RC Radio Natural Born Citizen Debate Challenge

I would like to start off 2012 with a bang!

Who is a natural born citizen? Before late 2008 there was not much discussion of this question except in some obscure legal articles and talk about a few candidates not born on US soil like Mitt Romney's father (born in Mexico) and John McCain (born in the Canal Zone). Recently, many of those known as the "Birthers" started telling us that almost everything we learned about this term for 200 years is wrong. In 2008 during the run up to the election all the conversation was about "the birth certificate" but now the debate has moved to the claim that to be a natural born citizen requires both parents to be citizens at the time of birth. Even some politicians in New Hampshire and in Georgia have embraced the idea. What gives? I say let's get this settled.

I challenge proponents of both sides of the discussion on the definition of the term  "natural born citizen" in the United States Constitution under the requirements for president and vice president to a debate on Reality Check Radio on Wednesday, January 25, 2012.  I have arranged for up to three supporters of the traditional definition that a US citizen at birth is a natural born citizen to represent the "Obot" side of the debate. I challenge the "Birther" side to provide up to three proponents to take on the challenge.

The debate will be 90 minutes long and both sides will have equal time. Timing will be strictly enforced. Each side will be given equal time for opening and closing arguments. Each side will be able to ask the other side 4 questions of their choice and have time for rebuttal to the answers. The moderator (me) will ask 1 or 2 questions if issues appear to need further discussion. The remainder of the show will allow the listeners to call and ask questions.

I extend this challenge to Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, Charles Kerchner, Orly Taitz, Dean Haskins, Jerome Corsi, or any other proponent of the "two citizen parent" definition of natural born citizen. This is your chance to prove you are right. The first three who accept will be selected as participants  unless they wish to give up a spot to someone prior to the debate.

I will enforce a fair debate. If you are interested please contact me at realitycheck1776 at gmail period com or through the "Contact Me" link on rcradioshow.blogspot.com

Please feel free to link or copy this article to your blog or forum to get the word out. A refusal by either side to defend their position will be noted.

Paul Irey's Reply

Mr. Irey said he tried to post some of the following comments here on my blog but as it turned out he was replying to a website that linked to Doctor Conspiracy's comment on my article. Mr. Irey then sent me a couple of emails with comments. I told Mr. Irey that I would publish his comments here unedited. I will provide additional comments later.
___________________________________________________________________________________

  Obviously it is unfair for the moderator of "Reality Check Radio" to use my name but he won't use his own.  Who is the author of this article?  Why doesn't he release his name as I have?  The reason the WND story is not released yet is because ... first they decided to wait until after Christmas ... and second ... last week I learned that I would be in possession of a high resolution scan of a legitimate birth certificate from the Honolulu dept. of health from the era that will allow me to compare it to the problems I have found with Obama's BC.  This article should put a real dent in Woodman's prior findings that there is nothing wrong with Obama's BC.  Wait and see.  Then better evidence is still coming.  I have two more studies in progress and another researcher has even better proof.  I did not bet Mr. ??? $5,000 that officials at the health dept. would go to jail because ... even though they are guilty ... gov. has probably guaranteed them that no one would face charges in any case.

     Anyone who doesn't believe Larry Sinclair ... only has to look at what happened to Cain.  Here was another black candidate for president quickly hounded out of the running by media that started out only repeating rumors of the type they could have used with Larry Sinclair's claims ... but did not.  You also will not repeat our discussion of Mr. Sinclair being arrested at the National Press Club 2 blocks from the White House where he gave a news conference relating his story to the media ... that never reported anything about his presentation ... including the fact that he was arrested at that news conference in front of the press on a warrant issued by Beau Binden ... the son of Joe Biden ... on false charges ... two days before the Democratic National Convention that led to Joe Biden being nominated for Vice President.  Political favor?  The major media should have at least reported that false arrest.  But they were not allowed to ... and still are not allowed to.  So much for media honesty.

     If you believe that major media editors can print whatever they like ... ask Mr. ??? why they did not print any news or statements from that night at the National Press Club in Wash. D.C. ... but ran Cain out of office on far less information?  Government control is why.  There is no other answer.

     Also we learned later that it was the White House copier that created the distortions that would have deceived anyone. We notified the FBI that the White House might not always want copies coming from there to be so easily identified because of those peculiar distortions ... and there might have even been devices planted that would easily identify any document copied at the White House and given unintended intelligence to spy agencies in other countries.  Planting spy devices in copiers at important official locations is not new.  We did it to the Russian embassy in D.C. years ago.  Why didn't Mr. Woodman notify the White House himself immediately?  All the newspapers that received the handouts that morning on the 27th of April had those distortions because it was the White House copier that made them.  Because those handouts were far better in detail than the PDF released by the White House online ... is why I use them in the first place.  Had the major media printed my evidence when it first came out ... we might have found this out much sooner.  Doesn't anyone think it odd that major media refused to run the story about letters on the BC not matching each other ... but rumors of comments made by Herman Cain to a few women years ago were sufficient to slander the name of a black candidate for president?  It was shameless.

Paul Irey

[He also sent these followup comments:]

Mr. RC ???

     If you are contesting my statements ... then your name has as much bearing as mine.

     I attempted to "publish" the text in blue again at your website".

     If it does not publish this time ... you should publish it yourself along with this statement.  The supportive statements I had made to you during our conversation about the arrest of Larry Sinclair that still can not be mentioned in the major media ... even though it happened in front of 100 reporters at the National Press Club in 2008 ... during the time of the election process ... should be proof enough of the press censorship I mentioned. You also mention my contention that JFK was shot from the sewer drain but forgot to mention that I told you that I had seen the one time showing of the Marie Muchmore film on channel 5 in New York City that showed that the limo stopped at the moment of the fatal head shot.  That's an important part of my story. The Zapruder film does not show that stop and has painted in the appearance of an exit wound in the front of his face.  The attached poster shows that better.  Media will not publish that or ever refer to the fact that the government's own evidence clearly contradicts itself. The fact that media will still not publish my poster ... even though none of the supporters of the Oswald did it alone theory ... including Gary Mack himself ... who is the curator of the Texas Schoolbook Depository Museum ... have ever been able to give me any kind of answer as to this contradiction.  That's what I meant by a supportive statement ... and your not referring to what I said to support my claims was not "fairly representing our conversation".

   In addition ... I read your statement ....

"I had the opportunity to speak with Paul Irey on a Reality Check Radio program, hosted by RC. I found Irey to be sincere and honest, but at the same deeply influenced by his own biases about the President. Honesty won out, and in conversations with RC, Irey admitted he was wrong in some of his claims. This hasn’t stopped the Birthers from continuing to use Irey’s prior reports as evidence."

[Editorial comment: This is not my statement. See below.]

     I interpret that to mean that when you called me ... we were both being broadcast on your radio show and you did not mention that.  If we were being broadcast ... and I was led to believe that your call was a private conversation ... isn't that illegal?  Aren't you supposed to ask me if I want to be on your show?

     In addition Orly Taitz and Jerome Corsi were both informed of my feeling that part of the "different typeface" evidence may be flawed as a result of my understanding of Woodman's findings ... prior to your call.  Some of it is still correct ... but I informed them that I had lost complete confidence in the evidence and would not support it if required to testify ... but would rely on the new evidence that was already available to them at the time ... but not published by WND yet ... and I would give it to you now but I don't want to "scoop" mr. Corsi or WND.

     So in addition to the text in blue below this ... you should publish the entire text of what I have just said here ... and if possible publish the JFK poster attached.  I think that otherwise it is easy to assume that I am a kook for making my claims ... which I did not make to you without these supportive statements and they should be included at your website for your readers to consider.

Paul Irey

[Editorial comment:

Mr. Irey was confused by the following article which linked to a blog post by Doctor Conspiracy: Before It's News: Paul Irey Backtracks

The comment that Mr. Irey attributed to me was actually made by Doc C who referenced his call to RC Radio on my program on June 23, 2011. I neither recorded nor broadcast my call to Paul Irey in November that is the basis for the previous article on this blog.

I am also publishing the poster that Mr. Irey sent me on the Kennedy assassination. Warning: This content is very graphic.]

A Conversation with Paul Irey

Paul Irey

I called Paul Irey last week to invite him to appear on Reality Check Radio to debate  John Woodman on the authenticity of the Obama long from birth certificate. Irey has declared it to be a forgery beyond doubt. Mr. Irey’s claims are based on differences in typefaces and other anomalies among various letters in the document. In his book, Is Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?: A Computer Guy Examines The Evidence For Forgery, John Woodman devoted an entire chapter to Mr. Irey’s claims and found them to be easily refuted. John Woodman has publicly challenged Paul Irey to debate him but Mr. Irey has refused. I thought I would offer a fair forum to them where a full two hours could be devoted to a debate but unfortunately Mr. Irey still refuses. Mr. Irey was kind enough to be a guest on my show earlier this year and I had hoped he would consider a return for what could be an interesting evening.

Mr. Irey and I touched on a number of topics and the conversation while civil did become heated at times. Irey concedes that John Woodman has found some major flaws in his original analysis. Namely, Woodman demonstrated that many of the letters that Irey chose to blow up for comparison are from a vertical section of the document where it appears that the copier or scanner caused a distortion. Irey concedes that Woodman is correct. Irey also said that he has sent an email to Orly Taitz, Jerome Corsi, Doug Vogt, and others advising them of the problems with his analysis and asking them not to use it. I was startled to hear this and told Mr. Irey I had never seen a single retraction printed anywhere. I told him that this hasn’t stopped Taitz from including it with her motions in several court cases and in her challenge presented to the Ballot Law Commission in New Hampshire last month. Irey offered two explanations why he was not that concerned to have his flawed analysis submitted as evidence. First he says he is still sure the birth certificate is forged because a source he will not name from the Secret Service told him in 2008 that Obama was not born in Hawaii. Second, he is working on a new analysis that will be published soon (one would assume in World Net Daily) that will be “irrefutable”.  He also said it didn’t matter because no judge had read them anyway. I suspect Irey is correct that no judge has ever really read his gobbledygook but no real expert would dare let work that he would not endorse be filed in any court.

I asked Mr. Irey if he was concerned that two administrations in Hawaii had vouched for the validity of both the 2008 COLB and the 2011 long form birth certificate and that Dr. Fukino, Loretta Fuddy, and Alvin Onaka had all staked their professional reputations on those documents. Irey replied that “Fuddy and Onaka would both be going to jail” for their complicity in the forgery. I told him that I would bet him $500 that neither of them would go to jail by a date one year from our conversation. Irey would not take the bet. (My offer still stands by the way.)

I then asked Irey how he could explain other additional evidence of that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. These included the contemporary newspaper accounts, recollections by Obama’s teacher Barbara Nelson, and the passport records for Ann Dunham that showed that an official from the state department had investigated the Obama child’s place of birth. Irey was familiar with these but dismissed them all. He said Barbara Nelson was lying and that the newspaper announcements were the result of Obama’s grandmother filing for a birth certificate after the Obamas returned from Kenya. Irey said he remembered reading that there was a Hawaii law that allowed one to get a birth certificate that said the birth place was Hawaii even though the birth occurred elsewhere. He could not quote the statute. He said that was done for a Chinese communist but he could not remember the name. I am sure Irey was referring to the birth certificate issued by the Territory of Hawaii in 1904 for Sun Yat-sen.  Dr. Conspiracy and others have written about this fraudulent birth certificate oft cited by Birthers as proof that anyone can get birth certificate in Hawaii with merely a signature of a relative. No other certificate other than this one from 1904 has ever been produced although Orly Taitz and others have maintained it is easy to obtain a birth certificate that shows a Hawaiian birth with a mere signature of a relative.

Irey also buys into Larry Sinclair’s cockamamie stories. I will not delve into the details but let’s just say Irey is very familiar with all the details and believes Obama is bisexual and met male lovers at Rev. Wright’s church.  He had several of them killed according to Irey. He buys into other conspiracy theories too: Did you know that all the major news outlets have their news stories verified daily by the government? Mr. Irey says that this began in 1947 under the Truman administration and continues to this day. 

Paul Irey’s hobby of delving into conspiracy theories goes back a long way. If you talk to him for very long he will always get around to the Kennedy assassination. He believes the fatal shot was fired from a sewer in front of the limousine and that the famous autopsy photo showing little damage to Kennedy’s face cannot be reconciled with the Zapruder film. He believes the driver of the limousine slowed the vehicle intentionally at the right moment to allow the unknown assassin to take the fatal shot. I did not want to engage him on the Kennedy assassination details. We recently passed the 48 year anniversary of the assassination and I have seen every conspiracy on the assignation debunked to at least my satisfaction. I see no point at spending time on it. 

I am convinced that Paul Irey is sincere in his beliefs.  He might even be a pleasant guy to meet but he lives in a different world than most of us. He trusts no one and wakes up every day sure that unknown sinister forces are controlling every aspect of government and the media. Like most conspiracy theorists he always invokes the shadowy “they” to toss out mountains of evidence for which he has no explanation.  For that I pity him. However, that in no way excuses the fact that he has allowed his so-called “evidence” that he knows is flawed to be used by charlatans like Orly Taitz and Jerome Corsi to convince their gullible followers and readers that the President is a liar.

New Hampshire to Taitz: Take your nutiness back to La-La Land

Last week Orly Taitz finally got to put her stack of "zibits" and "dossies" before an honest to goodness official venue. On November 18 Taitz appeared for nearly a full hour before the New Hampshire Ballot Access Commission. The Commission held a hearing on four challenges to candidates for the January first in the nation presidential primary election. Taitz had filed her challenge against President Barack Obama based on her so called "evidence" of a forged Hawaiian birth certificate, social security fraud, and a wrong headed interpretation of the Constitutional definition of "natural born citizen". Taitz gave a 30 minute disjointed presentation and cross examined the single witness called by the commission, Assistant Secretary of State Ms. Karen Ladd. Taitz's challenge was scheduled to be heard last but as is the norm for Taitz she asked and received special treatment from the commission to accommodate her "busy schedule" and move her top the top of the list of challenges to be heard.

The bipartisan commission apparently was not swayed by Taitz and the testimony of several other supporters including one former and several current Republican state representatives. After a very short discussion they voted 5 - 0 to reject the challenge.

RC Radio again provided same day coverage of the hearing with a great account provided by The Fogbow Forum member, Whatever4. It may be downloaded here: RC Radio: The Nut's in New Hampshire Special Edition. A special thanks to W4 and to Sterngard who asked most of the questions during the interview.

A complete video of the hearing was posted by a Taitz supporter, Tim Carter:

One very telling moment came at the end of Taitz presentation when the Commission Chairman Bradford Cook (R) asked Taitz if she had any real evidence other that innuendo and opinion and Taitz said "No". What I found disturbing was the reaction to the defeat by supporters of Orly Tatiz. They accosted the counsel for the Secretary of State following the ruling. They accused the members of the Commission of committing treason. Some of these accusers include several current state representatives. Here is another video that documents the reactions of Susan Delemus and Harry Accornero both Republican members of the legislature.

A written transcript of Whatever4's recollection of the hearing is also available at Jack Ryan's SCRIBD page:

NEW HAMPSHIRE BALLOT CHALLENGE HEARING REPORT - 11-18-11 - As Reported by Whatever4 of The Fogbow

Reality Check Radio Is Changing Nights!

RC Radio is moving to Tuesday night at 8:30 PM EST beginning tomorrow night. Be sure and tune in for the same Birther smackdowns.

Jerome Corsi, Paul Irey, and Lucas Smith team up to shoot themselves in the foot

Okay, bear with me, this one will take a bit of explanation. Remember the WND article by Jerome Corsi titled How does Obama's document stack up against a genuine BC? that was publsihed last month in which Paul Irey analyzed the fonts on a previously unpublished Hawaiian birth certificate from August 1961? Irey tried to show that this birth certificate had more consistent typewritten fonts than did the Obama LFBC. Irey's font voodoo is irrelevant and has been completely debunked by John Woodman in his book Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud? and by others. (Including this author.)

In Corsi's article a highly redacted birth certificate of a female born in Honolulu on August 23, 1961 was presented as an example of a "genuine" Hawaii long form birth certificate. (No additional proof was provided that this was a genuine document other than a photo of the seal and signature of Registrar Alvin Onaka just as appears on the Obama LFBC. Other than that we are left to take Corsi's word for it since the names and addresses were all redacted.) To any sane person this new birth certificate was a curiosity and if anything supported the authenticity of the Obama LFBC for several reasons. It confirmed that the name of the hospital was really Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in 1961 just as appeared on the Obama LFBC.  The signature of the local registrar, V. K. L. Lee is there as it was on the Obama certificate. The form was exactly the same. However, once a commenter or two on WND pointed out these items a new even more redacted image was substituted in the article that removed the name of the hospital and Lee's signature for whatever reason.

WND Mystery BC front side as originally posted

WND Mystery BC - back side

WND Mystery BC with additional redaction

What turned out to be the real gem in the article was a seemingly innocuous scan of the back side of the "mystery birth certificate". John Woodman enhanced the contrast of the image, flipped it using photo editing software and determined that some of the redacted data from the front of the document was visible. The most interesting bit of this data was the birth certificate number. It ended in the digits "09945". When compared to previously published birth certificates from August 1961 we noticed that the number for Miss X born on August 23 was almost 700 lower than Barack Obama's (10641) and the Nordyke twins (10637 & 10638). The certificate number for the Waidelich BC was 10920. Stig Waidelich was born on August 5. I know this is a bit nerdy but for those who follow this stuff believe me it was significant and blew a huge hole in the conspiracy theories about the Obama certificate number that have been pushed by birthers since the release of the short form in 2008.

"Mystery BC - Certificate number discovered by John Woodman

Some folks thought they could make out the some the names on the "mystery birth certificate" but not conclusively. The best guess was that the last name began with "A" and the mother's name was Theresa Pxxxxx.

With that, the story went dormant. WND buried the Corsi article in the archive and Irey dodged a proposed debate with John Woodman. Then entered he, Lucas Daniel Smith ....

Lucas Smith left a comment on an article at Doc Conspiracy's blog with a link to a new article on Smith's blog. Smith's rambling article contained some juicy details of the sexual trysts between Orly Taitz and Charles Lincoln III at a house occupied by Lincoln, Peyton Yates Freiman, and Lucas Smith in 2009 when Taitz brought in Lucas Smith to testify concerning the POSFKBC before Judge Carter in Barnett v Obama in September 2009. Smith ultimately never appeared on the stand in that case.  In the article Smith also published copies of the Obama birth announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser obtained by Smith's pal Gary Ronhovde from the California State Library microfilm collection in October 2009. The Obama announcement had previously been published by at least two sources from both the archives of the Honolulu Start Bulletin and the one from the library in California. However, what was new in Smith's article was copies of the birth announcements for almost every day in August 1961. (Now I warned you this wasn't simple.)

Birth announcements from August 1961 Honolulu Advertiser.

On page 37 of the Advertiser birth records that Smith posted is an entry for a baby daughter of Mr. and Mrs. James K. Ah'Nee born on August 23. Aha! or Ah Nee! This was the mystery Miss X from the WND article. Credit goes to Gorefan at ObamaConspiracy.org for noticing this tidbit of information.  Now when we look at the certificate numbers we find a pattern:

[Edited January 5, 2012 to include the Virginia Sunahara BC]

Ah’Nee – 09945 – August 23rd, Accepted/Filed August 24th
Nordyke, Susan – 10637 – August 5th, Accepted/Filed August 11th
Nordyke, Gretchen – 10638 – August 5th, Accepted/Filed  August 11th
Obama, Barack – 10641 – August 4th, Accepted/Filed August 8th
Sunahara, Virginia* - 11080 - August 4th, Accepted/Filed August 10th
Waidelich, Stig – 10920 – August 5th/Accepted/Filed August 8th

* Not verified

If it looks to you as if they were assigned alphabetically in monthly batches give yourself a pat on the back. Doc C proposed just such a theory when the Waidelich birth certificate number was captured by this author from CNN's AC360 show last April. The Ah'Nee certificate supports that theory very well. The number of births per month in Hawaii in 1961 (page 205) was around 1400 so the spread in the certificate numbers from Ah'Nee to Waidelich of 974 appears reasonable.

I did a little additional research and I believe that the name of the holder of the birth certificate is Johanna Ah-Nee Randolph of Mililani, HI and the parents names were James K. and Theresa Pukaua Ah-Nee. One has to wonder how Jerome Corsi or Paul Irey obtained a copy of this birth certificate. Did Corsi have a copy of the Advertiser birth announcements? Did he or Irey contact people until they found someone who would supply a copy? Regardless, it shows the intensity with which the Birthers like Corsi have invested their time and money into attempts to discredit President Obama. However, once again the efforts have blown up in their faces.

What are the morals of the story? First, any time Birthers attempt to do real research they debunk their own theories. Second, don't trust your private documents to amateurs like Jerome Corsi and Paul Irey.

John Woodman: Paul Irey will not debate me because Jerome Corsi might not like it

John Woodman returned as my guest on RC Radio last Thursday night. He said that Paul Irey who had initially seemed open to debating him on a national radio show had changed his mind after reading portions of the book (we assume that would have included Mr. Woodman's debunking of Irey's own assertions about the LFBC). He also said Mr. Irey told him that Dr. Jerome Corsi might not like if he debated John. That is a remarkable statement from someone who boldly accuses the President of publishing a fraudulent document and claims the can prove it beyond any doubt. Why would Paul Irey take his marching orders from Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily?

John Woodman also expanded his debate challenge to include Jerome Corsi and any or all of his stable of so-called "experts" including Mara Zebest and Douglas Vogt.

I say let's bring it on! RC Radio joins in the challenge and would provide time to host such a debate on a future program.