Parsing the Associated Press Story About Barack Hussein Obama’s Official Birth Certificate

First, read:

Parsing the Statement by Dr. Fukino about Barack Hussein Obama’s Official Birth Certificate

Understand the truth about what Dr. Fukino did and did NOT say.

Then, read the Associated Press story about Dr. Fukino’s statement:

State declares Obama birth certificate genuine

Understand what is truth and what is deception.

The AP wants people to read that headline and believe that the State of Hawaii declared that the COLB produced by the Obama campaign was genuine. That is NOT true. They never said any such thing.

The AP reported: “State officials say there’s no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii”. That is NOT true. They never said any such thing.

The AP has a track record of inaccurate reporting, making “AP” appear to stand for “Advocacy Press“.

Was this instance mere negligence, incompetence, or intentional deception to benefit Obama’s campaign?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Presidential Eligibility. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Parsing the Associated Press Story About Barack Hussein Obama’s Official Birth Certificate

  1. Ted says:

    Obama can’t be POTUS.

    Since no congressman and senator objected on 1/8/09 to Congress’ count and certification of the electoral vote which would have turned resolution of Obama’s eligibility issue over to Congress, rendering moot both the Berg and Lightfoot cases, Berg finally does achieve standing on the issue of actual harm, to be addressed at the 1/9/09 SCOTUS Conference on Writ of Certiorari. Obama’s failure to submit evidence of his constitutional qualification for the 1/9/09 conference will mean he cannot thereafter challenge Berg’s request to enjoin the 1/8/09 Congressional electoral count and certification, albeit retroactive, scheduled for SCOTUS conference 1/16/09. Moreover, Chief Justice Roberts has scheduled a full Court conference on the Lightfoot case 1/23/09 in the event there needs to be a Constitutionally mandated action, the Inauguration itself, to enjoin retroactively.

    Checkmate! (WHERE IS THE NEWS MEDIA?)

  2. Ryan says:

    Mr Red Pill,

    I believe you are running out of allies in the Birth Certificate fight.

    Here’s a quote from a media source:

    “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.”

    If you think that’s just typical MSM coverage, you’re wrong. It’s from WorldNetDaily – probably the most Anti-Obama news source out there.

    The “expert” Berg used to show “proof” of a forgery would not even allow his real name to be used. Yeah I’m sure he’s an expert.

  3. John says:

    You really ought to look closely at this, everyone, because this is as rich as it gets:

    Ryan said:
    ”[quote]You know what? You may actually be right about something. There may not actually be an original paper copy of the COLB. I bet there isn’t. The certificate of live birth is something that is, routinely, generated by the government offices as an official government issued birth record. If a person shows up in person to get it, it would be printed out and handed to the person. If it was an urgent document to be sent across the country – it is reasonable to expect that document to be sent digitally. If that is the case, and the document was to be posted online – photoshop is the most common piece of software to use to make it presentable on the web, or in an email.
    On the other hand, if the document was sent by courier, it would have been scanned, and manipulated by photoshop for the web. Photoshop is not just used for faking documents. It is used for rotating, resizing, sharpening, de-skewing, and adjusting contrast. Any, or all of the things could have been done to the file.
    The document itself is a damn piece of paper.[endquote]”

    Yes, Ryan, the fact certainly is that in any case [a real] document [must be] a piece of paper.

    You might recall (but it wouldn’t surprise me if you didn’t by the time you got to the fourth or fifth line, even if you made it clear in your first line that you were responding to my point by agreeing) that my point was that there was no paper COLA because if the Phony One had such a paper copy of this COLA he could easily re-scan it on another scanner, and post the new image. That has not been done and will never be done because there is no such paper COLA.

    Now let’s look at the foam-around-the-mouth remainder of that blather. Because that has to be the biggest load of nonsense I have thus far yet read from one of the Phony One’s close-your-eyes-and-name-your-own-definition-of-hope-and-change sycophant apologists.

    >”it is reasonable to expect that document to be sent digitally …”

    Huh?

    >”On the other hand, if the document was sent by courier, it would have been scanned, and manipulated by photoshop for the web. ”

    What are you talking about? I thought you just agreed with me that there was no paper copy of the COLA. What exactly are you trying to say (I mean, obscure) here?

    >”Photoshop is not just used for faking documents….”

