The Brand New Birther Thread

The Protestant witch trials in Salem and the North Berwick (which King James attended and included in his book) involved torture.The methods to kill witches used by both Protestants and Catholics were horrendous and barbaric.I don't know why you hammer so hard on the sins of the Catholics but ignore the sins of the Protestants. Humans are humans with examples of saints and sinners in every group you look at. Edited by 14174dm, : quotation code

It was a mistake. Your turn. Anything involving neither an error nor magic. Anything at all. Now you're being mistaken about why you're mistaken. At the time, you explained "He's identified as the editor of the Harvard Law Review on the same page that the bio is given about birth in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii."You just saw the word "Harvard" and assumed it was the source of the misinformation.Now, suppose Goderich saw the word "Kenya". Suppose that skimming through D.F.M.F. or a precis of it she saw that it was written by a black guy, with a Kenyan father, who grew up abroad, and didn't notice (or the precis didn't even mention) that he happened to be born on American soil. This mistake would be far more understandable than yours, which required the sort of muddleheadedness that would startle a rabid badger on acid.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The evidence that the mailman gave amounts to every reason to suppose it was Obama, whether you dispute the evidence or not. From the evidence given it is quite right to conclude that it was Obama. FROM THE EVIDENCE GIVEN... It had to be Obama, his memory dovetails with the known facts. You dispute his memory, but that's something else.

---

It may be the ONLY reason to believe it, but that is all. It certainly does not dovetail with the known facts. And under the circumstances it isn't really sufficient evidence to cover the basic improbability of the claim. He could be mistaken, and by the evidence he probably is.

quote:

---

The man's testimony is so credible you should be correcting the information YOU are trusting by it. If he remembers Mary Ayers describing the student as a "foreign student" then you have to give up your insistence that he couldn't have been.

---

As has already been pointed out it is not certain that Mary Ayers was speaking about the same student. It is hardly impossible that she helped two students - or maybe more. However I do not insist on even that. Instead I believe that she WAS talking about a foreign student. And, therefore, she was not talking about Obama who was not a foreign student.

quote:

---

Why are you trusting people who have a vested interest in denying inconvenient facts about his history? There are LOTS of such inconvenient facts in Obama's history, far beyond the location of his birth. We could be here for years sorting them all

---

I don't think that disagreeing with questionable assertions you happen to like really counts as "denying inconvenient facts". But in this case - if we assume a secret association with Ayers (which is not that likely) - it really doesn't make sense fit Obama to publically go out to his mother's house to thank her for secret help and tell the mailman what he was doing. So either way you have a problem.

quote:

---

I didn't miss his having a foreign name, where are you getting that? The mailmain remembered him as having a foreign name, he just couldn't remember the name itself. Turns out the name "Obama" happens to be a foreign name, corroborating his imperfect memory

---

I said that you missed the fact that an actual foreign student - one who was not a U.S. Citizen, resident in the U.S. - would likely have a foreign name. And you missed it again.

quote:

---

Since it would have been very important in Obama's Presidential campaign to play down his association with Ayers, I wouldn't trust anything they said about when they met or how close their relationship was

---

However, as I pointed out this whole business makes the idea of a secret relationship implausible.

quote:

---

There's good reason to distrust the establishment stories about Obama that you all buy so uncritically, so you can't use them to convince me to give up my own good judgment pf tje facts as I've encountered them

---

It is not a matter of simply trusting them - and I did not rely on them. I did consider the possibility of a secret relationship and that consideration was right there in my post. the story only makes sense if the visitor had an open relationship with the Ayers family and Obama did not. And in fact the timescale is so vague we neither know if Obama was a student or in Chicago at the time.So I suggest again that the most likely explanation is that Mary Ayers was helping a foreign student who was not Obama - most likely studying in Chicago - that he was the visitor and quite possibly talking about a different Presidency altogether. Since you haven't offered any reason to think that Mary Ayers was at all likely to call Obama a foreign student - and because it is reasonably likely that the mailman's identification was mistaken this would seem the more likely explanation.

It's almost like she had access to a book about Obama or something...a book that contains references to his parentage and background in Kenya.

Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.

And as a bonus, here's Snopes debunking it as thoroughly as you could wish for.Welcome to Kenya, Birthplace of Barack Obama | Snopes.com

Snopes was originally funded by Soros and everyone knows it was created to discredit honest news and support Communist Main Stream Media.

My mistakes are irrelevant. I'm not responsible for an author sketch in a book which said Obama was born in Kenya. Funny how that "mistake" stayed in print for some years without anyone making an issue of it until it was recognized that it had to be dispensed with because it was so inconvenient for this author who was now a big political figure. It could not possibly have been a mistake, not that kind of statement in those circumstances, uh uh, sorry, and your scenario is just silly. She had to have a source she considered trustworthy and of course she did and of course when it became inconvenient for the truth to be out there in actual print she had to make up something and it was a totally unlikely something. Sorrrrry.

Golly gee, another hoax? But whose hoax? Which is the hoax? Do you know? Of course not.Now go listen to the video of the Kenyan ambassador who clearly says there is some kind of monument to Obama's birth in Kenya.

Nope, not on this subject would I read snopes.

Any literary agent or editor or publisher worth her salt would not make such an idi*otic mistake.

They show you how easy it is to make a mistake. It is hard to detect a train of thought there.Who was there to notice it and "make an issue of it"? So, go for it. Your explanation that involves neither a mistake nor magic. Who was her source? What evidence was she presented with? Flesh out your insane fantasy a little.

You make idiotic mistakes all the time. Are you going to tell us that no-one who can hold down a responsible job has ever under any circumstances been a little bit like you?

The KJV still says "book of life", in Revelation 22:19, and it has for centuries. Even though it appears in no Greek manuscript. The 'print' you are talking about is an obscure one, that nobody had any particlar reason to read for decades.

OK, you don't have to glimpse into that perverse hotbed of factual accuracy. ThinAirDesigns has posted the original of the photoshopped picture; and I can tell you myself that the Arabic script under where it says "Kenya" does in fact read h-a-w-a-ii, left to right, which does kind of give away that it's a joke.