The Hidden Trap Within The Birth Certificate Cult

The Birth Certificate Culters all claim the same thing,

"All Obama has to do is show his real birth certificate."

The hidden trap in that is the base working assumption is that the birth certificate Obama already produced is a fake.

So the culters put Obama into a Catch-22. HE cannot be a natural born citizen if he doesn't show his "real" birth certificate, and by revealing his "real" birth certificate he would be making a de facto admission of guilt in forging the birth certificate he already presented.

The culters think Obama is a fool. Man, are they WAY OFF BASE!

You are giving them far more credit for thought than they deserve.

If a child is born unexpectedly while the parents are on vacation, the child doesn't lose the citizenship of his parents to take on that of the country in which he was born. Right? And there is no dispute that Obama's mother was an American citizen. So... wtf?

... and this is part of what the "birthers" are pinning their ridiculous hopes on ... The law that was in effect until 1986 (and was in effect when Barack was born) says that, if you have one U.S. citizen parent and one foreign-national parent ... and IF the baby is born OUTSIDE the U.S., and IF the U.S. citizen parent had not lived in the United States for at least five years after the age of 16 by the time the baby was born (and Ann Dunham was only 18 when she gave birth to Barack, remember, so she, technically, didn't meet that requirement) ... then U.S. citizenship did NOT pass from that parent to the baby.

Weird, huh? But that is actually how U.S. immigration law read at the time.
They sure weren't thinking about teen parents when they made that rule.

HOWEVER ... since Barack was born IN THE UNITED STATES, that whole rule about the age of the U.S. parent has nothing to do with this situation (it's just that the "birthers" believe he was born outside the U.S. (because of some bogus audiotape that purports to be of Obama's African grandmother saying Barack was born in Kenya. yeah, right)).

I just figured the birther's arguments failed on every level, even IF Obama had been born outside the US.

And, even IF Obama's g-ma said that Barack was born in Kenya, she may have been talking about her son (Barack Sr., and not our PE) so it still isn't "proof" of anything.

Yeah, their arguments are ridiculous across the board. Damn but those are some delusional people!


Anyway, thanks for the explanation. :)

Title 8, Paragraph G of the U.S. code says:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

Here's a link. Read a let me know what you think
: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html

It is supported as fact by the state of Hawaii.

Mighty shrewd of his mother to do that, knowing that someday her son would be the President of the United States.

How come no one brings up the fact that McCain was not born in this country? He was not even born in US territory.

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone when it was US territory. And by virtue of his birth there, he is a US citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state (in 1959). Even if he had been born there before 1959, he would still be a citizen. Hawaii was a territory until then.

anmd that was not part of the Panama Canal Zone.

Doesn't change his natural born status, though. McCain is a natural born citizen by virtue of a parental citizenship.

He wasn't born in Colon, Panama.

He came out of his mothers colon.

See the difference?

That doesn't make it a US territory. Yes McCain is a US citizen because his parents were US citizens. John McCain is a Naturalized citizen, not a natural born citizen. Read the United States Constitution. To be a natural born citizen you must be born in a state of the United States. John McCain was not.

But the Panama Canal Zone was. And it doesn't matter if we had the Canal Zone by treaty or not, it makes no difference how it became a US Territory.

no matter what you call it.
Berry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it became a state. That caused problems with his running for President because he was not born in a state, but a territory.

...and yet their people are granted US citizenship. The Constitution does not stipulate that you have to be born in a US state to qualify for the office of the President, merely that you have to be a "natural born citizen".

in a State. Read that part in the Constitution.

People born in Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands are not natural born according to the Constitution because they are Territories. They are US Citizens, yes, but they are not eligible to run for President. There is a distinction in the Constitution. What is so hard to understand?

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States"

A citizen of the "United States" does not mean that you have to be born in a State of the United States. Nowhere does it stipulate that you have to be a citizen of a state. The "United States" includes territories and commonwealths within. How hard is THAT to understand??!!

They are US Soil.

Leased is not US soil. No more than if you lease a villa in Mexico entitle you to US laws.

Under senate resolution co-sponsored by both Clinton an Obama:

"Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States."

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S.RES.511:

So?

When the SC strikes all or part of a statute, does somebody get up and say, "Oh, wait, the Senate thinks the statute was fine."

How does a Senate resolution dispose of the question?

The Coco Solo hospital was built in 1941.

And if you think they are US soil - read some of the Gitmo decisions.

Babies born to foreign staff on US military bases are not US citizens.

