John Woodman Challenges Corsi and Company to a Debate

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

I am challenging Jerome Corsi, Mara Zebest, Karl Denninger, Doug Vogt, Paul Irey, and Tom Harrison to publicly debate the evidence regarding Barack Obama's birth certificate.

The proposed debate is to take place on Mark Gillar's Tea Party Power Hour Show. Sorry, RC, to pass your Reality Check show by; this all came about when Mara Zebest misrepresented on Gillar's show what I had said in my book.

Anyway, I thought folks here might be interested. The debate is proposed to take place next month.

John Woodman
Author, Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud? A Computer Guy Examines the Evidence for Forgery
Obamabirthbook.com

raicha · **Posted:** Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:50 pm

I thought they refused to debate you back in October?

http://rcradioshow.blogspot.com/2011/10 ... te-me.html

mimi · **Posted:** Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:50 pm

Please let us know when everything is confirmed.

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

It was Paul Irey who refused to debate me. Now I'm challenging pretty much the whole team.

And rumor has it Irey is supposed to be coming out with something new. And maybe he won't feel so on the spot if it's not just him. So who knows? Maybe he'll change his mind.

jtmunkus · **Joined:** Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm **Posts:** 3516

Still waiting for Irey to explain why any forger would even consider using 23 different typewriters. Is this to dupe the public into thinking the forgery is real? There is no possible scenario in which this theory could possibly make sense.

But they are afraid of the truth, because they already know the truth.

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2128

He explained it during his book tour. Because Obama is committing massive fraud and needed to keep the whole birth certificate forgery thing a secret, he couldn't put out the word that he needed skilled forgers to help him to continue his usurpation. He had to settle for bumbling fourth-rate forgers who made lots of mistakes--such as all the different fonts--and put in lots of clues to let people know that this was a forgery, such as the smiley face in the "a."

In this situation, apparently, the government spy agencies--who are working very hard to help Obama overthrow our democracy by doing things like monitoring butterdezillion's computer and hacking Orly's email account--were not available to the President to help produce a competent forgery.

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=5870&start=425#p247341

jtmunkus · **Joined:** Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm **Posts:** 3516

Thank you. That makes sense.

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

My approach was to take all questions seriously and try to consider all possibilities for evidence of forgery. In this context, it was certainly plausible that if a forgery had taken place, one might be able to detect some evidence for it by closely examining the typewritten characters.

Contrary to Paul Irey's claims, I really found no compelling evidence in that direction at all, however.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Sat Dec 03, 2011 8:00 am

John

I don't take any offense that you chose to debate the crowd on Gillar's show and I hope it happens. The logistics of that would be interesting unless it is arranged as a series of 1 on 1 debates.

I believe Gillar is a Birther. He professed to be open minded when he had Foggy on his show but you will notice that the show is no where to be found on his archive. He said at the time the show would be up in a day or two and it never was posted. He records his show for editing and posts them later so there would be no chance for listeners to call. People like Corsi would never dare take unscreened calls.

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Sat Dec 03, 2011 8:44 am

Reality Check wrote:

John

I don't take any offense that you chose to debate the crowd on Gillar's show and I hope it happens. The logistics of that would be interesting unless it is arranged as a series of 1 on 1 debates.

I believe Gillar is a Birther. He professed to be open minded when he had Foggy on his show but you will notice that the show is no where to be found on his archive. He said at the time the show would be up in a day or two and it never was posted. He records his show for editing and posts them later so there would be no chance for listeners to call. People like Corsi would never dare take unscreened calls.

Exactly like I've said gillar is a pussy. He talks a lot of shit but when he's confronted he backs down. He ran away from the amazon discussion boards for corsis book after many posters showed him the flaws in his argument. He dared me to find a lie in one of his shows with the supposed birthers experts on YouTube. I pointed out over 30 lies in the first ten minutes and he abandoned responding. Like RC said he had foggy on to debate and got destroyed so thoroughly he never posted the show

Reality Check · **Posted:** Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:00 am

I don't think Mark Gillar "heavily edited" the show with Foggy. He just quietly made it disappear. It was posted for a day or two and the parts he cut out were mostly where he was having issues with Skype on BTR. I can speak from experience that there is an ongoing issue with Skype and BTR that they have not resolved. When I start getting heavy distortion I have to disconnect and call back in to the show. Foggy would have a much better handle on the differences in what was cut from the show Gillar ran.

Andrea Shea King is another story. Her editing of the show where Foggy called to ask Greg Lakin and Marco Ciavolino some tough questions was obviously intended to remove content.

When I PM'ed Mark Gillar back in August he wrote back

Gillar wrote:

I didn't delete it, but am not actively promoting it at this time either. My show is not the "birther show" it is the Tea Party Power Hour. The interview with Foggy will be put back on the page once a few more shows have taken place.

At the time he was trying to promote a debate between Foggy and Jerome Corsi. That debate never happened of course. Maybe he would have listed the show again if the debate had occurred. As for his excuse that "his show is not a Birther show", well he has three episodes listed in one month that are all Birther shows, two with Orly Taitz and one with a collection of interviews with Corsi, Sheriff Joe, Susan Daniels, Dean Haskins, and a group of what he calls "computer experts" on the birth certificate. It sounds like Gillar is still going full bore Birther to me.

Cooter · **Joined:** Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:01 pm **Posts:** 32

jtmunkus wrote:

Thank you. That makes sense.

I see what you did there.

Sequoia32 · **Posted:** Sat Dec 03, 2011 6:23 pm

Reality Check wrote:

I don't think Mark Gillar "heavily edited" the show with Foggy. He just quietly made it disappear.

I can tell you that he edited out the part where his racism slipped in.

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Sat Dec 03, 2011 8:36 pm

Reality Check wrote:

I don't think Mark Gillar "heavily edited" the show with Foggy. He just quietly made it disappear. It was posted for a day or two and the parts he cut out were mostly where he was having issues with Skype on BTR. I can speak from experience that there is an ongoing issue with Skype and BTR that they have not resolved. When I start getting heavy distortion I have to disconnect and call back in to the show. Foggy would have a much better handle on the differences in what was cut from the show Gillar ran.

Andrea Shea King is another story. Her editing of the show where Foggy called to ask Greg Lakin and Marco Ciavolino some tough questions was obviously intended to remove content.

When I PM'ed Mark Gillar back in August he wrote back

Gillar wrote:

I didn't delete it, but am not actively promoting it at this time either. My show is not the "birther show" it is the Tea Party Power Hour. The interview with Foggy will be put back on the page once a few more shows have taken place.

At the time he was trying to promote a debate between Foggy and Jerome Corsi. That debate never happened of course. Maybe he would have listed the show again if the debate had occurred. As for his excuse that "his show is not a Birther show", well he has three episodes listed in one month that are all Birther shows, two with Orly Taitz and one with a collection of interviews with Corsi, Sheriff Joe, Susan Daniels, Dean Haskins, and a group of what he calls "computer experts" on the birth certificate. It sounds like Gillar is still going full bore Birther to me.

He's a jack ass coward. I doubt we'll see it listed again for a long time. Every time I hear his name mentioned it is in regard to birtherism.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:15 am

Irey refused Woodman's debate challenge:

Quote:

John,

Why didn’t you mention the venue for this debate? The last time we spoke you were having the fantasy that Hannity on Fox would host the debate.

Again I must explain to you that any bad news about Obama is blacked out on major media. When I say bad news … I am talking about the crimes he committed or his bi-sexual history … etc. The media controls existed long before Obama came on the scene and until he did … I never would have believed that major media would protect anyone in politics like they have with Obama.

This is not bias. It is daily media control by wire. Editors must wire in daily for approval … to the fed … any story the public reads or views on major media TV or print. The public will never be allowed to hear any debate that we might have on any major media venue. Ask Lou Dobbs who now gives us only financial news on FOX … was fired from CNN … and got a settlement for that. If he quit … as claimed … CNN would not have had to give him a dime. Who took the shot at his house? Three days later the report was that he resigned. Why can’t FOX use him for political news … since that was his 30 year experience? Of course all this happened to him because he brought up the subject of Obama’s birth certificate on his show. The U.S. government fired him John … and prevents him from being a political reporter now.

