Tag Archives: debunk

The Notorious Doctor Fibs Rises Again???

phibes final

He Was Surprised To Find Out Somebody Else Was Putting Words In His Electronic Voice Box

Well darned if the Birthers aren’t up to their old “Everybody Is A Birther!!!” trick once again. Now, the poor target is Michael Savage, or Doctor Savage of radio fame. ORYR has this little headline up:

Dr. Savage: Obama’s Birth Certificate 
Fabricated: His Whole Story Is Fraudulent

As usual, there is another dumb video/audio you are supposed to listen to, and I almost didn’t waste my time because this isn’t my first Birther Rodeo. And these things have a remarkable tendency to not say what the headline says. But, it was only 3:36, so I said, “What the heck?”, put on my headphones, and grabbed the barf bag, just in case. Here is a transcript of the relevant part:

At :56

As far as him being killed ten years before, I find that bizarre, I don’t believe it. But you know, given the fact that there were issues about Obama’s friends, and Obama’s birth certificate, which was eliminated by the fabrication, or whatever you want to call it. . . many people say that’s not an issue. So he’ll go past the issue. The issue of his college records being sealed . . . the whole story is fraudulent. I want to go back to my main point, and then I’ll move on again with the Obama thing.

He’s president now for what 4 ½ years. How long is it already that we have suffered under this man. I will say it again because I think it’s the most salient point of all with regard to this man. Had he applied for a position as an FBI Agent, he could not have gotten clearance to become an FBI agent. If Obama had applied to become a secret service agent to protect the president, because of his past associations, he could not have become a secret service agent, That’s all you have to remember, I mean the rest is just spurious, or you know things that people make up. He could not have qualified to become a FBI agent or a secret service agent owing to his friendships, his sitting in a church for twenty years listening to hate America speeches by Rev. Wright. And many other things that were in his past. Say, Well what do I care about that, I don’t know, don’t care about it. It’s too late to care about it anyway. As they say in the vernacular, the house is out of the barn, so what’s the point.

It seems apparent to me that Savage was answering some stupid caller, with some stupid conspiracy theory about Obama having been killed ten years earlier. It looked to me like Savage was categorizing the birth certificate as a “fabrication” for purposes of argument and then saying that anything about Obama’s past outside of his conduct and associations was irrelevant. Once again, a whole lot different than the headline. But, I wasn’t positive of my conclusion. It seems like ORYR was a little spooky, too, because after the video,  he wrote:

Listen to Savage’s many comments about Obama’s ID Fraud

There was a link to a June 2010 audio/video where Savage goes on a dual allegiance and British citizenship rant. But, that was three years ago. A lot of really really wonderful people were Birthers back then. That doesn’t mean that they stayed Birthers.  Heck, the long form came out less than a year after that, and there were numerous court decisions on the two citizen parent stuff. Sooo, I found a later  video from Savage, from April 26, 2011, which was already transcribed:

Here’s the problem with the Birther issue. It’s irrelevant where he was born in one sense but quite relevant in another. It’s relevant because if he wasn’t born here then he’s not qualified to be president. However, even if it turns out to be true that Barack was not born here, it’s too late to impeach him for that in the sense that it would take two years to get an impeachment or any other hearing going with this congress at which point he’d be out of business anyway. That’s Number One.

But to link all of your criticisms about this Marxist president to this birth issue is a disastrous error for two reasons. Firstly, because his biggest crimes and misdemeanors are not about where he was born, but about his social policies, most particularly his economic policies, which are classic Das Kapital Marxism.

Secondly, there’s another major problem with this which is that I believe he’s probably going to pull out an authentic birth certificate — or facsimile thereof — just around the time of the debates during the next election when he faces his Republican opponent. If he does that, it’s the end of the road for the Republicans if they’ve linked themselves to this issue, but even if they haven’t linked themselves to this issue, they’re finished. Why?

Let’s say the candidate is a middle of the road guy like Romney who has never linked himself to the Birther issue. Obama’s going to show his real birth certificate. And if Romney should, God forbid, accuse him truthfully of being a Marxist socialist on the economic level — which I doubt he would have the guts to do anyway — Obama’s going to pull out the real birth certificate, smirk and say, “You know, Mitt, here’s the problem with your argument. Your crackpot extremist Republican Party accused me of not even being an American. And yet here’s my birth certificate. Now you’re going out of your way as an extremist to say I’m a Marxist when, in fact, I’m a centrist trying to help the most number of people.” That’s the end of the Republican party as we know it.

And that’s why the Birther controversy is a disastrous issue on which to hang all our criticism of this Marxist President. Remember who you’re dealing with here. You’re dealing with a Chicago gangster regime that is printing money based upon nothing. They have the printing presses. And if they can print money and they can print bonds that have no value whatsoever, why do you assume they couldn’t forge an “original birth certificate” at the end of the road and use this instrument to foist this charlatan upon America again.

That’s my position on the birther issue.


That seems to kind of dovetail with what Savage said in the latest ORYR post, that ” That’s all you have to remember, I mean the rest is just spurious, or you know things that people make up.”

Yes, kind of like ObamaReleaseYourRecords does.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is from one of the fantastic  Dr. Phibes movies, about which Wiki says:

The Abominable Dr. Phibes is a 1971 horror film starring Vincent Price and Joseph Cotten. Its art deco sets, dark humour and performance by Price have made the film and its sequel Dr. Phibes Rises Again cult classics. Dr. Phibes is inspired for his murderous spree by the Ten plagues of Egypt from the Old Testament.

