Liar liar liar ..... I'm not surprised after all I know who you are and
your religion.
There is an executive order. Obama issued it on the day he took power. It
covers his BC in Hawaii, his Occidental College records and his other thesis
records from Harvard.
Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are
dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a
superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the
lies. He lies outright.
Jojo
PS. Expert spin with Naudin. I am not, never have, and never will be
associated with Naudin. This is "guilt by association". A well known
debating technique to spin the issue.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <a...@lomaxdesign.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo Jaro
believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and with
evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order
doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar.
I've said similar things about Naudin, because he made blatant errors in
his MAHG investigation, stonewalled friendly inquiries, and eft the page
with those major errors (that totally reverse his conclusions) without
corrections, thus continuing to mislead the public. That's culpable. Until
he fixes this, he's a *liar*.
If Naudin were a serious investigator, he'd do it in a flash. He made a
mistake. Embarrassing. So what? All it takes is "Oops!" and it is almost
entirely over.
And if Jojo were interested in truth, he'd do the same. From long
experience, now, I concluded he isn't interested in truth. He is
interested in *insult* and *winning.*
At 02:24 PM 12/26/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat,
strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once
and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what?
Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block
access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block
access to Obama's vault BC.
Fascinating. Is there such an Executive Order? That would be quite odd.
Legally, the President has no authority over Hawaiian officials, unless a
federal issue could be shown. and this would not qualify.
Jojo went on to repeat the Executive Order claim that Obama is preventing
access to the vault certificate. Is that true? Is there an "Executive
Order to block access."
What can be found on this?
The basis for the claim might be covered here:
http://www.politifact.com/subjects/obama-birth-certificate/
Is Politifact results from checking claims. It's remarkable how many
claims are shown as flaming lies, and how many of the rest are shown as
false. There really are only a few related claims that they show as true.
This is not one of them:
http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/feb/27/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-hawaii-governor-cant-fin/
The claim: State Rep. Leo Berman says Hawaii governor can't find anything
that says Obama was born in Hawaii
They consider the claim by Berman to be false. What they found showed that
Berman apparently misinterpreted statements by Abercrombie. What had
actually happened?
... The Associated Press reported that Abercrombie's office had ended its
effort to make public more information about Obama's birth. The story does
not say that Abercrombie had failed to find evidence of Obama's
birthplace, but that the state's attorney general had told the governor
that he can't disclose birth documentation without the person's consent.
"There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to
produce a document," Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said.
We wondered whether Abercrombie sought Obama's permission to obtain more
proof of his birth. The White House wouldn't comment, but Abercrombie told
CNN on Dec. 27 that "we haven't had any of those discussions."
Per the authenticity of the document posted online by Obama, our
colleagues at PolitiFact National pointed out July 1, 2009, that
FactCheck.org, a respected fact-checking unit at the University of
Pennsylvania, had traveled to Chicago to examine the document and
concluded that it's legitimate.
Unfortunately, that would be a reference to the "short form" certificate.
This page was written before the long form was released.
Abercrombie had apparently not requested permission.. My speculation about
why he'd not look at the vault certificate himself, and announce it, turns
out to be confirmed as the reason. It's illegal without consent!
Were there later developments on this? (Sure: Obama requested the long
form, and then released copies of it, both as direct copies, given to the
media, and on-line, as a readable, but compressed copy, as would be a
necessity.)
Was there an Executive Order? Jojo claims it. That's a specific kind of
document, and is not informal, and obviously is not binding on anyone not
informed of it (and may not be binding, period, but that's another issue.)
I was concerned about Jojo's claim of such an Order, which is why I'm
investigating.
The claim is common. There was an Obama Executive Order that is commonly
asserted to prevent release of his birth certificate. That's a totally
naive and imbalanced understanding of the Order.
http://www.thefogbow.com/birther-claims-debunked1/other-stuff/ covers it
and links to the Order itself.
However, is there *another* Executive Order? To get the real poop (or
"genuine bullshit"), I'll need to go to birther sources, perhaps.
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=246370 refers to the
same order, but also to
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi/read/246335 which, in
turn, refers to a Sheriff Arpaio page on WND. Which showed bupkis unless
maybe I gave them my email address, don't know. Not about to do that. Dead
end.
