MILITARY JUDGE says evidence could be an "EMBARRASSMENT" to BHO!

[Simon W. Moon]

As with the other forgeries, it lists Mombasa as being a part of Kenya at the time which it was not.
Good luck with that.

 

[Crunch]

As with the other forgeries, it lists Mombasa as being a part of Kenya at the time which it was not.


Good luck with that.

Really?

On 25 May 1887, its administration was relinquished to the British East Africa Association (see Kenya). The sultan formally presented the town in 1898 to the British. It soon became the capital of the British East Africa Protectorate and is the sea terminal of the Uganda Railway, which was started in 1896. Many workers were brought in from British India to build the railway, and the city's fortunes revived. On 1 July 1895, it became part of Britain's Kenya protectorate (the coastal strip nominally under Zanzibari sovereignty).

Mombasa became the capital of the coastal Protectorate of Kenya in 1920. On December 12, 1963 it became part newly independent Kenya.[7]

Mombasa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not that I trust wiki all that much but this is common knowledge.

 

[Crunch]

I stand corrected. However, your little picture is clearly fake because the date starts with the month, when it is always done with the day first pretty much everywhere outside the U.S.

Are you talking about the Hawaiian long form BC?

 

[Demon of Light]

Are you talking about the Hawaiian long form BC?

I am talking about this alleged Kenyan birth certificate. The Brits, who ran Kenya, start with the day, then month, then year and that is not how it is written on your alleged birth certificate.

 

[Crunch]

I am talking about this alleged Kenyan birth certificate. The Brits, who ran Kenya, start with the day, then month, then year and that is not how it is written on your alleged birth certificate.

Prove that...... link something that proves Kenya followed English dating format in 1961.

Also prove that the Doctor did….. And the person that typed it up.

Good luck with your assignment this weekend. :mrgreen:

 

[Simon W. Moon]

That's not the long form certificate of live birth from Kenya.

 

[Demon of Light]

Prove that...... link something that proves Kenya followed English dating format in 1961.

Really? The British have always done it that way and therefore Kenya did it under the British in 1961.

That's not the long form certificate of live birth from Kenya.

There's also that.

 

[Crunch]

Really? The British have always done it that way and therefore Kenya did it under the British in 1961.



There's also that.

Well..... that certainly proved your point, I don't know if I've ever seen such a compilation of hard and accurate evidence before in my whole life.

Have you ever thought of opening up a fact checking service?

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Embarrassment to a president or anyone is not grounds for denying a defendant the right to mount a defense; especially when the code says he can garner whatever evidence necessary.

Why should anybody be able to demand a single damn thing of a man who has held the appropriate documentation up in front of a camera for inspection, or a man on whose behalf a state Health Department has spoken:

"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."

Fukino says that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently from any other.

She says state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest in it.

There's a reason this has been repeatedly thrown out of Federal courts.

This guy's an idiot.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

By the way, the poll question sucks. The way you phrased it, it's "heads I win, tails you lose." :lol:

 

[Crunch]

Why should anybody be able to demand a single damn thing of a man who has held the appropriate documentation up in front of a camera for inspection,

Uh....... I'd like a link to this assertion, as far as I know Barry has only shown his papers to factcheck and DailyKOS. No cameras involved.

or a man on whose behalf a state Health Department has spoken:

"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."

Fukino says that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently from any other.

She says state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest in it.

This so full of contradictions it's hard to know where to start.

1. Under what authority does Dr. Chiyome Fukino declare anyone a Natural Born Citizen?

2. Notice she say "original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health".... not his birth certificate. Which vital records? (note for the reading impaired..... records means plural..... more than 1 record)

3. Hawaiian law makes it a crime to release any information about someone’s records, yet Dr. Chiyome Fukino does just that with this statement.

There's a reason this has been repeatedly thrown out of Federal courts.

The court cases have been thrown out of court for "standing", not on the case’s merits..... none of the cases have been heard. By this the courts have determined that no US citizen has a right of redress in this case, which is a violation of our 1st amendment rights. :shrug:

This guy's an idiot.

I know Barry is an idiot..... try not to look too much like one yourself.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Uh....... I'd like a link to this assertion, as far as I know Barry has only shown his papers to factcheck and DailyKOS. No cameras involved.

No, I'm not going to bother, because you're not asking me to prove anything worth proving, and even if I did it wouldn't change your opinion.

1. Under what authority does Dr. Chiyome Fukino declare anyone a Natural Born Citizen?

She doesn't need any authority. That's like saying that someone needs to be in a position of authority to assert that premeditated murder is illegal.

The law is simple -- if you're born here, you're a citizen. She had the authority to assert what the records kept by her department said.

2. Notice she say "original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health".... not his birth certificate. Which vital records? (note for the reading impaired..... records means plural..... more than 1 record)

Why don't you ask her, if you're that bent on word-smithing the exact text of what she said?

3. Hawaiian law makes it a crime to release any information about someone’s records, yet Dr. Chiyome Fukino does just that with this statement.

Actually, from what I've read, it would've been a crime for her to release his birth certificate for public scrutiny. I'm not aware of any law that makes it illegal for her to assert thathe was born in the state.

The court cases have been thrown out of court for "standing", not on the case’s merits..... none of the cases have been heard.

You say that as if standing is not a significant requirement for filing a suit in Federal court! :lol:

I know Barry is an idiot..... try not to look too much like one yourself.

Listen, if you're gonna insult me, at least have the cojones to come out and DO it.

 

[Crunch]

No, I'm not going to bother, because you're not asking me to prove anything worth proving, and even if I did it wouldn't change your opinion.

In other woeds, pure unbackable BS.

She doesn't need any authority. That's like saying that someone needs to be in a position of authority to assert that premeditated murder is illegal.

The law is simple -- if you're born here, you're a citizen. She had the authority to assert what the records kept by her department said.

I can show you 6 Supreme Court cases that define NBC as born on US soil to two US citizen parents. the woman is an uninformed fool.

Why don't you ask her, if you're that bent on word-smithing the exact text of what she said?



Actually, from what I've read, it would've been a crime for her to release his birth certificate for public scrutiny. I'm not aware of any law that makes it illegal for her to assert thathe was born in the state.

I can show you the statute that makes it illegal to disclose any info from the records.

You say that as if standing is not a significant requirement for filing a suit in Federal court! :lol:

Standing is fine and dandy if we are talking about Joe suing Jim for something Jim did to Andy. The legitimacy of the POTUS is something that concerns and affects every American citizen..... yet the courts have used the cowards way out to not hear the cases on their merits by stripping all US citizens of their 1st amendment right to redress of grievance against the government.

How long are you going to defend Barry hiding all of his records and using your money to fight from showing the records that would prove he is eligible to his office? The Constitution says in Article II, section 1”No person except a natural born Citizen,”….. that is a positive mandate to run for the job, and if asked, Barry has a positive duty to provide the proof. He’s been asked and he stonewalls and hides behind a technicality.

Listen, if you're gonna insult me, at least have the cojones to come out and DO it.

I did..... did you miss it?

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

In other woeds, pure unbackable BS.

No, just that it's a meaningless point to debate with you. :lol:

I can show you 6 Supreme Court cases that define NBC as born on US soil to two US citizen parents. the woman is an uninformed fool.

Seems to me that that can't be the currently accepted interpretation, or McCain wouldn't have passed muster. We also wouldn't have Republicans screaming about "anchor babies." :lol:

I can show you the statute that makes it illegal to disclose any info from the records.

By all means, point me right straight to the law that makes what she said illegal.

Standing is fine and dandy if we are talking about Joe suing Jim for something Jim did to Andy. The legitimacy of the POTUS is something that concerns and affects every American citizen..... yet the courts have used the cowards way out to not hear the cases on their merits by stripping all US citizens of their 1st amendment right to redress of grievance against the government.

Standing is a legitimate consideration, period. It doesn't matter who the case is brought by or brought against.

How long are you going to defend Barry hiding all of his records and using your money to fight from showing the records that would prove he is eligible to his office? The Constitution says in Article II, section 1”No person except a natural born Citizen,”….. that is a positive mandate to run for the job, and if asked, Barry has a positive duty to provide the proof. He’s been asked and he stonewalls and hides behind a technicality.

He's provided proof, but some nutjobs just can't be satisfied.

I did..... did you miss it?

Go right ahead, be direct about it. Let's see if you've got the guts.

 

[Crunch]

No, just that it's a meaningless point to debate with you. :lol:

No, it means you made a statement, I called you on it, you can't backup your statement, it was pure BS.

Seems to me that that can't be the currently accepted interpretation, or McCain wouldn't have passed muster. We also wouldn't have Republicans screaming about "anchor babies." :lol:

McCain didn't, that is why they felt the need for a non-binding resolution that declared him NBC. Also McCain lied about where he was born. He said he was born on base when in fact he was born in Colon not on the base. In Reality, there were 3 candidates on the national ballot that didn’t qualify, and at least one wasn’t even a citizen of the US. What do anchor babies have to do with Barry?

By all means, point me right straight to the law that makes what she said illegal.

§338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records,

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrs2008/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm

Standing is a legitimate consideration, period. It doesn't matter who the case is brought by or brought against.

So you don't think that as an American citizen we should have the right to challenge a persons qualifications to be POTUS? That's insane.

He's provided proof, but some nutjobs just can't be satisfied.

Some nutjobs can't look at the facts and get by their own personal agendas. Every time you insult me I'll throw it right back at you.

Go right ahead, be direct about it. Let's see if you've got the guts.

This guy's an idiot.

Did I call you an idiot? Did you call me an idiot? Right back at ya. It's so nice to debate with a mature person that is above calling their opponent names... gives me a warm fuzzy.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

No, it means you made a statement, I called you on it, you can't backup your statement, it was pure BS.

No, it means you can't tell me what it would accomplish if I could show you Obama showing it on camera, and your opinion wouldn't be changed in any way by that, but you're going to give me a hard time for not wasting my time.

McCain didn't, that is why they felt the need for a non-binding resolution that declared him NBC. Also McCain lied about where he was born. He said he was born on base when in fact he was born in Colon not on the base. In Reality, there were 3 candidates on the national ballot that didn’t qualify, and at least one wasn’t even a citizen of the US.

Your argument makes no sense. A non-binding resolution wouldn't change McCain's status as a candidate for the Presidency.

What do anchor babies have to do with Barry?

The whole concept of anchor babies is that someone crosses the border, has a kid, that kid's a natural-born citizen, and every immigration nut is pissed about it and wants to change the 14th Amendment.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrs2008/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm

How does this say it's illegal to announce someone was in fact born in Hawaii?

Man, he just can't win. The head of the DoH there says he was born in Hawaii, she's breaking the law. If she doesn't, it would've been a sign he hadn't been. :lol:

So you don't think that as an American citizen we should have the right to challenge a persons qualifications to be POTUS? That's insane.

That's actually not at all what I said.

Did I call you an idiot? Did you call me an idiot? Right back at ya. It's so nice to debate with a mature person that is above calling their opponent names... gives me a warm fuzzy.

I called the dude who is the subject of this thread an idiot.

I'll take this as an admission that you lack the guts to insult me directly. So be it, keep nibbling around the edges if you must.

 

[Crunch]

No, it means you can't tell me what it would accomplish if I could show you Obama showing it on camera, and your opinion wouldn't be changed in any way by that, but you're going to give me a hard time for not wasting my time.

If you try to claim that Barry has shown that COLB to any one except Factcheck and the DailyKOS I have to insist on proof as those are the only people that Barry has shown his alleged COLB to..... and of course they bare entirely unbiased and trust worthy.

Your argument makes no sense. A non-binding resolution wouldn't change McCain's status as a candidate for the Presidency.

Yet he sponsored a non-binding resolution to declare just that. Both major parties knew they had nominated ineligible candidates for POTUS. Nancy went as far as to change the certification of eligibility for Barry and took out the part that declared him eligible under the Constitution..... why did she do that? (feel free to ask for proof, I got it)

The whole concept of anchor babies is that someone crosses the border, has a kid, that kid's a natural-born citizen, and every immigration nut is pissed about it and wants to change the 14th Amendment.

Do you think that was what the founders had in mind when they wrote the requirement for Natural Born Citizen into the Constitution as a requirement to run for POTUS?.... you are aware we fought a war with England to rid ourselves of foreign control, right? Would you want a President that grew up in Mexico, that didn’t know a thing about our way of life and the founding principles of this country?

How does this say it's illegal to announce someone was in fact born in Hawaii?

Man, he just can't win. The head of the DoH there says he was born in Hawaii, she's breaking the law. If she doesn't, it would've been a sign he hadn't been. :lol:

Don't argue with me, I didn't write the laws of Hawaii, but that is as plain as it can be... it is against the law to disclose any information in the vital statistics records, and that is what what's her name did in the statement you posted.

That's actually not at all what I said.



I called the dude who is the subject of this thread an idiot.

I'll take this as an admission that you lack the guts to insult me directly. So be it, keep nibbling around the edges if you must.

My apologies then..... as I was the only other poster at the time, I assumed it was aimed at me….. Still not too fond of being called a nut job. Just because I see smoke and wonder what Barry is hiding, and just because I have done thousands of hours of research about citizenship, the Constitution, and Hawaiian law and have a few questions about the veracity of Barry’s birth myth doesn’t make me a nut job.

According to recent polls, people that are sure of Barry’s qualifications to be POTUS are now the fringe. :lamo

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

If you try to claim that Barry has shown that COLB to any one except Factcheck and the DailyKOS I have to insist on proof as those are the only people that Barry has shown his alleged COLB to..... and of course they bare entirely unbiased and trust worthy.

Yet he sponsored a non-binding resolution to declare just that. Both major parties knew they had nominated ineligible candidates for POTUS. Nancy went as far as to change the certification of eligibility for Barry and took out the part that declared him eligible under the Constitution..... why did she do that? (feel free to ask for proof, I got it)

I'm sorry, I'm just not buying it. First off, both parties had alternatives that were born in the continental US, so if the eligibility of McCain or Obama was actually in question, they could've gone with other candidates. Second off, there is simply no way on the face of the Earth that a serious legal issue like ineligibility for office could possibly be addressed by a non-binding resolution. Third, the Speaker of the House has no authority to tinker with anything pertaining to who is and is not eligible to run for President.

Do you think that was what the founders had in mind when they wrote the requirement for Natural Born Citizen into the Constitution as a requirement to run for POTUS?

I don't give a damn what the founders had in mind. The founders had the 3/5ths compromise in mind. I'll make my own moral judgements without them looming over my shoulder, thanks.

you are aware we fought a war with England to rid ourselves of foreign control, right? Would you want a President that grew up in Mexico, that didn’t know a thing about our way of life and the founding principles of this country?

Are you seriously telling me that Obama represents, to you, foreign control?

Don't argue with me, I didn't write the laws of Hawaii, but that is as plain as it can be... it is against the law to disclose any information in the vital statistics records, and that is what what's her name did in the statement you posted.

I'm telling you your interpretation is incorrect.

My apologies then..... as I was the only other poster at the time, I assumed it was aimed at me….. Still not too fond of being called a nut job. Just because I see smoke and wonder what Barry is hiding, and just because I have done thousands of hours of research about citizenship, the Constitution, and Hawaiian law and have a few questions about the veracity of Barry’s birth myth doesn’t make me a nut job.

I've done lots of thinking and reading and researching too. The difference between you and I is that you can't see the forest for the trees. You keep focusing on your own "alternative" interpretation of the Constitution (even when I point you to court decisions that directly contradict your beliefs) and you worry about things like Obama's eligibility when the system used to elect him is vulnerable to remote automated attack.

In other words, you're down in the weeds worried about the details while everything else is burning down around you. Your priorities are askew.