Natural Born citizen just means by the mere act of being born you are a citizen. Naturalized citizen means someone who started out as a citizen of another country and then later became a citizen.

As for the Constitution, it gave the power to define Natural Born vs. Naturalization to Congress for the cases under consideration. The current law says that you are a citizen by birth (natural born) if either of your parents are US citizens at the time of your birth or if you were born in the United States proper.

L-

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Why the distinction then?

Nobody was born in the United States of America. Duh.

Anyone over the age of 35 in 1790 was born in a British colony.

You see, we had this revolution thing in the 1770's. It was in all the papers, you must have heard about it.

If they had limited it to "natural born Citizen" then NOBODY would have been qualified to BE president for another decade or so.


George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson - None of them were born in the "United States of America". There was no USofA for them to be born in. They were all born in a British colony.

Do you get it?

Read the part you bolded again, in one breath:

"or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution"

They wanted the President to be born a citizen of the US, but at the time none of them had been. They weren't stupid enough to write a Constitution that would have required everyone to wait around 35 years before anybody could qualify to be president.

A Territory of the US is American-controlled land which holds a specific legal status within the law, typically just below that of a full state.

"US territory" is whatever we hold on to by whatever means, such as land given to us by treaty, like our embassies and the Panama Canal Zone, where McCain was born.

The actual certificate stays with the records office.

The records office won't give you an "original".

You don't even get a copy anymore in most states. They print it up from the data on record and the clerk stamps or seals it to certify it.

It is then conclusive proof in court, btw.

the latest lawsuit doesn't question the validity of Obama's birth certificate. The lawsuit questions the citizenship of Obama's father! The claimant says that Obama's father was an English citizen, which means our President-elect had duel citizenship at the time of his birth and that makes him ineligible to be President. WTF? His mother was an American citizen and he was born in Hawaii. How does the citizenship of his father change any of that? Even if Barack had duel citizenship, why would that matter anyway? As long as he was born a citizen of THIS country, what difference does it make? :shrug:

edited: typo

ab British citizen (via IReland) when Arthur was born.

So precedent wihtin the history of American presidents shows that argument is nothing more than the rantings of a toshpot.

...which is kinda odd for Freepers.

"“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”

That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. Brack Obama has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.

And this leads to the relevant question:

HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’S STATUS BE “GOVERNED” BY GREAT BRITAIN?

A natural born citizen’s status should only be governed by the United States. This is the core issue before the Supreme Court of the United States. "

http://www.freepowerboards.com/sarahpalin/sarahpalin-about1225.html?sid=3d6220117dc5f73e07d810c76c2dcb43



Yeah, It's nuts, I know.

They argue a case based on a lack of evidence. Can't do that (and win).

As a matter of fact, it is the ONLY thing that you've brought up on DU in weeks!!!

I can see one thread on it.. But don't you think that some of us notice how many times you've created threads on one topic and one topic alone?

You should know that the bogus subject doesn't even deserve conversation, but you keep bringing it up in all sorts of threads over and over and over again....

Seriously............ What gives!?!?!?!?

This is Big-Time important. The wingnuts are trying to do a end-around, And we all better know all the in's and outs about it. And the supreme court is rightwing leaning, that alone should put the fear of God in us

If he doesn't think some here aren't paying attention at how many times..... and how many different threads he's started....

He's dead wrong.

It's NON-stop with this guy!!!

This is a big time move the wingnuts are trying to pull here. Get your head out your ass

Any moreso than the suits brought by 9/11 Truthers against Bush for causing 9/11.

But I have encountered this argument "in the wild" so to speak, and it's worth keeping track of for no other purpose than countering viral emails that might arrive at your office, family, or elsewhere.

So for that reason, I agree that it's something to track. I also agree that Larissa correctly points to a fascination with the subject by the OP. At some level I'm "fascinated" as well, but fascination combined with (as I see the OP's posts) subtly but importantly misleading is a dangerous combination.

just like some will have a fascination with a trainwreck or a car wreck.

But unlike a car wreck or a train wreck, it CRACKS ME UP!

ON EDIT: There's very little point in me posting in the threads decrying the Obama appointments because to date, Obama hasn't upset me with a single appointment.

In fact, to date, the only thing Obama has done that I disagree wiht is he forgave Joe Lieberman. I think that prick deserves nothing in the way of forgiveness.

I think it's hilarious. I feel guilty in a way, like a throwback to the days when people would go for a fun day out at the lunatic asylum and pay a golden doubloon to poke the inmates with sticks.