These really are some cool movies, and the artwork is magnificent. The caption is a reference to the fact that Dr. Phibes:

After each murder, the twisted zombie doctor (who cannot move his lips but speaks through an electronic voice box disguised as a phonograph) melts down a waxen image of the dead doctor with a blow torch and plans his next attack — a sly homage to Price’s trademark 1953 horror classic House of Wax .

For ESL’s The Image Easter Egg is a wordplay on High Fives. Here is a good review of the movie:


Note 2. Rise/Rises. Yes, it should read “Rise” in the title because here, “Doctor” is an adjective modifying “Fibs”, and NOT part of a compound noun “Doctor Fibs.” But, it just looks and sounds funny because the tendency is to read is as a compound noun.

A Birther Mid-Summer’s Night Dream!!!


Reed Hayes Admits To The Girl Reporter That He Never Actually Examined The Real Document

The seasons come, and the seasons go. Life is a cycle, and once again mid summer is upon us. True to ancient rituals, the Birthers are cavorting about by moonlight in the woodlands and meadows of America, and in general making asses out of themselves(see Note 3 below) . This time, the ostensible reason is that a humble Hawaiian document examiner, Reed Hayes, may topple Obama.

The story is at over at Free Republic, and ORYR, and even being spread around the Internet in various comment sections. Inhibitions lowered by untaxed spirits will drive wild mating rituals.  Roofs will be raised in barns, and trailers will be set  a’ rocking from  Georgia to Oklahoma.  Nine months hence, new little Birthers will arrive, some with names like Reed and Reedella in honor of this year’s fertility god. But, it isn’t really the Reed Hayes story that is driving all this.  Because there isn’t a story. He bases his conclusion on some online images presented him by the Cold Case Posse. This latest round pheromone pumping began over at The Western Center For Journalism:

There have been many lawsuits challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President—most based on the fact that Obama is not a natural born citizen, his father being a Kenyan. Other lawsuits challenge the validity of Obama’s PDF long-form birth certificate, riddled with strange anomalies like multiple layers and eight different fonts.

The lawsuits have all crashed and burned in flames for two reasons: 1. The court hearing the lawsuits have treated the cases as a joke instead of a valid question of Constitutional requirements. And 2. The plaintiffs haven’t had Reed Hayes on their side.

Reed Hayes  is a forensic document expert who may be the man who finally brings down the Obama administration.

There is more such merriment at this link:


Here is the money quote:

Based on my observations and findings, it is clear the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing  material from various sources.

and a short video:

My GUESS is, that poor Reed Hayes already rues the day he ever decided he needed $50 badly enough to get in bed with Mike Zullo. Because Reed Hayes has never seen or touched the original document. And here the Birthers are, presenting him as someone who may topple the President. How is the poor man going to be able to go out in public after the Cold Case Posse heads for the Last Round Up, which ought to occur within the next few months? Because even the most stubborn Birther is getting fed up with “We are meeting with VIPs right now“, and “This is going to be REALLY BIG!“, and “Just keep sending us your money!

Particularly with Orly Taitz out there accusing Team Arpaio of having Low T, impotence,  performance anxiety, and fighting like girly-men.  There is nothing wrong with silly-season, as long as you know it’s silly. But no matter how much fun the fantasy, sooner or later you have to wake up. If I was the Birthers, I wouldn’t lose the flame-retardant long johns just yet.  And what was that Shakespeare said???

Shall we their fond documents see?
Lord, what fools these Birthers be!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is James Cagney, playing the role of Bottom, in William Shakespeare’s 1935 film, A Midsummer’s Night Dream. Unable to find funding in Great Britain, Shakespeare brought the script to Hollywood. Warner Brothers snapped it up, but after a squabble with Hal Wallis, Shakespeare was denied the right to make any script changes, and any voice at all in casting the players. As he complained later, it was like he wasn’t even there. As Wiki notes:

Directed by Max Reinhardt and William Dieterle, and starring Ian Hunter, James Cagney, Mickey Rooney, Olivia de Havilland, Joe E. Brown, Dick Powell, and Victor Jory. Produced by Henry Blanke and Hal Wallis for Warner Brothers, and adapted by Charles Kenyon and Mary C. McCall Jr. from Reinhardt’s Hollywood Bowl production of the previous year, the film is about the events surrounding the marriage of the Duke of Athens, Theseus, and the Queen of the Amazons, Hippolyta. These include the adventures of four young Athenian lovers and a group of six amateur actors, who are controlled and manipulated by the fairies who inhabit the forest in which most of the story is set. The play, which is categorized as a comedy, is one of Shakespeare’s most popular works for the stage and is widely performed across the world. Felix Mendelssohn’s music was extensively used, as re-orchestrated by Erich Wolfgang Korngold. The ballet sequences featuring the fairies were choreographed by Bronislava Nijinska.

