, removing a document from 2008 that’s been re-printed 7,000 times (Google hits), is not the way to go about it.
Update: The 2008 and 2009 debates are back online (at the link above).
Sworn affidavits submitted in previous Berg cases, reported the following:
“I left Kisumu City and traveled to Mombosa, Kenya. I interviewed personnel at the hospital in which Senator Obama was born in Kenya. I then had meetings with the Provincial Civil Registrar.
I learned there were records of Ann Dunham giving birth to Barack Hussein Obama, III in Mombosa, Kenya on August 4, 1961. I spoke directly with an Official, the Principal Registrar, who openly confirmed the birthing records of Senator Barack H. Obama, Jr. and his mother were present, however, the file on Barack H. Obama, Jr. was classified and profiled.
The Official explained Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. birth in Kenya is top secret. I was further instructed to go to the Attorney General’s Office and to the Minister in Charge of Immigration if I wanted further information.”
Really? And what proof did any of these so called individuals provide? Nothing. It never happened. You must be desperate if you are going over the carcass of Berg’s filings to find some support for this mysterous Kenyan birth. To play along for a second, did Kenya issue him the Bomford fake Kenyan BC or was it the one supposedly found by Lucas Smith, who ironically also submitted an “affadavit” on how he “obtained” this document….
Hearsay is hearsay whether it is a “sworn affidavit” or the ranting of some drunk in a bar.
Oh, I forgot. It will all come out during discovery. Good luck getting there.
An affidavit repeating hearsay is worthless. An affidavit repeating hearsay of unnamed Kenyan officials is less than worthless.
John: The Official explained …
An unnamed official quoted in an unsworn affidavit given under a false name. Are you trying to be funny or what?
John: I completely agree with you! I found a Kenya BC, that you will be able to use, that’s right here.
Keep up the good work. I’m happy to help.
You forgot that it’s also unsigned. There’s just a jpeg of a signature poorly pasted onto the signature line.
From the comments over at the Post and Fail, note who the comment is from. So from the author’s reply, was the comment really scrubbed or did Sharon not check before she wrote the article. If that was the case then she did herself a disservice by making such accusations without confirming that the comments were gone first. Either way it does not change the fact that the comments are worthless in a court of law and mean nothing except to the birthers, who have already made up their minds.
Thursday, April 15, 2010 at 10:38 AM
I just went to the Kenyan site, clicked on the “Hansard” tab, and found that the 2008 documents are no longer listed. However, when I clicked on 2010, I was able to find and download the March 25 minutes, and saw the page with the discussion on Obama.
Mrs. Rondeau replies: Yes, I also found that to work after publishing today’s article. It’s interesting, though, that the link in the story we published last night is inactive.
Another question. Where is Mombosa, Kenya? Isn’t it Mombassa? If it is not even spelled right in the affidavit, then what else is suspect in the document?
Mario’s take…Wrong as usual…
“There we have it clearly stated by a current Minister of the Kenyan Cabinet that Obama was born in Kenya and is not a “native American.” It is unbelievable that a high-ranking member of the Kenyan government would make such a matter-of-fact statement, given the debate that is raging in the United States about whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya. From his statement, it appears that Mr. Orengo believes that the American electorate knew that Obama was born in Kenya and still voted for him to be President. It is also significant that no one in the Kenyan Parliament corrected or challenged Mr. Orengo when he made his statement, given that Obama’s place of birth debate must be well-known in Kenya and is important to Obama’s legitimacy to be the President of the United States. Kenya would not only be embarrassed but would also be negatively impacted upon if Obama were found not to be the legitimate President of the United States. One would also think that Mr. Orengo would share his knowledge with the American people. I surely hope that the American media will immediately fly to Kenya and personally speak to Mr. Orengo to find out why he believes that Obama was born in Kenya. The full House report may be found at http://www.bunge.go.ke/parliament/downloads/tenth_forth_sess/Hansard/RDRAFT25.03P.pdf. [Direct viewing scrubbed/disabled on Kenyan server as of 15 Apr 2010. A copy of the PDF file can still be downloaded at this link.] The speech of Mr. Orengo starts at page 29 and ends at page 31. The above quote is found on page 31.”
“I surely hope that the American media will immediately fly to Kenya and personally speak to Mr. Orengo to find out why he believes that Obama was born in Kenya.”
