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.]

This entry was posted in Birth Certificate, Paul Irey, RC Radio, World Net Daily. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Paul Irey’s Reply

  1. suedb says:

    A Kennedy conspiracy nut to boot. A serial or multiple loser – Who would have known.

  2. verbalobe says:

    A question for Mr. Irey. It is based on this statement: "…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…"The question is this: How do you know that it is "legitimate"?

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  4. Anonymous says:

    It is somewhat humorous that someone who cannot perform a basic internet posting is holding himself out to be an expert on much of anything.

  5. verbalobeYou silly. Every other birth certificate issued by Hawaii is legit except Obama's.

  6. @AnonymousNot only that, he couldn't figure out who was making the statement. It was clear that the quote was from Doctor Conspiracy and not me. I really have no idea at what web site he was trying to comment.

  7. Captain Jack says:

    Irey is typical of the "experts" paraded by birthers. They are birthers themselves and base their entire analysis on inductive reasoning–they have a conclusion ready and then look for evidence to support it.

  8. verbalobe says:

    Well, the more poignant question would be: How on earth could someone have pronounced "a thing" counterfeit if they have NEVER IN THEIR LIFE laid eyes on:- the original "thing" itself, but only copies- a known legitimate original of that type of "thing"- nor a copy of a known legitimate "thing"?(Rhetorical, of course.)I can only imagine — but it seems reasonable — that the FBI and the Secret Service have GENUINE document forgery experts, and that they spend a good deal of their time examining actual original legitimate versions of the document types in their purview; in addition to knowing inside-out and backwards exactly what the issuing agencies' internal production processes are. I think it would take 5-10 years of full-time work in this precise line in order to credibly claim to be an expert. And Mr. Irey had never once done an iota of this work before 4/27/11, and perhaps still hasn't; and is only now on the verge of gaining access to a SINGLE legitimate example for comparison purposes. That he was even WILLING to pronounce an opinion, under these circumstances, marks him as a charlatan and a demagogue, not a scientist.Having a very heartfelt conviction about something is not the same as being right.And I have NO DOUBT that Mr. Irey's study of this "legitimate" document will fully confirm his foreordained conclusion that our President is a thug and a thief.

  9. verbalobe says:

    One last thing."…but ran Cain out of office on far less information?"What "office"?You know, if you can't even think or write straight, you shouldn't try to set yourself up as some kind of sekrit-fraud-decoder scientist guy.Just sayin'.

  10. Dr Ken says:

    It's amazing the levels Irey sinks to back up his failed analysis. Even going so far as to believe Larry Sinclair who has a rap sheet that goes out the door and around the block. One only needs to look at the Lie Detector tests Sinclair failed miserably.The test states that a -3 is required for a deception reading on different parts he scored a -7 and -15

  11. Bill says:

    Ummm … wow. He's trying to prove he's not a "nut" for questioning Obama's nativity by admitting he's a JFK assassination nut.The Internet is a wonderful thing.

  12. joeymac says:

    If I obtain a ten-dollar bill from the U.S. mint and xerox it to produce a copy, is the copy "counterfeit?" Of course not, it is merely a reproduction of currency, unless I try to pass it as currency.Would artifacts of the reproduction demean the original in any way? No, the original is the thing that the treasury certifies, and it is, ipso facto, legitimate. Since the treasury is responsible for issuing currency, it cannot produce "counterfeit."The birther liars have created a straw man with reproductions of the BC. which cannot issue "counterfeit" certifications of birth; if the Hawaii DOH issues a BC, it is legitimate simply because of that fact.The phony hullaballoo about "layers" and "fonts" on PDFs and scanned reproductions don't amount to a hill of beans, and it is pointless to refute their "analyses." The State of Hawaii has issued another certification of birth for the President and vouched for it. Thus endeth the story.

  13. The Magic M says:

    > 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 eraLet me make a guess: just like the last time, he's going to blank out the registration number because it would shoot a massive hole in the "Obama's number is out of sequence" theory?They did this once on WND (enhancing the contrast in the backside however yielded the number which confirmed the "alphabetical order by month" theory and refuted the "order by birth date" birther theory), they will do so again.(In a related funny note, earlier today I saw birthers point to a forged McCain BC as if it was the original, "see, he showed his real one", totally oblivious to the modern computer fonts on the alleged 1936 copy. Confirmation bias seems incurable.)

  14. Dr Ken says:

    > (In a related funny note, earlier today I saw birthers point to a forged McCain BC as if it was the original, "see, he showed his real one", totally oblivious to the modern computer fonts on the alleged 1936 copy. Confirmation bias seems incurable.)Not just that but you could see the smudges where they blanked out the original information. It also says he was born in Colon when McCain says he was born on Coco Solo naval base which isn't located in Colon

  15. suedb says:

    The entry for McCain is in the medical log book of the base. I have no problems with McCain as I have no problems with Obama or ANY PERSON BORN TO AN AMERICAN AND AN AMERICAN ON A MILITARY BASE/CANAL ZONE ETC. You can really get things screwed up when you as an American marry a "foreign born spouse (used to be FBW)". See, it gives the morons something to do about nothing.See what happened to Mr Obama Sr. and Stan.

  16. obsolete says:

    Mr. Irey says: "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 not rumor, but fact, that Cain's employer paid out at least two sexual harassment settlements to settle cases against Mr. Cain. Perhaps Mr. Irey was too busy reading only censored news sites and missed that important info?

Leave a Reply (Please see the RC Radio Blog comment policy). Your first comment will be moderated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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