    Why are you refuting what was never said? I never said that using photoshop on the scan proved it’s a forgery. Are you trying to distract someone from the point that I actually AM making? I’m saying that there is no real independent confirmation of the existence of an original paper COLA, none. Not even the simplest and easiest “second-opinion” that the Phony One could give the doubtful by simply scanning the original paper COLA a second time on a different scanner and posting that new image online. My point is that such a second scan can never be done because there is no paper COLA because the image that was posted online is a composite fraud.

    Who are you trying to fool, the half-educated, semi-literate buffoons who would take an online image as certified proof of authenticity? Surely you are not trying to convince anyone with half a dose of reason, a teaspoon of critical thinking, or a dollop of common-sense!

    Genius, the reason that a state goes to the trouble to impress a birth certificate with a date stamp and a raised seal is to make it trustworthy as an authentic document from an official state office.

    Sending such a document in an email would be worse than pointless as anything printed from a JPG file in some other place is completely useless as proof of anything. This, by the way, is the very simple point that many have been trying to make for six months.

    What do you take everyone for, stupider than people who agree with you? (Rhetorical question, answer only if idiot.)

    A person would have to be incapable of reading their own grade school diploma to believe something as stupid as what you have suggested.

    Again, there is no hard copy of this particular COLA available because there never was any hard copy of this COLA. This image is a composite image made from a variety of sources, and there will never be another scan of the supposed “original” COLA, which would be falling-over-backward simple to do if the Phony One had an original COLA. There will never be another scan because there is no “original” paper COLA to scan, and scanning a printout of the composite image would convincingly put the lie to it. The fact that the Phony One is unwilling even to simply put the supposed COLA on another scanner and show us a different scan of the same hypothetical paper document hypothetically impressed with a raised seal before it left the Hawaiian government office is convincing testimony to the fact that there is no such paper original COLA and never has been.

    For you to even suggest that such COLAs are routinely sent to recipients as digital images from the government office where they are produced is for you to be scraping the bottom of the rabidly-maniacal-raving-with-absurdity barrel with such a fanatic desperation that you’ve succeeded at nothing better than having worn a hole that we can all plainly see through.

    This kind of desperation to sustain a fraud utterly belies that smug, well-rehearsed “innocence” to which the Phony One’s apologists pretend with such overblown fanfare, a role they have studied till it became a career, studied to the point that it now unmistakably spotlights the extreme fanaticism of their attempt to gloss over this glaring, obvious, out-in-plain-sight, OOOOPS!

    This utterly absurd, nonsensical desperation of theirs is only the latest loud and convincing proof that the real extremists in this controversy are not those who question the validity of that phony image, but those who keep trying to defend it with nonsense and to direct everyone’s attention somewhere else, most frequently, in their signature lazy-man’s way, by mindlessly lobbing topic-changing defamatory insults because, though superficially plausible to the shallow and easily distracted, the polished and well-rehearsed but provably ridiculous justifications in their little handbook are in such limited supply. Of course this is only to be expected among those whose mental capacity is so severely limited to begin with that they can so easily be convinced that there might be profit in a lie.

  4. Jax says:

    John-

    “This utterly absurd, nonsensical desperation of theirs is only the latest loud and convincing proof that the real extremists in this controversy are not those who question the validity of that phony image, but those who keep trying to defend it with nonsense and to direct everyone’s attention somewhere else, most frequently, in their signature lazy-man’s way, by mindlessly lobbing topic-changing defamatory insults because, though superficially plausible to the shallow and easily distracted, the polished and well-rehearsed but provably ridiculous justifications in their little handbook are in such limited supply. Of course this is only to be expected among those whose mental capacity is so severely limited to begin with that they can so easily be convinced that there might be profit in a lie.”

    First of all, a thesaurus is a privilege, not a right. Calm down. Second, by the time Obama is sworn into office, the people who will have vetted his rights as a citizen will have included the United States House of Representatives, the United States Senate and United States Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court, by the way, was appointed by Republican Presidents by a 7-2 margin. They’re not exactly in the tank for Obama.

  5. January 11, 2009 at 1:24 am
    Ryan Says:

    Mr Red Pill,

    I believe you are running out of allies in the Birth Certificate fight.

    Here’s a quote from a media source:

    “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.”

    If you think that’s just typical MSM coverage, you’re wrong. It’s from WorldNetDaily – probably the most Anti-Obama news source out there.