If the “mainstream media” can’t be trusted, why would the Birthers be relying on them to do their dirty work. Please Mario, Orly- any of you- buy that ticket- head to Kenya yourself and then buy the best evidence your money can buy.
Birfers don’t really believe, deep-down, what they’re saying, so they mostly don’t follow obvious lines of inquiry which would prove them wrong. (The few times they have done actual research, they helped debunk themselves.) I got banned from FreeRepublic for suggesting ways they could prove their allegations, the first step of which would have involved a simple phone call. I got banned, and nobody has ever made the phone call, apparently.
The document in question is not scrubbed or disabled. It has been moved along with the re-organization of the site to http://www.parliament.go.ke/parliament/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=24&Itemid=.
Black Lion: Where is Mombosa, Kenya? Isn’t it Mombassa?
No, it’s Mombasa.
Now I understand why this site is called “Dr. Conspiracy.”
Sharon’s article is still correct. Neither of the original links work, and the 2008 minutes are still unavailable.
Sure, there are plenty of saved copies of both the 2010 and 2008 minutes for future reference, but the timing of the “website redesign(?)” and the elimination of the 2008 minutes are very interesting facts, regardless of one’s views on the eligibility debate. But even more interesting is the MSM’s total lack of coverage of the March 2010 (and 2008) Kenyan discussion of Obama. This is an official government site–official government proceedings–we are talking about here, not someone’s personal blog. News is news, and it sells. One would think the MSM could use a little boost these days. Unless they have an “agenda”–more “conspiracy”…?
Personally, I have been very entertained watching you guys play defense.
FYI, I do believe that Obama was born in Hawaii, but I don’t believe he is eligible under Article 2 because of his dual citizenship at birth. Please, don’t waste your breath, I’ve researched it thoroughly. You won’t change my mind. If you want to call someone who has researched citizenship laws and history a wingnut or kook, go ahead. It must be fun, because you guys seem to do a lot of it.
Obama doesn’t need to direct a massive “conspiracy” to prove or disprove anything. He’s got people like you and the MSM taking care of the opposition for him.
My God! Do you people not use common sense?
It may very well be a huge coincidence that the website was re-organized, but surely you must question the timing and the fact that the link no longer works.
I’m not saying it was true or was not true. I’m not saying I believe or disbelieve.
I’m saying – use some freaking common sense and stop trying to make the birthers look like the idiots they are not simply for asking questions about something that is questionable.
stop trying to make the birthers look like the idiots they are not
stop trying to make the birthers look like the idiots they are
Why do you think other countries’ laws can exert control over our laws?
The State of Hawaii has confirmed that President Obama was born there. That makes him, by all the laws and traditions of the United States, a natural born citizen.
Birthers have never offered anything like concrete evidence to contradict that simple, clear fact.
Until they do, then they are fools howling at the moon.
I’ve done the same thing a few times. This is what I suggested:
1). Create a FAQ with a list of stories that have been disproved to prevent new birthers from perpetuating the same myths over and over (such as “Obama has spent eleventy jillion dollars defending this”). Post this FAQ in every thread, on every page, and in every forum.
2). Pay an actual documents expert for his or her professional opinion. No document expert will be able to give an opinion that is 100% sure, since they don’t have the document in hand, but it is a lot better than relying on the “expert” opinion of some guy on the internet who refuses to use his own name or divulge his qualifications.
3). Correct your side when it is wrong. Facts are facts. Lies masquerading as facts don’t help your side and make it look as though you have no real evidence. If it’s known to be false, don’t perpetuate it. If it’s suspected to be false, say so.
4). Instead of sending money to attorneys who all seem to have received their law degrees from the schools on the back of matchbook covers, pay a respected lawyer to look over your case and give his/her professional opinion. You may not like the answer, but at least you’ll know you aren’t being pandered to.
5). Stop calling everyone who disagrees with you insulting names or questioning their patriotism or sexuality. Insulting people who disagree with you lets the rest of us know that you really don’t have concrete and can only hurl insults like a spoiled child.
6). Demand proof. If someone says they went to Kenya to get birth records, demand to see their passport records, plane tickets, and other documents. If someone says they have credentials, demand to see them. Don’t be so desperate as to believe anything and everything you’re being told. Only the actual truth counts. Lies you wish were true do not count and can only hurt you.
