Blogger raises questions 'bout the 'O's identity etc.

Interesting:
I don't recall what rabbit trail I followed from some article linked in either the news or political forums here....... but this takes the cake:
Here:
http://69.84.25.250/blogger/post/Obamaunism-101-The-Stanley-Ann-and-Madelyn-Dunham-factor.aspx
And here:
http://69.84.25.250/blogger/post/Sky-news-covers-Obama-birther-movement.aspx

Hope these work.
Is it real or is it dis information...... that is the question?

I know truth can seem stranger than fiction...... and, on the other hand, much which is fiction contains some elements of truth.

(Maybe one day I'll learn my lesson to stop chasing 'bunny' trails..... but it is nearing 'that season' most everyone celebrates......:tonofbricks

 

And you, sir, think by labeling and judging others you can stop people from thinking for themselves, reading the research of others, and doing their own investigations into areas which might be available to them? You see sir, not all of us live on planet X. Some of us may live in the states or localities where, if some of these issues are raised, we too might be able to verify, and others might be associated or subscribe to data systems, such as identity searches or genological searches, etc., through which information of what seems to be relevant connections may be obtained and presented publicly for the futherance of investigations.

If, sir, this were the FBI etc., the investigations, allegations, verifications, etc., might be secret and classified. If our news media and journalists and investigative reporters were free to do their own pursuits and present their reports without the interference of their monopolistic ownership controls or their concern for offending some corporate sponsor who is also fronting for the policies of those who best serve their interest, then the free press might be free and serving our interest by doing their job.

But, you see sir, it is not that the information isn't available somewhere, but it is that the information which we get through most common media sources is controlled so much so that it avoids questions, or leaves us with more questions than answers. Sure, the blogger presents a lot of possibilities and associations which perhaps he is able to weigh and understand because of his own pursuit, than we are in just having to read the points which don't clearly show the connections which he might have more knowledge of...... but that does not mean he is in error in posting what he has found, and that if a person wishes to do further research, now or at some later date, the blogger might have presented enough of a start to a trail that could eventually lead to somewhere concerning the inegema of this man in the WH. Our concern with his information is whether what he reports is a true representation of what he has found: one can believe it at face value, or reject it as hogwash, or one can read it and keep their mind open to questions until they themselves have found enough information which either eliminates or supports his research. I, sir, am in this last category. Additionally, just like this board, the blogger presents his own opinions concerning the relevance of information he presents, and as far as pov...... he has rights to opinions and sharing, and you, sir, have the same rights.

Never before have the people elected a man who has such power as the president, with so little verifiable history or credentials, nor taken his 'accomplishments' upon his word and elevated both him and them to proportions exceeding proof. Never before have we had a man so generally accepted by folks, like you, who insist they didn't support his election, stand in the way or defend the areas of his annonyminity as preferred over the ideal of proof of identity and transparency.

It is because the president has sealed inquiry into his records and history, and it is because of what is known of his previous associations with others and their own suspect or criminal associations in the past, which keeps him cloaked and protects him from what? What is it that he knows that we are not supposed to know? Just who is this man many call 'president' without first choking over whether he is really supposed to be office or wondering how many might have been involved and for what reason in getting him in and setting up the American people for his reign. Sure, 'reign' is not the normal 'american' word used..... but he feeds us lies and uses doublespeak to mask intentions behind misleading words...... and presses the congress and the courts to agree with his policies and his positions ........ and we may have no idea concerning the pressures and threats they may come under either from him or the many he has appointed..... than he is in honoring the separation of powers of a lawfully elected executive under our constitution. He has appointed officials and has stopped FBI investigations into their past..... into positions of the public confidence and exposed to classified information. He has proclaimed himself 'a citizen of the world'. On more than a single occasion he has identified with the muslim faith. If he says he's a 'Christian', he uses scripture out of context, doesn't identify with its moral positions on homos#xuals and marriage, or abortions, nor on renditions, nor on stewardship regarding the ownership of others' property and wages or that of government in the use of funds and taxation: he even takes scripture out of context to use it as a weapon against Christianity by misapplication and targeting the niave to believe that we are the fundamentalist and terrorist, when Christians who can and do read the Bible know there's a difference between the OT and the NT in a distinct audience..... one was Israel and the other the church ..... and the times ....a difference between a nation claiming their inheritance and occupying a land in victory, a difference in a nation held captive and in subjection to others, and a difference in a kingdom which is not of this world nor is submissive to the fear of death or allegiance to worldly values which brings men into bondage.

In regard to this last statement.... good law supports and protects the rights given by God for a people to be free, and free to choose 'good'. Bad law, criminalizes even good people in an effort to control all people through fear.

Something is wrong when we're not concerned with the lies from the WH, amongst others who are leaders and responsible for telling us the truth, and that makes us more afraid of each others' probing and concerns that we become voluntarily willing agents to silence or discourage their questions.