In the forest outside Athens, Oberon (Victor Jory), the king of the fairies, and Titania (Anita Louise) his queen, are having an argument. Titania tells Oberon that she plans to stay there to attend the wedding of Duke Theseus and Hippolyta. Wanting to punish Titania’s disobedience, Oberon instructs his mischievous court jester Puck (Mickey Rooney) to retrieve a flower called “love-in-idleness”. Originally a white flower, it turns purple when struck by Cupid’s bow. When someone applies the magical love potion to a sleeping person’s eyelids, it makes the victim fall in love with the first living creature seen upon awakening. Meanwhile, the mischievous Puck turns Bottom into a donkey. When Titania wakes up and lays eyes on Bottom as a donkey, she falls in love with him.

Note 2. Midsummer’s Night. Actual Midsummer’s Night occurs within a few days of the Summer Solstice, around June 24 in most countries. In contrast, Mid-Summer occurs sometime between June 21 and September 21.

Note 3. Ass. This is NOT a bad word!!! As noted by Gershon Legman, in one of his collections, I forget which one:

There once was a girl from Madras
Who had a magnificent ass!
Not rounded and pink
As you probably think.
It was gray, had long ears, and ate grass!

If you have never heard of Gershon Legman, see here:


Note 4. Other Reed Hayes articles:



Orly Taitz As “The Sorceror’s Apprentice”???


From Merlin’s Database She Druid The Wrong Conclusions???

Well, now we all know the source of Orly’s power!  She is a witch who has access to Merlin’s Database! Here is a screenshot of her recent post:

Orly Plea For Help #897

Here is the link, where you can read some meaningless comments from her Flying Monkeys, if you so desire:


Sooo, what is Merlin’s Information System? If you go to their main website, you learn nothing except that they are honest, committed, cost effective, etc. etc. etc. and when you finish reading it all, you still don’t have much of a clue what the heck they do. BUT, this website, put together by attorneys,  goes into much more juicy details! (WARNING! AVISO! ACHTUNG! The website is found at Justia, an online legal reporting service, which means this article may have been scrubbed or altered by evil and nefarious Obots!)


Here is a screenshot of part of the page:

Merlin Blurb 1

(Click On Image To Make Larger.)

This excerpt is interesting:

Another reason Merlin is worth considering, is that Merlin is the last of the pay investigative research databases we’re aware of that will give access to full Social Security numbers to attorneys. However, this access requires lawyers to submit to an on-site office visit by a Merlin representative and incur a one-time $100 charge for the visit to insure that you fall within the Gramm-Leach-Bliley and Fair Credit Reporting Acts’ permitted uses for accessing Social Security number information. Each time you use Merlin, you must select a permitted use for the search. (After its purchase by LexisNexis, Accurint began to restrict Social Security number access only to attorneys whose practice is strictly in collections. Some attorneys report they still have access to full Social Security numbers if their Accurint account pre-dates the Lexis purchase.)

On this brief survey, The Merlin system seems professional enough, but like any tool, the user ought to know what they are using, and why. This excerpt sums up pretty well what happens when tyros get in over their heads:

That bit about identifying people by the wrong sex is directly verifiable in Neil Sankey’s low-quality list, which begins by listing Stanley Ann Dunham’s sex as “male” 10 times and as “female” 0 times. Stanley Ann Dunham is the name of Barack Obama’s mother. Was Barack Obama’s mother a man? Now that would be a really explosive revelation! Other clear errors find their way into Sankey’s list — the frequent misspelling of Barack Obama’s name is one and the placement of the White House in the states of Maryland and California is another. My favorite is the record which places Barack Obama’s residence at 1234 Happy Street, a street in Covington Washington that does not exist.

Finally, what does Neil Sankey think of his own list? The Guardian asked him:

Most recently, he carried out an exhaustive search of databases that he claims threw up 140 different identification numbers and addresses for “Barack Obama”. He admits the findings prove nothing — there is nothing to link the entries to the president…

Let’s sum up: an error-riddled search with repeated false genders, multiple false names, dozens of false street addresses, and a few false states for something as easily located as the White House, generated from databases that at times contain more inaccurate information than accurate information, somehow generates multiple social security numbers for Barack Obama. Meanwhile, the search is rejected as proving nothing by the very person who carried it out.

There are two conclusions you can draw from this:

1. This sure is one screwed up list.
2. Clearly, Stanley Ann Dunham was a man and Barack Obama does not actually exist.

I go with Option 1.


So, this is a very old story, one going back almost 2,000 years . . .:

My apologies to Mickey Mouse for associating him with Orly Taitz!!!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. Well, this is strange indeed, and it must be MAGICK!!!  From the neck up it is Orly Taitz, aka Orly the Strange, Orly le Fay, Fatta Stupana, and “The More! Again!”.  From the neck down, it is the beautiful and talented actress M’el Dowd, in her dress as Morgan le Fay from the Broadway musical, Camelot. Here she is:

Morgan_le_Fay_Camelot m'el dowd

Note 2. Morgan le Fay. To understand more about Morgan, try this link. She is an utterly fascinating character:


Larry Klayman Is Dressing Up Like A Lawyer For Halloween!!! (Or, Loser Suit Larry)

Mr. Scratch Couldn’t Help But Chuckle When He Heard Klayman Was Going To Represent Himself

Well, Larry “Klutz” Klayman, Esq.,  aka Loser Suit Larry, must have sold his soul to the Devil or Joseph Farah, whichever, because now he is going down the idiotic Citizen Grand Jury Birther road.  Here is what he recently wrote at World Net Daily (WND):

On Oct. 31, 2012, I will be in Ocala, Fla., presenting evidence to a citizens grand jury, chosen in the ordinary course without regard to politics and biases, seeking the indictment of the likes of President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others who have betrayed and terrorized the nation and violated the rule of criminal law. With regard to Obama, not only has he defrauded the American people by being elected president despite his not being a natural born citizen, but he also has compromised, in treasonous fashion, our national security. Once indicted, we will then seek to try him for these crimes. If he refuses to appear at trial, which he surely will, the people will try him in abstentia.