I've been watching Arpaio for years, from long before this affair. Is he
claiming an Executive Order?
Here is the Arpaio press release:
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/ksaz/pdfs/Birth%20Certificate%20Investigation%20Part%20II.pdf
It doesn't mention an Executive Order. It raises a concern about Hawaiian
law regarding alien birth certificates. As I've mentioned, this is a
common practice, I've registered two out-of-the-US births. I don't think
that these certificates mispepresent the actual birth. They simply provide
a way to obtain a local birth certificate if you need one. We were advised
to get them because we wouldn't want our children to have to get a
certificate from China or Ethiopia. Arpaio doesn't seem to realize that
this is common everywhere. Arpaio is confusing "U.S. citizenship" with
"Natural-born citizenship." They are quite different issues. By U.S. law,
our daughters became U.S. Citizens the moment they entered the US on the
visa they had. They did not become "natural-born citizens." They would not
be eligible to be elected President. Damn shame, actually, but that's the
Constitution at present!
http://www.mcso.org/MultiMedia/PressRelease/Sheriffreleasesobamafindings.pdf
gives more details on Arpaio's "findings."
I don't know if anyone else is concerned about an Arizona sheriff
investigating people and events that took place outside his jurisdiction
and that don't relate to any alleged crimes in his bailiwick. But this is
Arpaio, he's not shy! He used his "Cold Case Possee," which is
non-governmental, and which does not operate with public funds. The
investigation was requested by the Tea Party. Arpaio is, however, using
the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office web site and seal to issue his press
releases. Not really my concern at this point, I don't live in Arizona.
I found no mention of an Executive Order.
Here is an example of a birther claim about an Executive Order.
http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-executive-order-barring-release-of-his-birth-certificate/
Basically, the guy doesn't understand what he's reading. It's the same
Executive Order, that has nothing to do with personal data outside of the
Presidential documents, and would have no effect on access to them.
http://www.wnd.com%2F2012%2F11%2Fnow-white-house-petition-seeks-obamas-birth-certificate/
This is a birther page, from last month. The "reporter," repeats the
Executive Order myth. Yes, his first order sealed "his own records" form
public access, but that order was only about normal presidential executive
privilege, it has nothing to do with outside personal records. In many
comments, this reporter continues to propagate myths, asking questions
that have been answered (like the question about Abercrombie) that were
*long ago answered*, as if there is no answer and the questions being
unanswered demonstrates cause for suspicion.
My conclusion, I've researched this enough. Absent some specific
assertion, I'm not looking more. There is every sign that an Executive
Order myth developed out of the original Order that had nothing to do with
the issue, all references I could find pointed to that (or weren't
explicit.)
As to Sheriff Arpaio, *birthers* are complaining that he hasn't released
his information. The reporter above cites Arpaio, but not by name, instead
calling his work "law enforcement conclusions," which is highly
misleading. Arpaio's investigation was not "law enforcement," it was not
an official investigation, even though Arpaio abused his position in how
he announced it. It worked. It misled the reporter, if he actually cares
about fact, which isn't clear.
One more point of interest here. I hadn't seen any one address the alleged
problem with Hawaaian law, I had only my own knee-jerk opinion.
http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/AdmRules1/11-120.pdf Foreign persons
adopted in Hawaii.
Sec. 11-120-4 Issuance of certificate.
Upon submission of the application as provided herein, the registrar shall
prepare and file the Hawaii certificate of foreign
birth that shall contain the following information:
(1) Information about the adopted person:
(A) Full name as set forth in the adoption decree;
(B) Sex;
(C) Date of birth; and
(D) Place of birth.
(2) Information about the adoptive parents:
(A) Name of father and maiden name of mother;
(B) Date of birth of each parent;
(C) Place of birth of each parent; and
(D) Mailing address of parents.
(3) The statement "This certificate is not evidence of United States
citizenship for the child or the
parents named above." [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth: HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2)
(Imp: HRS Secs.
338-17.7(c), 338-20.5)
http://www.thefogbow.com/birther-claims-debunked1/birth-certificates/birth-certificates-101/
covers the issue. There is no sign that Hawaiian law creates a problem
with identifying "foreign birth certificates."
http://www.thefogbow.com/special-reports/second-arpaio-press-conference/
covers the Arpaio investigation, with astonishing thoroughness.