And so on. Every time I’ve suggested these steps, I’ve been insulted, had my patriotism questioned (and worse, depending on the forum).
The birther’s quest has absolutely nothing to do with truth and absolutely everything to do with their discomfort with Obama being president, for whatever reason.
The birther make themselves look like idiots quite well on their own. We don’t have to do anything.
If someone (in this case, Dr. Conspiracy himself) can quickly find and post the corrected web address, why can’t the birthers?
Why can’t they do simple due diligence before chalking another non-event up to a vast conspiracy?
Is it too much to ask that those flinging wild accusations use that same common sense you mention, and spend a moment or two looking at the actual facts of the matter at hand?
Or do the birthers need their Two Minutes of Hysteria to go along with their Two Minutes of Hate?
Looks like Sven’s had a gender re-assignment….8-)
“but I don’t believe he is eligible under Article 2 because of his dual citizenship at birth.”
Who cares what you think? You’re not a Constitutional lawyer; you’re some malcontent, who crawled from under his rock, banging away at a keyboard.
Obama will be re-elected, and Cory Booker will follow. Better get used to it. The Repugs will run Romney/Jindal: Victor Newman and Howdy Doody.
Kathryn–This is the quote from “Fight the Smears”:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony…As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.s children. Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
Maybe you should ask Obama your question. He is a Constitutional Law professor, isn’t he? He admits in that statement that he was “born” a dual citizen, and remained so until 1982.
Misha, I’m sure you care as much about what I think as I care about what you think.
At least I’m civil about it.
“Maybe you should ask Obama your question. He is a Constitutional Law professor, isn’t he? He admits in that statement that he was “born” a dual citizen, and remained so until 1982.”
As you said- we shouldn’t waste our breath- you have already made up your mind.
So what are you going to do with your conviction that you are correct, while the majority of the voters just aren’t as ‘informed” as you are?
You can work to vote Obama out of office- or you can move to have him impeached.
Go for it.
I guess we need to explain that “common sense” does not mean “allegations are obviously true if they support the conclusion that Scott Brown is trying to prove.”
Scott Brown: I’m not saying it was true or was not true. I’m not saying I believe or disbelieve.
Sallyven: Sure, there are plenty of saved copies of both the 2010 and 2008 minutes for future reference, but the timing of the “website redesign(?)” and the elimination of the 2008 minutes are very interesting facts, regardless of one’s views on the eligibility debate.
First of all, a document (2008) remaining undisturbed for a year and half and being moved with a web site redesign is the most unremarkable thing I can imagine. The Kenyan web site went from hard wired links to a database driven content management structure. This is the normal course of evolution for web sites, and changes like this almost inevitably involve changing all the URLs. It wasn’t just these minutes but ALL the minutes from 2008, 2009 and 2010. It is delusions of grandeur that make sites like WorldNetDaily think that their publication of an article shakes the world and stampedes the Kenyan Parliament to take their entire legislative minutes archive offline!
Moving from a hard-linked to a content-managed web site is the normal evolution of a web site. Changing URLs is the normal consequence of the change in document storage technology. If it was going to happen ever, it HAD to happen some time. The very fact that the RECENT document was only offline briefly suggests that they gave priority to current content and will get around to the older content later. Nothing at all odd about that either.
Have you ever seen the face of Santa Claus, or a poodle in the clouds? The human brain is wired to find patterns and to make sense of them. It happens even when the input is really just random information. But there is really no Santa Claus and no poodle in the clouds. In the same way Conspiracy Theorists try to make sense of random coincidences, even though nothing is there. You say, Sallyven, “very interesting facts,” but frankly I find a web link going bad one of the most uninteresting things I can imagine.
As for your views of what a “natural born citizen” is, I won’t try to argue with you, but will only ask one question: in all of your research, did you run across one Civics textbook that agrees with you? I didn’t think so.
One textbook that was used at the West Point Military Academy said this:
The fellow who wrote that book was appointed US District Attorney for Pennsylvania by George Washington. But I’m sure you’ve already found that in your research.
“At least I’m civil about it.”
There is nothing civil about what the birthers are trying to do: drive Obama, the first black president, from office. Orly, Beck and their coterie are trying to incite a lone wolf.
