HAVE THE QUESTIONS BEEN ANSWERED?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Apr. 27, 2012) — One year ago today, the White House released what was purported to be Barack Hussein Obama’s long-form birth certificate allegedly requested and obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health with special permission from its director, Loretta Fuddy. In her response, Fuddy stated that she would provide “a computer-generated certified copy” to Obama’s attorney, Judith Corley.
The mainstream media appears to be providing no coverage of the historic release which was intended to quell questions regarding Obama’s birthplace, parentage, and eligibility for the office of President..
Posted on the White House website that day was a statement from White House Communications Director, Dan Pfeiffer, who said:
At a time of great consequence for this country – when we should be debating how we win the future, reduce our deficit, deal with high gas prices, and bring stability to the Middle East, Washington, DC, was once again distracted by a fake issue. The President’s hope is that with this step, we can move on to debating the bigger issues that matter to the American people and the future of the country.
But was the issue fake, or was it the “birth certificate” that was fake? Is a “computer-generated certified copy” authentic?
One year prior to the image’s release, a joke was made about Obama’s “birth certificate” by Jimmy Kimmel, in apparent acknowledgement of the doubts surrounding Obama’s birth narrative [Warning: indecent language.] Kimmel “will be sitting next tot he first lady” this Saturday at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, where he is expected to give a “performance” intended to “just make Obama laugh.”
On April 27, 2011, Obama gave remarks regarding the image purported to be his birth certificate, although he did not have the “document” in his hand while doing so. He railed against “sideshows and carnival barkers” in reference to those who doubted his birth in Hawaii.
Pen Johansson also made reference to a “carnival” in his blog post in an unusually personal attack launched against The New York Times’ David Brooks, who had once been an Obama supporter. [Warning: indecent language.]
While claiming the April 27, 2011 image to be his long-form birth certificate long demanded by citizens doubtful of his story of having been born in Hawaii, former White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, had said nearly two years before that he had been responsible for releasing Obama’s “birth certificate” “on the internet.” At that time, it was purported that the Certification of Live Birth posted in June 2008 by Factcheck.org and The Daily KOS was the only one available.
Where, then, did this new “image” come from?
The image contains no raised seal from the registrar’s office and contains a typographical error of an “X” where a “T” should appear in the word “THE.” Blogger “Pen Johansson” speculates that the “X” is not an error, but rather, an intentional act to signify that Obama to Malcolm X might have some type of connection. Johansson states:
Since Obama entered public life at the national level, he has often been compared in appearance and ideology to Malcolm X with some conspiracists actually believing Obama is biologically related to him, and that this is the core of Obama’s secretive biography that he wants hidden by concealing his records.
The White House release did not appear to satisfy everyone’s questions about Obama’s birthplace and constitutional eligibility to serve as president. After numerous reports of forgery were released, members of the Surprise, AZ Tea Party approached their local sheriff, Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, and requested an investigation into the authenticity of the document. Arpaio commissioned a Cold Case Posse to respond to the constituents’ request at no expense to taxpayers. Following a six-month investigation, the group declared that “probable cause” existed that the birth certificate image as well as Obama’s Selective Service registration card were “computer-generated forgeries. According to recent news reports, Arpaio is expected to release more investigative material in the near future.
This morning a local report from a LaFayette, LA newspaper entitled, “Today in History 04.27.12” mentions last year’s birth certificate release:
One year ago: An Afghan officer, Col. Ahmed Gul, killed eight U.S. airmen and one U.S. civilian during a routine meeting at an Afghan air force headquarters compound in Kabul. Responding to critics’ relentless claims, President Barack Obama produced a detailed Hawaii birth certificate in an extraordinary attempt to bury the issue of where he was born and confirm his legitimacy to hold office.
The article is a syndicated Associated Press report. In speaking with an attorney from the Associated Press in New York last year, The Post & Email was told that the news organization did not obtain a copy of the document from the White House and that a Freedom of Information Act request would have to be submitted in order to do so.
Shortly after release, experts in the areas of computer images, document creation and manipulation, and “internet engineering” declared the image a forgery which utilized multiple “layers.” Another report disagreed.
Obama’s birthplace is not the only issue involved in the question as to his constitutional eligibility. Many scholars, writers and constitutional attorneys have maintained that the citizenship of the parents, or at least the father, is key to determining a person’s “natural born Citizen” status in keeping with Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
During an April 10 ballot challenge hearing in New Jersey, Obama’s counsel, Atty. Elizabeth Hill, “agreed during the trial that there was absoulutely [sic] no evidence before the court as to who Obama is or where he was born, including excluding from evidence the internet image of Obama’s alleged Certificate of Live Birth he released on April 27, 2011. The ALJ [Editor’s Note: Administrative Law Judge] confirmed that to be the case.” Ms. Hill was removed from the case shortly thereafter, and Atty. Angelo Genova, a partner in the law firm, will reportedly now be handling the case, which is expected to be appealed by Atty. Apuzzo, lawyer for the plaintiffs.
Exactly one year before the release of the birth certificate, Malcolm X’s confessed killer, Talmadge X, was released from prison. It is believed that members of the Nation of Islam plotted and killed Malcolm X because they perceived him to be “a hypocrite.” Why did they think so?
Malcolm X and Elijah Mohammad, founder of the Nation of Islam, had considered each other “hypocrites” following Malcolm’s expulsion from the Nation of Islam. When Malcolm discovered that Muhammad had had children out of wedlock in defiance of the Nation of Islam’s teachings, their relationship began to unravel. After President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, Malcolm had declared, “The chickens are coming home to roost,” as did Obama’s minister of 20 years, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, following the atrocity of the 9-11 attacks.
In an article appearing in The New Yorker two days prior to Obama’s release of his “birth certificate,” author David Remnick wrote the following of Malcolm X and Barack Hussein Obama:
But what do Malcolm’s readers see in him? Writing two decades ago, Cornel West called Malcolm “the skeleton in the closet lodged in the racial memory of most black professionals.” Consider the foremost black professional in the country—the President of the United States. After Barack Obama was inaugurated, he returned to the British government a bust of Winston Churchill that was on display in the Oval Office and installed a bust of Martin Luther King, Jr. King is rightly regarded as the singular hero of the era that lasted from the Montgomery bus boycott, in 1955, to his death, in April, 1968. Malcolm was an electrifying spokesman for black dignity and selfhood, a radical prod to the mainstream movement, but his role in the civil-rights movement was marginal.
Yet, when Obama was young and trying to come to terms with his own identity, he read the autobiography and it affected him more deeply than even the works of Richard Wright and James Baldwin. In balmy Hawaii, at the most prestigious private school west of the Rockies, Obama found something in the narrative of a man who was also of mixed race, had lost his father, and needed to create a self. “His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me,” Obama wrote of Malcolm in “Dreams from My Father.” “The blunt poetry of his words, his unadorned insistence on respect, promised a new and uncompromising order, martial in its discipline, forged through sheer force of will.” Obama, who adored his white mother and grandparents, was disturbed by Malcolm’s desire to “expunge” the white blood in him. What he admired was the book’s depiction of Malcolm’s redemptive journey and his redemptive, universalist final year.
“I was never taken with some of his theorizing,” Obama told me last year. “I think that what Malcolm X did, though, was to tap into a long-running tradition within the African-American community, which is that, at certain moments, it’s important for African-Americans to assert their manhood, their worth. . . . That affirmation that I am a man, I am worth something, I think was important. And I think Malcolm X probably captured that better than anybody.”
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.