In effect, along with a coterie of other patriots, we will make Ocala in 2012 what Philadelphia was to the colonies in 1776. Please join us in the noble cause, as We the People have been abandoned and scorned by our so-called leaders for far too long. See www.citizensgrandjury.com. Now it is our time to risk our fortunes, sacred honor and lives to preserve the nation, using the rights that our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us: the citizens grand jury.

Forget about Mitt Romney and the Republican Party; their game is up. We can save the nation and live without them, so help us God.


They must be getting desperate over at  WND, because the citizen grand jury Birther game is so old and toothless most Birthers won’t even fall for it. The scam was popular for a while several years ago. For example, see this article from April 2009:


This is a familiar routine. The results are a foregone conclusion. Obama will be found guilty of whatever they charge him with. If a Judge ever bothers to look at whatever crap they produce, he will say something like Judge Lambert said in 2009. (See Note 2 below.):

[T]here is no authority under the Rules of Procedure or in the statutes of the United States for this court to accept [a presentment]… The individuals who have made this presentment were not convened by this court to sit as a grand jury nor have they been selected at random from a fair cross section of this district. Any self-styled indictment or presentment issued by such a group has no force under the Constitution or laws of the United States.”

The only thing remotely interesting about the announcement is the title  (Life After Romney And The Republicans)  and the  catty little remark about Mitt  and the  GOP, “Forget about Mitt Romney and the Republican Party; their game is up. We can save the nation and live without them, so help us God.” I sense that Klayman is a little miffed about the Republican grown-ups ignoring the silly, childish Birther stuff.  Sooo, we get the histrionic, whiny, little, “Who needs them, we’ll just do it all by ourselves!” mantra. Yeah, and next the Birthers will hold their breaths until they turn blue, and  run away and join the circus. Oh wait, they already joined the circus.

Anyway, I guess Larry “Klutz” Klayman does not intend to ever practice real-world, serious law again. Perhaps he is thinking of a new career in acting, or maybe stand-up comedy???  If he appears at your door on Halloween night in his little junior lawyer costume, don’t give him any of the good candy.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image.  This is Walter Huston playing the Devil in the 1941 film, The Devil and Daniel Webster. Wiki says:

The Devil and Daniel Webster is a 1941 fantasy film, adapted by Stephen Vincent Benét and Dan Totheroh from Benét’s short story, “The Devil and Daniel Webster”. The film’s title was changed to All That Money Can Buy to avoid confusion with another film released by RKO that year, The Devil and Miss Jones, and later had the title restored on some prints. It has also been released under the titles Mr. Scratch, Daniel and the Devil and Here Is a Man. The film stars Edward Arnold, Walter Huston, and James Craig. It was directed by William Dieterle.

In 1840 New Hampshire, poor, downtrodden farmer Jabez Stone (James Craig) sells his soul to “Mr. Scratch” (Walter Huston) in return for seven years of luck and prosperity. With his time almost up, Stone begs famed orator and fellow New Hampshirite Daniel Webster (Edward Arnold) to find some way out of his bargain with the Devil. Webster agrees to take his case. Mr. Scratch offers an extension in exchange for Jabez’s son, but Jabez turns him down. He then begs Webster to leave before it is too late, but Webster refuses to go, boasting that he has never left a jug or a case half finished.

When Mr. Scratch shows up to claim his due, Webster has to risk his own soul before his fiendish opponent will agree to a trial by jury. Mr. Scratch chooses the jury members from among the most notoriously evil men of American history, with John Hathorne (one of the magistrates of the Salem witch trials) as the judge.

Loser Suit Larry is a word play on another famous “loser”, Leisure Suit Larry,  about which Wiki says:

Leisure Suit Larry is a series of adventure games written by Al Lowe and published by Sierra from 1987 to 2009. The main character, is Larry Laffer who, though still somewhat lovable, is a balding, dorky, double entendre-speaking, leisure suit-wearing “loser” in his 40s. The games follow him as he spends much of his life trying (usually unsuccessfully) to seduce attractive women.

The Birther “Larry Laugher” is always losing his Birthers lawsuits.

Note 2. Citizen Grand Juries:

Wiki even has an article on citizen grand juries, which did not start with the Birthers, and notes:

The earliest so-called 9/11 citizen grand jury, the 23-member “Los Angeles Citizens’ Grand Jury on the Crimes of 9/11/01,” was organized in 2004 by activist Lynne Pentz. By October of that year it had launched an “indictment” accusing George W. Bush and other administration officials of complicity and foreknowledge of the attacks.[1] Among those offering testimony at the event were Webster Tarpley, Barbara Honegger, Don Paul, Jim Hoffman and Christopher Bollyn. Similar citizen grand juries were organized in San Diego later in the 2000s.[2]

Some campaigners, led by Georgia activist Carl Swensson, have sought to, “finally expose the conspiracy behind President Obama’s birth certificate,” by forming what they term “citizen grand juries” to indict Obama.[3] The “citizen grand juries” are based on the Fifth Amendment’s premise that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.”[according to whom?]