They promote scurrilous rumors, fictional legal theories, and assorted vitriol. Denialists are a motley crew of fifth rate lawyers, malcontents, grifters, anti-semites, felons and sore losers.
When Bush “won” the 2000 election, there wasn’t a left wing equivalent of Orly Taitz. We put up with Shrub for 8 years, and got the worst military blunder in US history. We went from a surplus of $212M to a deficit of $1T.
As I write, 4,708 service people have died. 30,182 have been wounded, most coming back missing eyes, limbs, with third degree burns. Approximately 95K Iraqi civilians have been killed in the crossfire. And there there are thousands of Iraqi civilians who have been maimed. All so Cheney and his buddies could get their paws on oil. Now, the same mob is crying wolf about Iran. And Iran has lots of oil.
The Christians of Iraq are facing annihilation, and Bush and his crowd are doing zero. Christian clergy have been shot dead on the street, Christian owned liquor stores have been closed at gunpoint. The only one reporting on this is Bob Simon, a Jewish journalist.
When Jews faced this, Israel came to their rescue in Yemen, Ethiopia and Entebbe.
There is nothing to be civil about. There hasn’t been anything like the Denialists since Father Coughlin and Walter Winchell. Glenn Beck, a heroin addict, and Sarah Palin, a rabble rouser, are going the way of Father Coughlin and Winchell.
Know why? Because when unemployment drops to 1999 levels, the Tea Partiers will be back to work.
“You can work to vote Obama out of office- or you can move to have him impeached.”
Denialists are armchair warriors.
Seems like common sense would say “check to see if the page has moved before you claim the site has been ‘scrubbed.'”
But, then again, conspiracism requires a suspension of “common sense.” Our fake Scott Brown here, for example, disregards the voice of reason that should tell him that Presidential candidates who have raised and spent $750 million in their campaign don’t forge birth certificates. That a dentist, poker-player, and DUI lawyer probably didn’t turn up the evidence that Clinton’s and McCain’s multi-million dollar oppo research teams missed. That a dentist, poker-player, DUI lawyer and 9/11 truther probably don’t have some super-secret interpretation of the Constitution that has been missed not only by said Presidential candidate (and the 69 million people who voted for him) but also by every legal commentator in the past 200 years. Common sense would suggest that the Republican governor of Hawaii would have no reason to protect the Democratic candidate, nor would her appointee to the DOH. Common sense would certainly say that internet “experts” aren’t to be believed, especially when they refuse to give their names or credentials, going so far as to sign court documents “XXXXX.” A reasonable person wouldn’t take the word of a forger over that of the Hawaiian Department of Health. Common sense would clearly state that when the head of the DOH says, twice, that she has examined all the records and Obama was born in Honolulu, and is a natural born citizen, she means it. Common sense clearly tells us that when the phrase natural born subject has been in use since 1350 including in the state charters and Constitutions, you don’t write natural born citizen to mean the exact opposite without telling anyone!
Scott, you and common sense are not on speaking terms. Common sense left you at the altar a long time ago. You think Occam’s Razor is Gillette’s new 6-bladed product. When God was handing out common sense, you thought she said “Pounds and pence” and you said, “Oh, I’m going to be murrican, so I don’t need none of that furrin money!”
I have scoured the legal community and in the past 200 years, I haven’t found a single commentator who says that a dual citizen is ineligible for the Presidency. I have seen half a dozen or so legal scholars say that the children of aliens are simply not citizens – a view rejected by Wong Kim Ark. I have seen exactly one credible source claim that the child of an alien wouldn’t be eligible for the Presidency and he was talking exclusively about those born before the 14th Amendment.
By contrast, I’ve read dozens, if not hundreds of articles which state plainly that those born here are natural born citizens and eligible.
Maybe you should talk to more Constitutional Law professors and fewer DUI lawyer/Dentist/poker-players.
Be honest, have you read anything on this subject that wasn’t written by a birther?
Sallyven: He admits in that statement that he was “born” a dual citizen, and remained so until 1982.
The Obama campaign quoted the FactCheck.org article; however, that FactCheck article has since been corrected. The correct year is 1984.
Brilliant! (hmmmm… Where’s the clapping smiley….)