And perhaps it is an unhealthy fascination, but I can't stop watching. Plus, if I didn't read over there, how would I know that I am laughing only to hide my FEAR because I know, deep down, that Clarence Thomas (the Patriot) is going to Do The Right Thing and publicly denounce Obama as an illegal alien and a traitor, after which Obama will be arrested, handcuffed, and hauled off to prison? Along with the entire Democratic Party, for perpetuating a fraud on the American People?

They aren't clear right now whether this is going to happen today, Monday, or January 20th...

...out of conscience.

I'll admit that it was funnier before the DNC convention when Hillary's speech was going to include a dramatic moment when she whipped out Obama's "real" Kenyan birth certificate.

It does my heart good to see the freeps obsessed with a subject that's going to get them NOWHERE.

have been reading the wacko freeper threads for hours, laughing. ;-)

We don't have Sarah Palin to kick around anymore.

As an attorney, I find crackpot legal theories to be entertaining, but I can only speak for myself.

There is an element of Schadenfraude in it... watching them desperately clutch at nothing.

It's as important as the Soviet Weather Machine, meaning that it is, by all accounts, am innefectual non-story put out by political proxies for no other reason than to de-legitimize Obama's wholly valid election in the eyes of the 23%-ers.

"Grasping at straws" and "Building castles in the sand" are two colloquialisms on which this topic is based on.

No one-- not even a Court Justice could state that Obama is not qualified and have that statement considered valid, truthful or legitimate itself within the eyes of the public.

The one going around is a copy of the original, but it's still a legal birth certificate.

If you're worried about the original, they already showed that to the media too. Factcheck.org, worldnutdaily, etc.

So there goes your whole post.

I'm laughing about this shit.

They won't take any case.

Guaranteed.

You can only steal an election when its close. The American people know Obama won by a very substantial margin.

you barely acknowledged all the answers given which made your assertion as likely as being struck by lighting (while riding in an elevator).

my main issue with arguing this with you is that you have time and time again refused to change your mind about the risk of this case and this issue NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAYS TO YOU.

so what's the point?

you've decide we all should be concerned. when you ask the question what will stop the supremes from doing it again, you are asking a rhetorical question. nothing will convince you how hell-freezing-over unlikely that is.

as i've said before, the supreme court could decree sometime soon that you are a hippo and that it's open season on hippos (you) tomorrow. they could do that. it's extremely unlikely that they will.

now to paraphrase you, they've already done stupid things, what makes you think they will not do it again? :shrug:

What Obama presented is precisely the same thing I got from Maryland and used to get a passport.

Yes, the doctor fills out some long-ass form that gets filed somewhere (maybe; or they just might enter the shit into a database then throw the fucking thing away; I wouldn't bet against it).

So good luck getting your genuine, original, super-duper Birth Certificate. I don't believe any state in the country hands those out (again, assuming the state even saves it). They just provide exactly what Obama has which is exactly what I have and is exactly what every other person whose BC I have seen has.

And Hawaii wouldn't give Obama a copy of that, even if he asked them for it.

The only thing you can get from the records office for your $10 (or whatever) in most states is the freshly printed document which is certified by the state as conclusive evidence of the facts recited therein.

Different states use various terminology for the same exact thing.

There is no truth to the "anyone could get a Hawaiian BC" myth at FR either. Birth records in Hawaii are quite important, due to the entitled of "native Hawaiians" to the land trusts set up in 1921, when the islands were annexed, and included as part of the statehood deal.

Nobody in 1959 had a Hawaiian state birth certificate. Subsequent to 1959, a lot of people needed one. If you think on that long enough, you'll understand the origin of the distorted statutory reading of the Hawaiian statutes over at FR, on the subject of how to get one.

You see - unlike, say, Delaware, which has been a state since 1791, there are people who where born in Hawaii, and alive in 1959 through today, who were not born in the "State of Hawaii", but who all became Hawaiian state citizens at the same time.

There is NO, repeat NO legal distinction between magic formulations of words that are variously used to refer to what most folks call a birth certificate.

And, yes, if you were born outside of Hawaii, and adopted in Hawaii, the issued document would STILL state your place of birth.

Notice that Obama was born in Hawaii and this fact is certified by the state of Hawaii on the document you can see in living 3-d at Factcheck (which is not an Obama front - recall Dick Cheney citing it as a source in the 2004 VP debate).

parsing of words in Freeperland. I don't know when I've seen such convoluted attempts at legitimizing a conspiracy theory! :rofl:

No surprise there.