Although the activists managed to hand out copies of “indictments” to Congressional staff,[4] the courts have not regarded the “citizen grand juries” favorably. In June 2009, a group of 172 campaigners declared themselves to be a “Super American Grand Jury” and voted to charge Obama with treason and accused him of not being a U.S. citizen.[5] Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the “indictment” on July 2, 2009 and declared “[T]here is no authority under the Rules of Procedure or in the statutes of the United States for this court to accept [a presentment]… The individuals who have made this presentment were not convened by this court to sit as a grand jury nor have they been selected at random from a fair cross section of this district. Any self-styled indictment or presentment issued by such a group has no force under the Constitution or laws of the United States.”[6]


Note 3. The Image Easter Egg. A word play on “Sole Practitioner.”

A person, who through a regular program of study, is learned in legal matters and has been licensed to practice his or her profession. Any qualified person who prosecutes or defends causes in courts of record or other judicial tribunals of the United States, or of any of the states, or who renders legal advice or assistance in relation to any cause or matter. Unless a contrary meaning is plainly indicated this term is synonymous with attorney, attorney at law, or counselor at law.

Note 4. In Abstentia. I didn’t think this was a real phrase, and that Klayman meant “in absentia”, but maybe I was wrong:

The GENERAL CONTEXT of such use is: ‘in abstentia’ – the realities of legitimation: In order to understand that the social effects of the common or learned (i.e., taught, as by pedagogic communications) illusions (maya), which are sociologically implied in the system of relations between the educational system (the School) and the structure of class relations, are not illusory, it is necessary to go back to the principle which governs this system of relations. Legitimation of the established order, by the School, presupposes social recognition of the legitimacy of the School, a recognition resting in turn on misrecognition of the delegation of authority which establishes that legitimacy, or, more precisely, on misrecognition of the social conditions of a harmony between structures and habitus sufficiently perfect to engender misrecognition of the habitus as a product reproducing what produces it and correlative recognition of the structure of the order thus reproduced. Thus, the educational system objectively tends, by concealing the objective truth of its functioning, to produce the ideological justification of the order it reproduces by its functioning.


OK. Either that, or it is a city near Ocala???

Larry Klayman’s Brief Career As A Criminal Defense Attorney???

The Jury Simply Wasn’t Buying Klayman’s Theory Of The Case

A few weeks ago  Larry Klayman, Esq. had a “Butterdezillion Moment.”  He decided when Alvin Onaka, Ph.D, the Hawaiian State Registrar verified to Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett  that “the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches  the original records in our files“,  Onaka was actually failing  to verify that information.

(Click on Image to Enlarge.)

The above blurb was taken from Klayman’s August 29, 2012 letter to DNC General Counsel Robert Bauer, Esq.. (See Note 1 below for a pdf copy of the Arizona Requests and the Hawaiian Verification, and Klayman’s letter to Bauer.) Klayman went on to add:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Let’s deconstruct this a little:

Onaka States:  “the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches  the original records in our files.”

Klayman Responds: Onaka was asked to verify the birth facts for Barack Hussein Obama that are claimed on the birth certificate posted on the White House website and pointedly failed to do so.

Klayman Responds: Mr. Onaka undeniably failed to verify that the image posted at whitehouse.gov “is a true and accurate representation of the original record in [the DOH] files.”

Klayman falls into the same tar pit of confusion that Birther Butterdezillion fell into. In fact, I think Klayman is using her journey into illogic as his starting point. Referencing the full pdf copies of the Arizona requests, and Onaka’s Verification below,  Ken Bennett made 3 separate requests. First, he filled out a Verification Request Form which had 6 items of identifying information typed in. Then, he requested verification of 10 separate pieces of information, and finally a blanket request that the White House long form image was a true and accurate representation of the original file.

Without going too deeply into the mechanics of the situation again, all 3 requests were verified. The first request was answered by the Verification itself. As Hawaii law states (See full statute in Note 2 below.):

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

The 6 typed in items were stated by Ken Bennett, the applicant, and thus confirmed by the Verification itself, as emphasized by the first 2 items on Onaka’s list.  The second request covering 10 items of information was specifically verified as items 3 through 12 on Onaka’s list. Finally, Onaka specifically stated the White House image matched the records on file. All this can be seen in the Note 1 Arizona pdf.

What I want to do is look more closely at Onaka’s response to that last request:   “The information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches  the original records in our files.”  I submit that if that statement had been the only response on the Verification form, that statement alone would have answered all three of Arizona SOS Ken Bennett’s request.

The reason is, that each of the 6 items typed into the Verification Request Form also appear on the White House long form image. The same is true of the 10 separate pieces of information for which Bennett requested Verification. If all that information is on the long form image, then in effect, these are “the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.” And, Onaka’s “verification  shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.”

Klayman, and his mixed–up mentor, Butterdezillion, are busily engaged in trying to wiggle and squirm their way out of Onaka’s Verification. Both are more concerned with what Onaka did NOT say, then what he did say. They try to pretend that there is some huge and legally significant difference between the phrases identical to and true and accurate representation of and Onaka’s phrase the information attached with your request matches  the original records.

In fact, the two of them argue that by NOT mimicking the exact words of the request, Onaka’s statement means the information has not been verified at all, and in fact is confirmation that the White House long form image and the original records are not the same at all. Butterdezillion has flittered off into the theory that “the word matches means that blank boxes equal filled-in boxes.” Klayman gets his little panties in such a wad that he fires off a series of indignant and foolishly threatening letters to the effect that the recipients darn well better not rely on Onaka’s statement:

the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original records in our files.

Oh really??? In actuality, Onaka’s statement provides exactly the proof that the various agencies and groups require. The long form Image that Obama posted matches Hawaii’s records. Only in Birfer World is that statement hard to understand. Which is very unfortunate for Birthers, because darned if that Slippery Onaka hasn’t gone and done it two more times!!! (See the Kansas and Mississippi Verifications in Note 1 below.)

Here is what Onaka said for Mississippi on May 31, 2012:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

and here is what Onaka said for Kansas on September 14, 2012:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Plus, Alvin Onaka signed off on all three of the Verifications with the same language found on the Mississippi Verification:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

In spite of all this, the Birthers remain convinced that there is something fishy about the Obama long form Image. If this isn’t DENIAL with a capital D, then there is no such thing as denial. And, the drunks are right when they get 5 DWI’s and still maintain they don’t have a drinking problem. No, this is about as slam dunk as you can get on the birth certificate issue. But I got to thinking about this, and since I don’t want to do like the Birther Blogs, and put one thing in my title something else in the article, let’s examine a hypothetical situation:    Larry Klayman’s Brief Career As A Criminal Defense Attorney!!!

From Larry Klayman’s Closing Argument in Bob “The Bank Robber” Beaumont’s Criminal Trial

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I want you to know how much I appreciate your time and attention during the course of this trial. We are almost finished, because this is really a simple verdict for you to bring back. The State’s entire case rests on fingerprint evidence, DNA analysis, and other tests which allegedly shows that my client,  Bob Beaumont, robbed the First National Bank. You heard Mr. Clyde from the State Crime Lab testify that he ran a DNA test on the wad of Red Man chewing tobacco the masked bank robber spit on the floor of the bank, as captured on camera.  Mr. Clyde says that DNA matches Bob’s DNA.

You also heard Mr. Clyde testify that fingerprints were all over the marked bills that were recovered from the robbery, and those fingerprints match Bob’s fingerprints. Mr. Clyde also said that a large quantity of human drool was found on those same bills, and the DNA on that drool matches Bob’s DNA.  And, Mr. Clyde, who thinks he is some kind of Match King, says that the fingerprints and DNA found on a gun and ski mask right outside the bank’s front door, matches Bob’s fingerprints and DNA.

And finally, Mr. Clyde testifies that a retinal scan from a hidden bank scanner, and a voice analysis from the bank video tape also match up with Bob’s post arrest retinal scan and voice analysis. Well, there you have it in a nutshell. The State has NO CASE whatsoever! Because when Mr. Clyde says all this stuff matches, he is not saying that all these things are identical! Nor, is he saying that they are true and accurate representations of anything.

Therefore, the State has utterly failed to meet its burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. As a matter of fact, by refusing to say that these things were identical, or true and accurate representations, the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that my client IS INNOCENT! Those of you who were able to stay awake without suffering seizures during the testimony of our expert symantical witness, Butterdezillion Jones, know what I am telling you makes sense.

Forget what Mr. Clyde said during his sworn testimony!  The real question you should be asking is why Mr. Clyde didn’t use those phrases identical to and true and accurate representations.  After this is over, I am going to sue Mr. Clyde. If you 12 people don’t find Bob innocent, then I may sue you too! Remember that when you are back there in that jury room! And remember this:

If the fingerprints match, guilt must not attach!!!

That is how I see this whole thing.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. Pdf Copies.

Arizona Requests and Verification

Klayman Letter to DNC Bauer

Mississippi Request For Verification

Mississippi Verification


Note 2. Hawaii Statute governing Verifications:

HRS §338-14.3 Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

Note 3. Links to Butterdezillion Articles:





Note 4. Link to relevant Larry Klayman article:


World Famous Brazilian Expert Examines The Long Form Image!!!

John Woodman Trekked Deep Into The Brazilian Tropical Rain Forest In His Quest For A World Class Expert

In a search that took him across the globe, John Woodman, author of Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate A Fraud,  managed to find a world class computer expert to examine the pdf image of Obama’s long form birth certificate. Here is a teaser, and the rest is at the link below:

As I examined patents and technical papers written on MRC compression, one name in particular seemed to pop up again and again — that of Ricardo de Queiroz.

Ricardo de Queiroz is one of the primary fathers of this entire technology.

The very first “mixed raster content” patent in the United States was granted to Leon Bottou and Yann Andre LeCun… But the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, and 13th patents were granted to Ricardo de Queiroz and his team. That’s about half of the first dozen or so patents. And some of his team members and students have also gone on to further develop the technology.

In addition, Professor de Queiroz appears again and again as an author of the available technical papers on MRC compression.

Now there are certainly many other individuals who have contributed to the development of this technology; and several in particular have made really big contributions. But I decided, based on what I read in the patent filings and technical papers, that if I were going to contact one expert in the world on this particular technology, the person I would pick would be Ricardo de Queiroz.

So I contacted him. And Dr. de Queiroz was gracious enough to reply — for which I thank him. In clarifying what compression technology is capable of, he has rendered a genuine service to all who have held any interest in this controversy.

World Class Computer Expert Evaluates Obama’s Birth Certificate PDF

This is a fascinating Internet Article and you should read it! While technical, it is still very understandable.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. Interestingly, Tropical Rain Forests have layers, too:

A tropical rainforest has four distinct layers

Emergent layer
Under story
Forest floor

From this website:


Lord Monckton’s Mathematical Folly (Or, Odds Botchkins!!!)

Lord Monckton Unsuccessfully Tried To Blow Some Smoke

Well, math is certainly not my strong suit so I am probably going to regret this one, but nobody has tackled Lord Monckton of Brenchley’s Eligibility Odds analysis yet. Except that I found after doing this Internet Article, that Dr. Conspiracy had just finished one, too. So here is the link to his, too:


Anyway, here is the relevant excerpt from the World Net Daily Internet Article, and the link to the whole article follows the excerpt:


Lord Monckton crunches the numbers

He cites:

1.   The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against.
2.   Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against.
3.   Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1. (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.)
4.   “Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1
5.   Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1
6.   Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1
7.   Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1
8.   Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate).
9.   White halo around letters: 10:1
10. Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1
11.  Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1
12.  Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules: 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known)
13.  Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1.

“There are many other errors, but these suffice. Defenders of Mr. Community Organizer say each error could have just happened by accident. I mean, it’s government form-filling, right?,” he wrote. “But here’s where the math comes in. If each error is a genuine accident,  the errors are independent events, so the probabilities of each error are multiplied together to determine the probability that all occurred in one document.

“Thus the odds against all of these errors occurring in a single document except by design are 1 in 100 x 100 x 10 x 10 x 25 x 40 x 25 x 25 x 10 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100. Accordingly, the probability that Mr. Obama’s birth narrative is in substance true is no better than 1 in 62,500,000,000,000,000,000, or 0.0000000000000000000016.”

He wrote, “Don’t be misled by the simplicity of the method. It’s simple but sound.”


First, let’s look at the method of determining the odds, from this website:


Independent vs Dependent Events

People often misunderstand the notion of independent events.  This is a probability term meaning that past events have no influence on future outcomes.  For example, when flipping a coin four consecutive times, the probability of getting four heads is:

This is because the probability of flipping a head if you flip a coin once is ½.  Flipping a coin is an example of an independent event.  When flipping a coin, the probability of getting a head does not change no matter how many times you flip the coin.  When the coin is flipped and the first three flips are heads, the fourth flip still has the probability of ½   However, many people misunderstand that the first three flips somehow influence the fourth flip, but they do not.  The probability is still the same, as if the first three flips had never occurred.

This is simple so far. You put the chance of something happening in the form of a fraction for each event, and then multiply the numerators and denominators. So let’s try it! Pull out 5 cards. Make 3 of them face cards. Turn them over, and pick one. What are the odds it will be a face card? 3 chances in 5. Pick out a second set of 5 cards with 3 of them being face cards. Now turn each set over and pick one card from each set. What is the chance both of them will be face cards??? 3/5  x  3/5 = 9/25.

Now we have the basic math down. Plus we learn something interesting. The more events you have with a fraction less than 1, the more the odds go up. With one set of 5 cards you had a 60% (3/5) chance of drawing a face card.  With 2 sets you have a 36% (9/25) chance of drawing 2 face cards. Monckton has a 13 series of events above, so his game is rigged from the outset to result in lower odds.

Let’s move on to some more concepts. Take the 5 card set and a penny.  The cards have a 3/5 chance of a being a face card, and the penny has a 1/2 chance of being flipped  “heads.” Multiply those fractions and you get 3/5  x  1/2 = 3/10.  But what does the 3/10 represent??? It can’t stand on its own as just a number without describing in more detail what it represents. Which in this example is the chance of drawing a face card AND getting “heads” on the flip.

Now, let me add a third item to these two, with some dice. What are the odds of me rolling box cars, or double sixes??? Those odds are 1 in 36, or 1/36. What are the odds of drawing a face card from the five card set, flipping “heads” on the penny, and rolling a double six???  Here’s the math: 3/5  x  1/2  x  1/36 or 3/360 or 1/120.  But the question arises, “What am I really measuring???”

Let’s make it more interesting still. What are the odds that I will break a nail while picking a card, flipping a coin, and rolling the dice??? I put those odds at 1 in 100,000. Now what am I up to in the odds? Here’s the math:  1/120  x  1/100,000 =  1/12,000,000 or 1 in 12 million. But the question arises once more, “What am I really measuring???” These are unconnected things.  I am picking the card, flipping the coin, rolling the dice, and breaking a nail all on the same desk top. What are the odds of that happening on the same desk top??? The answer is 1 in 12 million, but as you can see this is a basically meaningless number.

But I am still NOT happy with this number. I want it to be higher. Sooo, I am going to find a non-event, assign odds to it, and put it into the math mix. What I need for my non-event is something that either doesn’t happen at all, or if it does happen, it is not really what we normally think of as a measurable event, such as flipping a coin.  How about how many times does McDonalds fail to give me ketchup with my drive thru order.  That’s about 1 time in 4, or 1/4.  That makes the odds for everything (pick face card, flip “heads”, roll box cars, break a nail, and fail to receive ketchup)  about 1 in 48 million. See how easy it is to work your way up?