What do you call someone who researched the Apollo missions and determined the moon-walks were a hoax? How about someone who researched the 9/11 attacks and surmised it was an inside job?
The time and effort you put into deluding yourself is not a point in your favor.
Zixi of Ix,
Those are very sensible suggestions for any group operating with a spirit of honest inquiry. But that’s why birfers won’t adopt them.
The birfers at Freep have been quick-stroking it all week long over the Lakin matter, and virtually every long-debunked birfer talking point has been regurgitated, including the “Rainbow Newletter” high school story, and the bottom-of-the barrel “Blaine” BC forgery. The people making these claims aren’t newbies; they’ve been posting on birfer forums for years. So either they are some combination of (1)very stupid, (2)have incredibly shoddy memories, or (3)are simply dishonest. I’ll say (1) and (3) definitely, and (2) probably.
BTW, my good-faith suggestion to the birfers was that since international passenger carriers all make out passenger manifests, they look through the BOAC archives for passenger manifests of flights out of Kenya for 1961. I really don’t know how long they keep them. Maybe they have microfilm of everything going back to 1939. But no birfer seems to want to make that phone call. That’s what got me banned.
P.S. One very active nitwit even repeated the bogus “Chanise Fox” story which originated on FreeRepublic. So the “birfers punkin’ birfers” circle went all the way round the internet and back to Freep!
Sallyven: Now I understand why this site is called “Dr. Conspiracy.”
This site is call Obama Conspiracy Theories.
Sallyven: Personally, I have been very entertained watching you guys play defense.
Thanks. One of the secondary purposes of this web site is to entertain. Sometime that gets loss when I and others who frequent here get frustrated by the willful ignorance and repeated crocks we have to put up with.
Sallyven: You won’t change my mind.
That’s the difference between you and me. I am always questioning my assumptions and checking the facts. It’s more work, but I rarely get called on a mistake.
Thanks…I was close…However it seems like it was spelled wrong in the original affidavit if the past from John is correct…
YOu are correct. The birthers never seem to want to do the actual research themselves. They always recommend that someone do something or follow up. If Marion was so sure of his claim, he would fly to Kenya and depose Mr. Orengo himself. Or track down the individuals from the infamous 2008 meeting and depose them. Why doesn’t he or any of the other birthers do that? Because they really don’t want the answers. The would prefer to remain ignorant so that they can continue to perpetuate these ridiculous conspiracy theories so that haters like ScottBrown, John, Sallyven, and Sven can continue to be conned. I have never seen another group so willing to believe convicted felons and foreign officals over offical statements by American officials like Dr. Fukino, who has stated that the President was BORN in HI.
They banned you because they want to remain racist and ignorant. That is why there is no opposing opinion on the FR site….
Scott, but the original so called “conspiracy” that Sallyven was pushing was that the Kenyan government was “scrubbing” the so called “proof” from their website. When Dr. C and others pointed out that they did not and it was still there, you and the other conspiracy theorists wanted us to believe that it was moved somehow to hide the truth. And when the author of the Post and Fail article was shown that her article was wrong, instead of retracting or ammending her article, she left it out there with the wrong information. So the birthers are able to make themselves look stupid without any help from anyone.
chester a arthur. again another person claiming theyre not a birther but…
From ABC News care of Media Matters….Can anyone explain how noted birther and WND liar became some sort of expert on birth and citizenship? How low has ABC News gone for them to even quote that serial misinformer and birther liar?
“Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,” the amendment reads.
“It’s really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment,” said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. “Birthright citizenship is a loophole … [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S.”
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
“It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry,” Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship.
“My God! Do you people not use common sense?”
Wow, that was really funny! (my irony meter pegged out on that one). I nominate scott for best satire on Dr. Conspiracy.
have you seen this new nugget supposedly plucked from the minutes of the Kenyan parliament…from the PostEmail…:
There is something very peculiar that took place during the November 5, 2008 Parliament meeting that needs to be highlighted. On page 3278 of the Minutes, the Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs, Mr. Musyoka, stated:
At the beginning of this year, Senator Barrack Obama called me at midnight and told me: “Mr. Vice President, could you make sure you sort out this problem?” I want to assure him that the problem has since been sorted out.