    The “expert” Berg used to show “proof” of a forgery would not even allow his real name to be used. Yeah I’m sure he’s an expert.

    It appears that you are quoting from this WND story posted August 23, 2008, as evidence that I am “running out of allies in the Birth Certificate fight.”

    In that story, the paragraph preceding your quoted paragraph begins:

    However, FactChecker.org [sic] says it obtained Obama’s actual birth certificate and that the document was indeed real.

    Annenberg Political Fact Check (FactCheck.org) did NOT obtain “Obama’s actual birth certificate”, and the document they did obtain, a supposed Certification of Live Birth, came from Obama’s Chicago campaign headquarters, not from the state of Hawaii. There are significant differences between the two documents. It matters where the COLB document came from and that the State of Hawaii has never claimed that the COLB is authentic.

    Annenberg is politically connected to Obama, and no unbiased party has been allowed to examine the COLB.

    Both the FactCheck statement and the AP news story contained serious misstatements (a.k.a. lies).

    Obama promised to be “open, transparent, and accountable“. Were those “just words”?

    Why won’t he authorize the State of Hawaii to release his original birth certificate?

    And if you want to claim that WND is somehow no longer an ally in the Birth Certificate fight, why don’t you link to stories like this:

    Watch Obama commercial they don’t want you to see
    Fox, CNN, MSNBC refuse ads questioning Barack’s eligibility
    Posted: January 08, 2009

    or this:

    Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
    Supreme Court sets ‘natural born’ conference to follow inauguration
    Posted: January 08, 2009

  6. John says:

    Jax says:

    “First of all, a thesaurus is a privilege, not a right. Calm down.”

    Who said anything about a thesaurus? If you could, please, just name a single word in the passage you extracted and quoted that is not commonplace in the vocabulary of any ordinarily competent speaker of English ….

    … then you might avoid proving yourself to be exactly like the desperate types I was describing that you seem so closely to identify with.

    Why are you resorting to “mindlessly lobbing topic-changing defamatory” insinuations? It is not my fault that you get faint whenever you encounter a competent example of written English. I might therefore cautiously suggest that you also very carefully avoid reading anything written by Mark Twain or Abraham Lincoln for the sake of your own health.

    Could it perhaps be that you are jealous because you have nothing worthwhile to say or that, even if you did, you cannot make your ideas clear enough for others to understand?

    If you had suggested that I must have had a copy of Fowler’s Dictionary of Modern English Usage open before me to have made such complex sentences so understandably clear you might at least have shown that you understood why you were so affected (even if that would have been just as false and futile as what you did say).

    –John

    P.S. A thesaurus is a privilege? I thought it was a book. If I should ever need to use one, I’ll call it a reference or perhaps a tool.

    Leave it to a defender of nonsense to mistake a concrete object for an abstract idea.

  7. John says:

    January 11, 2009 at 1:24 am
    Ryan Says:

    Mr Red Pill,

    I believe you are running out of allies in the Birth Certificate fight.

    Here’s a quote from a media source:

    “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.”

    If you think that’s just typical MSM coverage, you’re wrong. It’s from WorldNetDaily – probably the most Anti-Obama news source out there.

    The “expert” Berg used to show “proof” of a forgery would not even allow his real name to be used. Yeah I’m sure he’s an expert.

    It appears that you are quoting from this WND story posted August 23, 2008, as evidence that I am “running out of allies in the Birth Certificate fight.”

    In that story, the paragraph preceding your quoted paragraph begins:

    However, FactChecker.org [sic] says it obtained Obama’s actual birth certificate and that the document was indeed real.

    Annenberg Political Fact Check (FactCheck.org) did NOT obtain “Obama’s actual birth certificate”, and the document they did obtain, a supposed Certification of Live Birth, came from Obama’s Chicago campaign headquarters, not from the state of Hawaii. There are significant differences between the two documents. It matters where the COLB document came from and that the State of Hawaii has never claimed that the COLB is authentic.

    Annenberg is politically connected to Obama, and no unbiased party has been allowed to examine the COLB.

    Both the FactCheck statement and the AP news story contained serious misstatements (a.k.a. lies).

    Obama promised to be “open, transparent, and accountable“. Were those “just words”?

    Why won’t he authorize the State of Hawaii to release his original birth certificate?