But, the McDonalds non-event needs more explanation. Simply not getting ketchup may not be an event at all because it is possible that I only ordered coffee at the window, and that typically does not require ketchup. Or, it could be that I ordered a dinner meal and no fries. Or, I just wasn’t feeling like ketchup on that trip, and so did not request any. Or, that I had some extra ketchup in the car.  Trying to pin a set of odds on a situation like that is very problematic. It is possible it wasn’t a failure at all.

Monckton slyly engages in this same practice. He mixes facts and conjectures about an electronic image and tries to make the nexus the fact that they all occur about the same document. He goes further, because he also picks some events which are not agreed to constitute events by the non-Birther side. This is like saying “heads” were flipped, when one party to the action does not believe the coin was flipped at all. But Monckton makes the leap, and then assigns those contested facts odds as if they were not contested. This is great if you trying to run the number up, but pretty much meaningless for any other purpose. It will take a while, but let’s examine Monckton’s 13 so-called independent events in more detail.

1.   The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against. 

I am going to call this one a non-event.  This is more like saying the coin exists, but it has not been flipped. The signature stamp on the paper document can not be moved about. If it can on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

2.   Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against.

I am going to call this one a non-event, also.  The date stamp on the paper document can not be moved about. If it can on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

3.   Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1. (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.)

Three time’s the charm, I guess. I am going to call this one a non-event, too.  There are no layers on the paper document. If  there are  on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

4.   “Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1 

I’m sorry. Has the Hawaii DOH been shown to have been lavishly funded in 1961? Did I miss that?  And what is a “wonky” typewriter as compared to a non-wonky one? If we are going to go all mathy on this, can we at least get some discrete measurable independent events???

5.   Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1

I am beginning to see a pattern here. Monckton is choosing things which are NOT events at all. There is NO proof that the certificate number is out of sequence. In fact, Alvin Onaka. Ph.D, Hawaii State Registrar has thrice verified the number as correct.

6.   Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1 

This is not a measurable event to which you can assign odds. No one knows what caused it.  Was it a typo, or did somebody lie, or did somebody just mess up by accident???

7.   Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1

Again, a non-event. This isn’t contrary to anything. The Cold Case Posse used the wrong coding book. I am becoming disappointed in Lord Monckton. We are halfway through this stuff, and there has not been one single discrete measurable independent event.

8.   Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate).

What miscoded statistical data??? The penciled in “9” is the correct number. Zullo and Corsi were using the wrong coding manual.

9.   White halo around letters: 10:1

Are we back to non-events again??? This is on the electronic image. There are no white halos on  the paper document.

10. Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1

Damn non-event again.

11.  Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1

Nope, he’s gone to a different document to multiply against the long form birth certificate. This is just for the purpose of making the number larger, like me adding broken fingernails to the discrete measurable events.

12.  Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules: 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known)

Nope, again. Different document. Same reasoning as 11 above. Plus, there is no evidence that the stamp wasn’t broken. How many 1981 documents from that post office have been analyzed???

13.  Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1.

This one might be a keeper, although it doesn’t relate to the birth certificate. There probably is a way to measure how often the SSA assigned group numbers to non-residents of the state. But that doesn’t prove anything was wrong. It could have been a typo.

Now I am kind of irritated here. I went and studied up on some math, and practiced multiplying fractions and Lord Monckton didn’t have but one marginally measurable event out of 13 alleged independent events. Everything else was an alleged incongruity of some sort, but mostly on the electronic pdf image. In other words, because Corsi and the Cold Case Posse couldn’t figure out how the paper document was scanned and uploaded, they came up with a bunch of ALLEGED errors, which His Majesty, or whatever you call him, tried to shoehorn into a phony probability analysis.

What is the chance that was an accident on Monckton’s part??? Let’s see, if we assume there is a 1 in 2 chance it was an honest boo-boo on his part, and we have 13 boo-boos, then 1/2 to the 13th power equals 1/8192 or 1 chance in 8,192 that it was an honest mistake.

For shame Lord Monckton of Brenchley!!!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is from the 1931 film, Dr. Jekyll and Mister Hyde.

Note 2. Links. Here is the previous article about Lord Monckton:


Note 3. Odds Botchkins.  This is a word play on the epithet, Odd Bodkins:

Odd’s bodkins is a mild profane oath, which literally means ‘God’s dear body!’ It’s now archaic, but was used as an exclamation like God damn! or a host of others.

The usual form of the second word is bodikin, which is a diminutive of body (the diminutive suffix -kin is found in such other words as lambkin). The expression occurs in Shakespeare (Hamlet: “Odds bodikins, man,” with a variant reading from the Quarto of “bodkin”), Fielding, and Smollet, among others. Expressions like this were very common in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; some other examples are ‘sblood (God’s blood), ‘snails (God’s nails), zounds (God’s wounds), and gadzooks (God’s hooks).

The word is unrelated to bodkin ‘a small dagger or pointed instrument’, which itself occurs in Hamlet, in the “to be or not to be” speech (“He himself might his quietus make with a bare bodkin”). This word dates back to the fourteenth century, and is of uncertain origin.


Botch means to mess something up.

Blowing Smoke means bragging or boasting. (Blowing smoke is similar to “hot air;” it has little substance, and dissipates rapidly.)