(Several hon. Members stood up)
Mr. Deputy Speaker: You are all out of order!
heron: Senator Barrack Obama called me at midnight and told me…
It is well known that Obama made some calls as a Senator to urge the Kenyan leadership to find a non-violent solution to the unrest over elections in which many died. I realize for birthers that EVERYTHING is about Obama’s office holding, but that is not the case in the real world.
That ABC news piece is the most irresponsible piece of writing from a mainstream media outlet that I have ever seen.
“The birfers at Freep have been quick-stroking it all week long ”
that’s why you find white spots on the bathroom wall, giddy they are!
It did seem like something that WND would have written…Very surprising considering that it came from ABC…
The Post and Fail is getting desperate….If you read the rest of the article, they get even more desperate….
“So, sometime in early 2008 Obama calls Mr. Musyoka and asks him to sort out a problem Obama has. Now what kind of help could a Vice President of Ministry of State for Home Affairs provide? Would not “home affairs” deal with birth data? Did Obama request a seal be placed on his birth certificate in Kenya? Whatever Obama’s problem was, Mr. Musyoka apparently took care of it. But why would several members stand up and create a disturbance to the point they were called out of order? Did it stem from what Mr. Musyoka had just said? If so, why? These are questions that beg an answer. There is another question begging an answer: Is Barack Hussein Obama ashamed to call Kenya his birthplace, or just practicing his usual cover-up and deception?”
As Dr. C noted there was a legitimate reason. But for the Post and Fail, they see conspiracy theories everywhere they look….
And from the comments some real faulty legal reasoning…
Friday, April 16, 2010 at 11:44 AM
Dr. Fukino’s statement public statement remains in doubt. Even if the AG somehow approved Fukino’s statement, their statements to you are dubious at best. Even if Fukino and the AG contend that being born on US soil is the only necessary requirement for being a Natural Born American Citizen, the AG would still be derelict in his duties. It is highly likely that the AG would not been able to approve Dr. Fukino’s statement without some sort government research and documentation. Why? Because the AG needed to verify who Obama’s parents were. Even if the AG knew that Obama’s parents were Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. or some aliens, this still require further research. Why? Because the AG needed to verify that the parents were not foreign diplomats or ambassadors. Even Obots contend that if Obama’s parents were foreign diplomats or ambassadors he would not be considered a Natural Born Citizen even if born on US Soil.
Mrs. Rondeau replies: Janice Okubo, Communications Director of the Health Department, said that the AG “approved” Fukino’s public statement. If true, then the AG would have had to possess backup documentation. His office says he does not. Is he is lying, then he is guilty of breaking the UIPA law of his own state. If he is not lying, then he is parsing words, perhaps. If he is being completely honest, then someone else is not.
Friday, April 16, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Have you been able to determine why a conflict of interest would exist between the AG and DOH in coorboration of the public statement that Dr. Fukino made.? You might also make an inquiry to ask what goverment research and government documentation was used to verify that Obama’s parents were not foreign diplomats or ambassadors. The AG should be aware that if the parents were foreign diplomats or ambassadors, Obama would not be considered a Natural Born American Citizen even if we are hold to the Obots’ definition of Natural Born Citizen to simply mean being born on US soil.
So now Obama’s parents may have been diplomats? Are the birthers really this stupid? I guess they are if they are willing to believe some of the crap that some sites have been spewing….
Is the reason you consider the ABC article “irresponsible” reporting because it addresses doubts by experts on whether US citizenship for the children born here of parents who are visiting temporarily is Constitutional under the 14th Amendment? Mmmmh, who do we know whose father was here temporarily when he was born and never naturalized as a US citizen…
Reading the article, I consider it irresponsible for two reasons:
a) neglecting to identify the sources fully- Corsi is a hardly an unbiased expert- they should have identified his political leanings and barely existant credentials better. Griglia is a perfectly valid source but he should have been identified correctly as “one of the most conservatiive legal academics in America”
b) Providing an unbalanced perspective- 3 views strongly against, with one weak viewpoint in favor of the actual current legal interpretation.
I can understand those who are uncomfortable with the idea of ‘tourism’ or anchor babies. But to me the 14th Amendment is pretty clear- whether by intention or not- the actual words are clear to me that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen.
if you don’t like that, go for a constitutional amendment.
