| steven787 said: Yes, I am being 100% serious. He wouldn't have to see it to come up with some contrary evidence. |
You're absolutely correct in saying Keyes needs to prove something if he wants to proceed with this case. But you're overlooking the fairly obvious point that if he can prove the certificate is fake or invalid he will have accomplished exactly that. It's a legitimate line of pursuit in a tenuous case, and frankly it's one that when/if he fails to find fault with the document will put an end to his case. Which is all the more reason to let it happen.
I mean I think we agree on what is far and away the most likely conclusion to the case, but I don't base my view on any portion of the case on the fact that I want it to take that course, that's called bias. Obama put the Certificate of Live Birth forward as his evidence, so shouldn't it be open to scrutiny to those whose argument it would serve to refute? Or are we to set a precedent whereby declaring you have a document and posting pictures of it is sufficient proof that you do and that it is legit? Certainly reasonable limits should be placed on the depth of the scrutiny but zero physical scrutiny is no more reasonable an expectation than it is to require Obama to prove a universal negative. While I'm sure you're confident that Obama's word is sufficient proof, I am a firm believer in the following quote:
"If one's actions are honest, one does not need the pre-dated confidence of others." - Francisco D'Anconia
Even if he wasn't asserting that it was fake it would still seem very suspect to me. This is an extremely dangerous standard to set forth where a document is submitted as evidence but only in the form of a photograph or scan, while being strictly off-limits to physical inspection...I should think that would seem odd to you.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