    And if you want to claim that WND is somehow no longer an ally in the Birth Certificate fight, why don’t you link to stories like this:

    Watch Obama commercial they don’t want you to see
    Fox, CNN, MSNBC refuse ads questioning Barack’s eligibility
    Posted: January 08, 2009

    or this:

    Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
    Supreme Court sets ‘natural born’ conference to follow inauguration
    Posted: January 08, 2009

    Bump.

  8. Pingback: How Congress Was Fooled « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  9. llabesab says:

    WHAT A BUNCH OF “BS.”

    JUST TELL THE MAN FROM MOMBASA TO OPEN UP THAT HAWAIIAN VAULT AND LET THE WHOLE WORLD SEE WHAT’S INSIDE. YOU WOULD THINK THAT SUCH A SIMPLE ACT WOULD BE DONE IMMEDIATELY. BUT RALPH WALDO EMERSON HAD IT RIGHT WWHEN HE SAID:

    “YOUR ACTIONS THUNDER SO THAT I CAN NOT HEAR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.”

  10. Pingback: Consider This… « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  11. Pingback: Leo Donofrio’s Recent Posts « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  12. Pingback: Obama’s Eligibility: It’s a Matter of Faith « We the People of the United States

  13. Pingback: AP Puts More Trust in Obama Rumors Than in Facts « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  14. Is the Associated Press an unbiased, trustworthy news organization?

    Would they distort the truth in order to gain a political advantage?

    Well, check out this example:

    The AP photographer who sent the caption would have known that it was …, but by not mentioning her the AP was able to do a media hit on … but still be able to claim they told the “truth” with the caption.

  15. Could H. RES. 593 be used as “prima facie” evidence by the State of Hawaii to issue Dr. Fukino’s second News Release and finally make the claim “Obama was born in Hawaii”?

    I think the answer is yes, based on

    Federal Rules of Evidence
    Rule 902. Self-authentication

    (10) Presumptions under Acts of Congress. Any signature, document, or other matter declared by Act of Congress to be presumptively or prima facie genuine or authentic.

    I guess it depends on whether a “Resolution” is considered an “Act” of Congress. If “Acts of Congress” are limited to actual bills that pass both houses and are signed by the President to become an official Act, then no. But if a simple “Resolution” of a single chamber of Congress is considered an “Act of Congress”, then yes.

    Members of Congress never inspected any original, initial vital record to verify the “Obama birth narrative”. They neglected their responsibilities under Section 3 of the 20th Amendment. They effectively “outsourced” those responsibilities to an unelected, unaccountable third party that has connections to Obama (via Annenberg). They Assumed that the fraudulent COLB which was shown to a small, select, controlled audience from Annenberg Political Fact Check was actually authentic.

    Members of Congress voted in favor of H.Res. 593 with the assumption that the COLB was authentic, and never realized that they were being played… they themselves were unknowingly becoming the ” prima facie” evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Did the State of Hawaii make the claim that “Obama was born in Hawaii” base on H.Res. 593 and not based on any hospital record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii? I think so.

    But now that Neil Abercrombie has become Governor, I have little doubt that new documents will be manufactured in Hawaii. Time is short for members of Congress to demand to see the original, initial vital records, released directly to them under seal by the State of Hawaii.

  16. As to Dr. Fukino’s first News Release….

    So, now we have our answer. We know whether or not “Date Filed by Registrar” matters. It matters. A lot. Because Dr. Fukino said that the “original birth certificate” was in the “Registrar’s” custody. It was still in the procedural stage. And because someone other than the Hawaii State Registrar was custodian of Obama’s original birth certificate on October 31, 2008, we know that Obama did not have a valid original birth certificate and he possibly had an application for a ‘Late Birth Certificate’ on file that was pending acceptance by the State Registrar….

    And if it was not in the State Registrar’s custody and under his authority, then his “original birth certificate” was not evidence to “date and place of birth and parentage.”

  17. As to Dr. Fukino’s second News Release….

    Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

    There were just under 5 hours between the chicken (H.Res.593)
    and the egg (Dr. Fukino’s second News Release).

    On July 27, 2009, the vote on House Resolution 593 came at 6:55pm EDT (12:55pm HST).

    And on that same day, Dr. Fukino’s second News Release was first made public in a PDF attachment in an email sent to MissTickly at 11:45pm EDT (5:45pm HST).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s