Well there was one birther who did their own research. That’s the one who went digging through newspaper archives in the summer of 2008 and reported finding the Obama birth announcements in the Honolulu Advertiser. Of course, that is an ex-birther, because confronted with the evidence she disclosed it online and opined that it was dispositive proof of Obama’s Hawaiian birth.
Having Jerome Corsi make a comment on Obama’s parentage, and whether it makes him elegible, is like having Anne Coulter make a comment on Bill Clinton’s economic policies, and whether they’re sound.
Sallyven: I have dual citizenship: US and Israel, and served in the IDF.
Got a problem with that?
my father always claimed that one day he would move back to scotland. i was born in the states. does the fact that he either did or didn’t effect my citizenship status ?
Sallyven: Is the reason you consider the ABC article “irresponsible” reporting because it addresses doubts by experts on whether US citizenship for the children born here of parents who are visiting temporarily is Constitutional under the 14th Amendment?
It is irresponsible because they quoted a political smear operative as if he were an expert. The guy (Corsi) does have a PhD from Harvard in Political Science (if memory serves me right), but that’s not law, and he is no authority on law of the Constitution. He’s an expert on changing the results of elections through smears.
The other source was expressing a fringe view, which is OK, but whenever a news article quotes a fringe view, they should not leave the mistaken impression that such views are mainstream, and should balance them with an authority who is part of the consensus view.
Nothing but more birther wild goose chasing leading nowhere.
Yes, hyperlinks change all the time. Anyone seeing a conspiracy in this is either way too paranoid for their own health or just being an intentional ass.
One of the Freepers even repeated the old April fool hoax, “VERY QUIETLY OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT”
It seems that this poster was genuinely confused. But it didn’t occur to him how a case of that magnitude could “very quietly” reach the Supreme Court.
The Post and Fail is unhappy with someone else….This time conservative Roger Hedgecock…
“On April 12, 2010, ten minutes into the third hour of your broadcast, you said: “I’m not a Birther’ but … Barack Obama is an American citizen, born of a U.S. woman citizen …”
You then talked about a member of the Kenyan Parliament making a statement to the effect:
“… how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the President of America?
I immediately called in to try to get you to discuss this a little further, but your screener told me that you had expressed yourself clearly and would not discuss it any further today. However, I was confused as to where you stood on the matter.
The question I left with your screener was: Why do you, Roger, think that the usurpation of our Presidency by Fraud and Deceit is neither a High Crime nor even a Misdemeanor? I and millions of your listeners would have liked to have have heard your considered response to this, lest we conclude that someone made you an offer that you couldn’t refuse.
However, on Tuesday, April 13, I was stunned to hear you read Clause 5 of Article II of the Constitution in its entirety but then hide behind the point that foreign parliamentarians shouldn’t go making statements about our government – about things they know nothing about, such as our requirements to be President, rather than actually discussing the legitimate doubts surrounding the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief of the military. I, like millions of patriotic Americans, was appalled at your response to the people who demand that anyone swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States be held to that oath. Your attempt to sidestep Obama’s eligibility problem was pathetic.”
lest we conclude that someone made you an offer that you couldn’t refuse
Typical. Whenever the birthers hear someone say something they don’t like, they accuse the person of being threatened or paid off.
As expected, the 2008 and 2009 Kenyan Parliamentary debates came back online.
Thanks for the update, Dr. C. When I go to the home page, and click on Hansard, then 2008, I do not see November 5, 2008, (the subject of the P&E article) listed in the available 2008 documents. In addition, when the link for the March 25, 2010 document is clicked (again from the index of 2010 Hansards), the document that appears is for the meeting of February 25, 2010. I’m curious if your search finds the same results.
It looks like there are big holes in the dates available on the web site, specifically all that appears right now is 3/6/2008 – 5/14/2008 and 1/9/2009 – 12/10/2009. Note that the parliament web site uses dates of the form dd.mm.yy instead of the US convention of mm/dd/yy. I don’t know how long the parliament sits each year.
It is interesting that the November 2008 minutes are still not listed, when they were there up until a few days ago. Also, did you notice that when you click on the March 25, 2010 minutes (that had the Obama references), that the February 25 minutes come up instead?
I sent them an email to let them know about the bad link for the March 25 minutes. The link in my article to the file still works: