Birtherism as Conspiracy Theory??? (Lies the Obotski Taught Us, No.1)

Orville Obotski, Warning the World About The Birthers

The Obotski have maintained since the beginning that Birtherism is a form of “Conspiracy Theory” in an effort to marginalize the Birther Movement. In fact, the leading Obotski web site is even called “Obama Conspiracy Theories“. According to the Obotski,  Birthers are merely another in a long line of paranoid conspiracy nuts which include The 9-11 Truthers, and Moon Landing Deniers.  Let us take a closer look at this accusation. It is The Birther Think Tank’s position that NOT all “Conspiracy Theories” are alike.

Legally, a conspiracy is defined as: An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors. These are “Little c” types of conspiracies and they occur all the time. Yet, the term “Conspiracy Theory” does not attach. What does it take to elevate a run-of-the-mill “Little c” conspiracy into a full fledged “Conspiracy Theory“???

Most dictionaries define Conspiracy Theory as “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators.”  Using this definition, it is easy to see how the 9-11 Truthers and Moon Landing Deniers fit the mold. Only POWERFUL conspirators could have pulled these tricks off. After all, there were videos of both events.

But, I would argue that a really good Conspiracy Theory needs at least two more elements to rise above the simple “Little c” conspiracy level.  First, a relatively large number of conspirators to participate in the cover-up activities. Second, the conspiracy needs to be about something important and out of the ordinary which requires a lot of cover-up activities. Once again, applying these criteria to the 9-11 Truthers and Moon Landing Deniers, show they fit easily into this enhanced criteria.

Both 9-11 and the Moon landing were important events and out of the ordinary, and any conspiracy would have required a lot of participants and cover-up activities. It would have taken a large number of active conspirators to plant bombs in the World Trade center, and steal aircraft, and crash them. It would have taken a lot to cover it all up. It would have taken large numbers of active conspirators  to act in the Moon Landing re-enactment, and film it, and design all the props. Plus, it would have required large numbers of silent onlookers willing to just keep their mouths shut about what was really going on, and help cover it up. For example, the people sitting at their computer screens and looking at blinking lights in Cape Canaveral pretending something real was going on.

And, the large numbers of conspirators is one of the things which make the real Conspiracy Theories hard to swallow in the first place, because people like to talk. The more active conspirators and the more silent onlookers  involved, the less likely the story is true, or even possible. Plus, the more activity required to make the conspiracy work, the more people who must be involved.  From the carpenters and electricians down to the people delivering pizzas to them. All this extra activity also make the  Conspiracy Theory seem more bizarre and implausible. With that behind us, let us examine Birtherism to see if ever fit any of the criteria for a genuine Conspiracy Theory.

Birtherism, insofar as it relates to an overseas birth, would have required a fake or phony birth certificate be filed in 1961 in Hawaii. This would have required but two conspirators. One, presumably a grandparent, and two, a willing participant at the Bureau of Vital statistics. Once a fake birth certificate was placed into the files in 1961, it would require little or no further activity from that point forward.  Any driver’s licenses or bar applications or passports would have required no active conspirators or silent onlookers. Yet, the Obotski have repeatedly portrayed Birtherism as implicitly requiring these unnecessary participants.

How much activity would it have taken to pull this off? Not much. No carpenters behind the scenes. No, directors or scripts. No actors or extras. No pyrotechnics or stunt doubles. No criminal mastermind to put it all together.  No, document fraud was pretty easy in those days of 1961. In fact, birth certificate fraud itself is pretty easy. Doubt it???  Here, is a link to a 31 page government report about Birth Certificate Fraud:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54392994/Birth-Certificate-Fraud

Would faking a birth certificate require powerful conspirators??? Nope. Just a grand parent and a clerk. Would faking a birth certificate require large numbers of people acting to cover anything up??? Assuming a birth in a third world country in 1961 would have even resulted in a birth certificate, maybe a bribe or two to lift it from the files. Such things happen regularly, and are not anything out of the ordinary. But strictly speaking, even this would not have been required.

Would it have required large numbers of silent onlookers to fake an Hawaiian  birth certificate??? Again, no. Was Obama’s birth in 1961 an important event??? Not outside of his family. Yet, again the Obotski take this opportunity to mis-characterize Birtherism as requiring the fakery be tied to Obama’s presidential aspirations 50 years after the fact.  This is a blatant attempt to mislead. Few, if any Birthers, have ever maintained the fakery was done so that Obama might one day be president.  Frankly, I have never seen it set forth that way outside of Obotski scribblings. There were good reasons for Obama’s family to want him to be an American citizen in 1961 which had nothing whatsoever to do with running for president.

Might a politician or two, or some other people, have become involved in this along the way??? It is possible, but not necessary. Only one or two people in Hawaii have ever seen the actual original paperwork. If they were involved in some way, it would only have been 50 years years after the fact, and in more of the cover up role.  And still, the number of conspirators could be counted on one hand. This is less than the number of people who helped cover up Arnold Schwarzenegger’s love child for ten years. Sometimes these things just take on a life of their own for political or other reasons.

This branch of Birtherism, the one questioning where Obama was born, was about possible document fraud. Document fraud is easy. It is occurring now, on a massive scale in our country. Some admit it. Some try to cover it up. Some, are employees of the government. These things have a life of their own.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/05/former-lps-employees-allege-30-to-78-error-rate-in-borrower-mortgage-records-contradicting-bankerregulator-cover-up.html

Summing this all up, it is clear that among the Birthers who questioned whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii, there was never a  need for a Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory to tie it all together. The Obotski who said there was, were simply lying, or carelessly parroting the lies of others.

Squeeky Fromm,
Girl Reporter

[Note: My BFF, Fabia Sheen, proofread this for me and added a few things. Thank you!!!]

Advertisements

About Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Hi!!! I am a Girl Reporter on the Internet. I am 31. Plus I am a INTP. I have a Major in Human Kinetics, and a Minor in English. I have 2 cats, and a new kitten! I write poetry, and plus I am trying to learn how to play guitar. I think that is all??? Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter View all posts by Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

One response to “Birtherism as Conspiracy Theory??? (Lies the Obotski Taught Us, No.1)

  • ellen

    People do lie, but that is not evidence that every person lies or that a person is lying in a particular situation.

    Fukino, of course, could be lying (but why? She was a Republican appointee, and she confirmed the facts on Obama’s birth certificate BEFORE the 2008 election–and again after it too). And she was not alone. She issued the first press release of confirmation together with Okubo and subsequently the former Republican governor of Hawaii also confirmed the facts on Obama’s birth certificate.

    And they were not alone. There is an unknown clerk who filled in the form that generated Obama’s short-form birth certificate, and she or he got the facts that were filled in from the document in the files. That is how the short-form system works.

    But we do not have to believe these four persons. There is considerably more evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. First there is the absence of any travel document for Obama in 1961. Girl Reporters may know, and if not they should know, that a child being brought to the USA from a foreign country requires–and has required for decades–some kind of travel document.

    if Obama were born in Kenya or any other country than the USA, the US Immigration Service in 1961 would have demanded to see either a US visa on a foreign passport or a US passport for Obama, or Obama being entered on his mother’s US passport. If Obama were born outside of the USA, the application for the visa or for the change to his mother’s passport to include him would have had to have taken place in that country. And yet there is no such document for Obama. Surely if Obama had been born outside the USA either the document or the application for it would have been found years ago. But nothing has been found.

    So we have a Hawaii birth certificate for Obama and the confirmation of the Republican (and Democrat) officials in Hawaii, and the absence of a travel document. In addition, there are the notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961 of Obama’s birth.

    These cannot be dismissed as advertisements, which could be placed by the relatives. Why not? Because Hawaii newspapers did not accept birth notice advertisements in 1961. They only published the official notices of birth that they were sent to them by the Hawaii government.

    But the Hawaii government did not send out notices of birth for persons born outside of Hawaii. So, could it have been fooled by relatives lying about the place of birth? No. Why not? Because whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital, Hawaii insisted on a formal signed witness statement. So for all of these reasons, the evidence is overwhelming that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    In fact, for Obama to have been born anywhere else than in Hawaii, all six of the following would have to be false, but all six are true:

    1. Obama’s two official birth certificates, with the state seals on them. (The official physical copy of the long-form birth certificate was handed around in the White House press room, and one reporter said that she had felt the seal and took a photo of the document. http://turningthescale.net/?p=541)

    2. The confirmation of the facts on the two birth certificates–that Obama was born in Hawaii–by THREE Republican officials in Hawaii.

    3. The notices of Obama’s birth in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961. (The claim that the notices could have been placed by lying relatives turns out to be false because whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital, Hawaii insisted on a witness statement.)

    4. The absence of a US travel document for Obama in 1961. Nor has there been an application for such a travel document found.

    5. This witness, who recalls being told of Obama’s birth in Hawaii in Kapiolani Hospital in 1961 and writing home about it http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece (The birther allegation that Dr West had retired by 1961 turns out to be false).

    6. Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said repeatedly in the taped interview that he was BORN IN HAWAII, and she said in another interview (Hartford Courant) that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.

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

%d bloggers like this: