Thread: Inconsistencies found in passport applications

Inconsistencies found in passport applications released by State Department for Obama’s alleged mother
STANLEY ANN DUNHAM SOETORO PROVIDED TWO DIFFERENT MARRIAGE DATES, USED SEVERAL NAMES, AND MENTIONED VIRTUALLY NOTHING OF HER ALLEGED CHILDREN

by Sharon Rondeau

Stanley Ann Dunham's photo from her 1981 passport application

(Aug. 1, 2010) — The U.S. State Department has released 14 pages of documentation in response to a Freedom of Information Act request made by Mr. Christopher Strunk dating back to October 2008.

Strunk was originally directed to make his request to the Bureau of Customs and Border Control, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security. He did so and stated that the records he had requested “do not fall within any of FOIA exemptions itemsâ€

Fascinating read Kathyet. BO is a mystery wrapped in an enigma. Thanks!

No wonder all of his personal documents are sealed from public view!

Has anyone seen the cover of the National Enquirer this week? It's a full page expose on Obama's birth in Africa, and claims to have a copy of the Birth Certificate to prove it.

Wouldn't it be utterly ironic if one of the more notorious sensationalist rags in the "news" industry for once had it dead on accurate?

Reminds me of the scene in Men in Black when Tommy Lee Jones tells Will Smith that the tabloids are some of the best investigative reporting on the planet. Have we come to the point in time where that just might be true?

Originally Posted by melena29

Has anyone seen the cover of the National Enquirer this week? It's a full page expose on Obama's birth in Africa, and claims to have a copy of the Birth Certificate to prove it.

Wouldn't it be utterly ironic if one of the more notorious sensationalist rags in the "news" industry for once had it dead on accurate?

Reminds me of the scene in Men in Black when Tommy Lee Jones tells Will Smith that the tabloids are some of the best investigative reporting on the planet. Have we come to the point in time where that just might be true?

It's true, the tabloids broke the John Edwards affair and many other stories the anti-American media won't touch.

Originally Posted by melena29

Has anyone seen the cover of the National Enquirer this week? It's a full page expose on Obama's birth in Africa, and claims to have a copy of the Birth Certificate to prove it.

Wouldn't it be utterly ironic if one of the more notorious sensationalist rags in the "news" industry for once had it dead on accurate?

Reminds me of the scene in Men in Black when Tommy Lee Jones tells Will Smith that the tabloids are some of the best investigative reporting on the planet. Have we come to the point in time where that just might be true[size=18][b]?

IT'S OFFICIAL! ENQUIRER ACCEPTED INTO PULITZER PRIZE COMPETITION


The BIG secret is out of the bag as mainstream media trumpets the historic news that the NATIONAL ENQUIRER has been accepted into the Pulitzer Prize competition for its exhaustive investigation of the John Edwards Conspiracy and Cover-Up.

The scoop was broken by Emily Miller at Huffington Post as rumors of our acceptance into the competition by the prestigious journalism committee ignited the blogosphere.

"The Pulitzer Prize Board has officially accepted The National Enquirer's submissions for breaking the John Edwards scandal, according to sources close to the Board. In a historic move, the Pulitzer Board conceded that the self-proclaimed tabloid is qualified to compete with mainstream news outlets for journalism's most prestigious prize.

"The Enquirer is in the running for the Pulitzer in two categories: "Investigative Reporting" and "National News Reporting" for The National Enquirer staff," Ms. Miller announced exclusively at HuffPo.

Quickly The New York Times - for many THE Paper of record - made it even more official with their elegant headline: "Enquirer Is Eligible for Pulitzer". Writer Richard Perez-Pena analyzed the Pulitzer committee's turn-around in accepting the ENQUIRER entry after initially dismissing the very notion.

The Times reported: Sig Gissler, administrator of the prizes, says he and his colleagues never publicly discuss the eligibility of any specific publication. "We apply our criteria, and if publications meet them, we allow them to participate."

But with a grassroots effort steamrolling the viral landscape, Gawker.com analyzed the situation point by point in their historic article: "There's NO Good Reason the National Enquirer Shouldn't Win a Pulitzer Prize"

And MediaBistro even has a poll (yes, you can vote in it) on whether or not the Pulitzer Committee should award The ENQUIRER investigation into John Edwards' alleged abuse of campaign funds to fund a conspiracy of silence:

Ms. Miller concluded in her Huffington Post exclusive: "The massive grassroots campaign by the public to push the Pulitzer Board to recognize the national importance of The Enquirer's reporting of John Edwards shows the best of Americans' core values - hard work, fairness and equality for all - even for tabloids."


http://www.nationalenquirer.com/nationa ... rity/68188

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

Originally Posted by melena29

Has anyone seen the cover of the National Enquirer this week? It's a full page expose on Obama's birth in Africa, and claims to have a copy of the Birth Certificate to prove it.

Wouldn't it be utterly ironic if one of the more notorious sensationalist rags in the "news" industry for once had it dead on accurate?

Reminds me of the scene in Men in Black when Tommy Lee Jones tells Will Smith that the tabloids are some of the best investigative reporting on the planet. Have we come to the point in time where that just might be true[size=18][/b]?

IT'S OFFICIAL! ENQUIRER ACCEPTED INTO PULITZER PRIZE COMPETITION


The BIG secret is out of the bag as mainstream media trumpets the historic news that the NATIONAL ENQUIRER has been accepted into the Pulitzer Prize competition for its exhaustive investigation of the John Edwards Conspiracy and Cover-Up.

The scoop was broken by Emily Miller at Huffington Post as rumors of our acceptance into the competition by the prestigious journalism committee ignited the blogosphere.

"The Pulitzer Prize Board has officially accepted The National Enquirer's submissions for breaking the John Edwards scandal, according to sources close to the Board. In a historic move, the Pulitzer Board conceded that the self-proclaimed tabloid is qualified to compete with mainstream news outlets for journalism's most prestigious prize.

"The Enquirer is in the running for the Pulitzer in two categories: "Investigative Reporting" and "National News Reporting" for The National Enquirer staff," Ms. Miller announced exclusively at HuffPo.

Quickly The New York Times - for many THE Paper of record - made it even more official with their elegant headline: "Enquirer Is Eligible for Pulitzer". Writer Richard Perez-Pena analyzed the Pulitzer committee's turn-around in accepting the ENQUIRER entry after initially dismissing the very notion.

The Times reported: Sig Gissler, administrator of the prizes, says he and his colleagues never publicly discuss the eligibility of any specific publication. "We apply our criteria, and if publications meet them, we allow them to participate."

But with a grassroots effort steamrolling the viral landscape, Gawker.com analyzed the situation point by point in their historic article: "There's NO Good Reason the National Enquirer Shouldn't Win a Pulitzer Prize"

And MediaBistro even has a poll (yes, you can vote in it) on whether or not the Pulitzer Committee should award The ENQUIRER investigation into John Edwards' alleged abuse of campaign funds to fund a conspiracy of silence:

Ms. Miller concluded in her Huffington Post exclusive: "The massive grassroots campaign by the public to push the Pulitzer Board to recognize the national importance of The Enquirer's reporting of John Edwards shows the best of Americans' core values - hard work, fairness and equality for all - even for tabloids."

Yes, that WOULD be a hoot to see the Enquirer win a pulitzer over this! Yee haw! Hell, people might even perk up to the issue of Obama's usurpation of the office.