On another thread here at DU, someone is asking "Why doesn't he just show his actual birth certificate?"

Uh-huh. It's fun to watch pizza being made. As soon as you see the words "actual", "vault copy", etc., you can see it coming a mile away

The other part of it is that they never mention just whom this birth certificate is to be "shown". I gather they want to be able to make the president jump every time they file a stupid lawsuit.

What thread? I want to see that! :rofl:

I keep seeing this allegation repeated on Freak Republic. Is it something that they've invented out of thin air, or something that has a kernel of truth that they've twisted out of context?

....and a false one because even if he showed the "vault copy long form" they all demand, they would simply move the goalposts back more and claim THAT was a forgery.

One of the biggest "gotcha's" in Berg's case was his constant demand for Obama's "Certificate of Citizenship" and a notarized "oath of allegience" from the US state department. Things a a native-born citizen wouldn't have - but a naturalized one would.

That way, Obama doesn't provide those, Berg can continue with his inane "illegal alien" claim. Obama does provide them, automatic disqualification due to being a naturalized citizenship.

It's really a clever version of "have you to stopped beating your wife?"

Nobody is falling for their bullshit.

Madness can be very creative.

the RW's railing against "anchor babies" over the last few years. Now if a child born on US soil of non-citizen parents is considered a citizen, why wouldn't a child born on US soil to an American mother and a non-citizen father be considered a citizen? Its just beyond stupid.

Truthers to the Left of Me, Truthers to the Right

snip

Alas, Trutherism thrives on both the left and right. Which brings us to the spate of lawsuits challenging President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court considers one of those suits, filed by New Jersey citizen Leo Donofrio, who maintains that Obama is not a "natural born citizen" because his father held British citizenship.

There may be the seed of a legitimate constitutional issue to explore here -- how is the citizenship requirement enforced for presidential candidates, anyway? And at least Donofrio concedes that Obama was born in Hawaii. But a dangerously large segment of the birth-certificate hunters have lurched into rabid Truther territory. The most prominent crusader against Obama's American citizenship claim, lawyer Philip Berg (who, not coincidentally, is also a prominent 9/11 Truther) disputes that Obama was born in Hawaii and claims that Obama's paternal grandmother told him she saw Obama born in Kenya.

Berg and his supporters further assert that the "Certification of Live Birth" produced by Obama was altered or forged. They claim that the contemporaneous announcement in a Hawaii newspaper of Obama's birth is insufficient evidence that he was born there. (Did a fortuneteller place it in the paper knowing he would run for president?) And they accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being part and parcel of the grand plan to install Emperor Obama and usurp the rule of law.

I believe Trig was born to Sarah Palin. I believe Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. I believe fire can melt steel and that bin Laden's jihadi crew -- not Bush and Cheney -- perpetrated mass murder on 9/11. What kind of kooky conspiracist does that make me?

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2008/12/05/truthers_to_the_left_of_me,_truthers_to_the_right

I AGREE WITH MICHELLE MALKIN!!!

This MUST BE a sign of the impending end of the world.

I need a shower

Michelle Malkin, voice of sanity?! Unbelievable.

It was certified by the State of Hawaii. I read this morning the wingnuts are saying Obama's Kenyan granny says she witnessed his birth. Then they added something about if she didn't then Obama renounced his citizenship when he went to Indonesia. It's almost sad there are citizens (as far as we know) of this country who are so profoundly stupid.

and that says something.

I'm not convinced we know 100% of what happened during 9/11. Especially the pentagon crash.

That's absurd on its face. The Bush Administration was never competent enough to be able to conceive such a thing, let alone pull it off.

I'm not saying he is involved but I'm I think he knew. I believe Franken's book documented that Bush received several warnings. Not competant to follow up on those I agree with. Bottom line I don't know, nor do I have all the facts but I'm skeptical of the whole thing.

Why rely on that?

The 9/11 Commission Report also documents, using the term "the system was blinking red", that the Bush administration ignored warnings out the wazoo.

Ashcroft had important things to do, like fight porn.

Did he start that as soon as he became AG? I had not found out about it until sometime in 2003.

There are only so many hours in a day, and the administration didn't want to deviate from its agenda of silliness to actually consider that they had other, real, responsibilities.

Even if they were not MIHOP or LIHOP ...

They WERE responsible for the outrageous lack of security that occurred on THEIR watch ....

They may not have caused it, but they certainly FAILED to stop it ...

THAT is their cross to bear, and nobody can take that away from them ...

No doubt about it whatsoever.

We have had an eight year long reign of the most incompetent administration in U.S. history.

Berg IS a 9/11 truther as well. Which really comes as no surprise.

One topic (PE Obama's citizenship) is complete utter bullshit. The other...well... let's just say if you believe our government hasn't lied to us at least once, I have some property to sell you.

Berg got that claim from Neo-Confederate "Judah Benjamin" over at the PUMAblog "TexasDarlin" The funny thing is Berg sites the Nationality Act of 1940 and 1952, but the act actually says that no action of the parents shall affect the child's US citizenship (the claim his is mom lost both their citizenships when she married Lolo Soetoro.)

Berg is basically trying to claim that Indonesian law (or at least his reading of it) trumps US law for purposes of establishing US citizenship

In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.

Update, Nov. 1: The director of Hawaii’s Department of Health confirmed Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu.
Analysis
Update Nov. 1: The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

Fukino also was quoted by several other news organizations. The Honolulu Advertiser quoted Fukino as saying the agency had been bombarded by requests, and that the registrar of statistics had even been called in at home in the middle of the night.

Honolulu Advertiser, Nov. 1 2008: "This has gotten ridiculous," state health director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said yesterday. "There are plenty of other, important things to focus on, like the economy, taxes, energy." . . . Will this be enough to quiet the doubters? "I hope so," Fukino said. "We need to get some work done."

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

... but if this was ever a forgery then there are too many people in Hawaii who are obviously complicit on all this... like whole agencies for starters.

As you said, nothings going to convince them. Moons made out of cheese, earths flat, Obama not American. Check, check and... check.

Mark.

All you can get is a copy, usually with a raised seal for authentication.

Sorry, I cannot read mounds and mounds of threads to find the answer.

Please just say... it's still pending, or rejected.

Thanks

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7957504


No cert in Obama Case.

The SCOTUS orders for today came out several hours ago, and cert was not granted in this case.


I still do not understand if this means they refused to hear the case or not ....

As long as he can get us out of this mess GWB created.

But those "show us your real birth certificate" loons are really stretching it.

Thankfully, all this will be moot after 1-20-09.

it invites no logical analysis.

I don't know why people dont think Obama was born in the US...he obviously was. But Obama should just show his actual certificate not a copy to shut republicans up. Heck, imagine how bad they would look if everyone found out that they were wrong like that! It would be hilarious!

It's good enough to get you a passport. It's good enough to verify your citizenship for employment.

If you mean a piece of paper from 1961, what makes you think he has one? I don't. Every time I need one, I pay the fee and get a certified document from the state, which is freshly printed and embossed. And, even if I was president-elect or the president, I would not be empowered to change the relevant regulations of the State of Delaware controlling the maintenance and issuance of data by the dept. of vital statistics. Freepers have weird fantasies that Obama can tell the state of Hawaii what to do.

They used to run photocopies from fiche and emboss those, but just about every state issues what you have already seen. And, yes, scanning things, resizing them, and formatting them to put on a website introduces image artifacts, even if two people are starting with the same source image. Your friend Polarik - whose ramblings you don't even understand - is ultimately a moron. Yes, people manipulate images of things when they put them on their websites. They adjust contrast, brightness, hue, threshold, palette, and all sorts of parameters.

And when you say "show his actual certificate" please be specific as to whom you want him to "show" it to. You personally?

I don't think public officials, as a general matter, should waive standing or jurisdiction in every frivolous suit that comes along the pike. That would be stupid and a waste of time. You think Bush should have personally shown up for those stupid 9/11 "inside job" lawsuits and given testimony? That's like feeding seagulls, my friend.

:shrug:

have repeatedly stated.

Get over it.

To them Obama has already been proven ineligible. Any outcome other than Obama going to prison will be seen as a travesty of justice and evidence the SCOTUS has been bought off by the new Hitler.

Here is a quote from one of the cultists:

"If the court ignored it and didn't issue a certiorari, they are no longer reputable in my opinion in upholding the constitution."

Uh-oh, the jig is up....

Place of Birth should read: Kenyatown, Africa since most freepers (and a certain brain dead vp candidate) believe that Africa is a country. ;)

Did you make that, or did you find it somewhere? :rofl:

;-)

They banned anyone who uses full sentences, and I think they are beginning to suspect anyone who doesn't simply grunt and throw feces.

I've noticed.

This shows that thrreads like this aren't as ridiculous as first thought.

:D

They will never be satisfied, so it's best to ignore them.