What I’m saying is that the best proof of Obama’s forged birth certificate is the major media blackout of any discussion of the matter. Herman Cain got roasted for an old affair and inappropriate remarks made to women years ago. That served two purposes for the controlled media. It makes us think that no one can run for president if they have a checkered past … because of the “free to print whatever they like media” and it pretends that Obama is clean as a whistle because no such scandals were published when he ran.
...

The rest is here

So the real proof the birth certificate is a forgery is that the media won't cover complete kooks like Corsi, Vogt and Irey? =))

Irey puts forth his Kennedy assassination theories too and John comments.

kate520 · **Posted:** Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:20 am

Where is irey getting the notion that the fed has total control of the media? Same place he gets his birfer "facts"?

kimba · **Joined:** Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:24 pm **Posts:** 6637

kate520 wrote:

Where is irey getting the notion that the fed has total control of the media? Same place he gets his birfer "facts"?

It's just silliness. They can't get over that there's no dirt on Obama because there's no dirt. They don't think if McCain's or even Hillary's oppo research teams came up with something they wouldn't have used it already? McCain was desperate 'round about mid- to late-October 2008. If he'd had something, he'd have used it. I am tiring of birthers and the way they try to smear my President.

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

Joseph Farah and Jerome Corsi: "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?"

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

mimi wrote:

Please let us know when everything is confirmed.

We have a debate scheduled for Saturday, January 21, on Mark Gillar's Tea Party Power Hour. Mark has told me that Mara Zebest, Karl Denninger and Tom Harrison would show up, but that Jerome Corsi wouldn't be there. At this time, I haven't heard a reason for Corsi not to be there. I have publicly challenged both Jerome Corsi and Joseph Farah to show up for the debate. This was done at the WorldNetDaily web site and at my blog rather than trying to call them as it wasn't regular business hours. If I don't hear from Farah and Corsi soon I will attempt to contact them more directly.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:02 pm

Is this live or will it be recorded for later broadcast that might allow for editing?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:09 pm

jmw wrote:

At this time, I haven't heard a reason for Corsi not to be there. I have publicly challenged both Jerome Corsi and Joseph Farah to show up for the debate. This was done at the WorldNetDaily web site and at my blog rather than trying to call them as it wasn't regular business hours. If I don't hear from Farah and Corsi soon I will attempt to contact them more directly.

You are really naive. If it won't make them money (and it won't), neither Corsi nor Farah will be there.

The applicable rule that involves those in the media can be most easily explained when dealing with talk show hosts. Talk shows are produced, and the producers have a couple of rules, one of which is to try to keep it interesting (with interesting guests). But above all else, any guest and any discussion must make the host look good. That is rule 1 and it must never be violated. Any producer who brings in a guest who embarrasses the host gets canned. (It happened to Sean Hannity when his producer thought it would be a good idea for Hannity to interview Robert Gibbs.)

And so it is with Farah and Corsi. Anything that interferes with their making money is anathema to them. They won't show up because they would be shown to be charlatans and liars. They need to stay in the protective cocoon of their echo chambers, and continue to "look good" to their gullible audiences.

Just how do you think you are going to make Corsi and Farah look good?

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

Reality Check wrote:

Is this live or will it be recorded for later broadcast that might allow for editing?

My understanding is that it will be presented live, and the recording will be available, unedited, for later listening.

jmw · **Joined:** Wed May 18, 2011 3:57 am **Posts:** 25

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

You are really naive.

That may well be. I generally try to assume the best of people, and I try to give people the benefit of a doubt where possible.

Nonetheless, I don't necessarily expect Farah or Corsi to show up. But if they don't, then I can publicly point out the fact that they were quite clearly challenged, and explicitly refused to appear and defend their bogus claims.

Plutodog · **Posted:** Mon Dec 19, 2011 5:56 am

And they will likely clearly explain that your arguments are bogus and not worthy of their time. It doesn't have to be true to impress their readers. That's what they want to hear and they will buy it completely. It's part of the definition of birferz.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:22 am

John, I am glad you are doing this and wish you best of luck. It is kind of funny how these "experts" have all assumed that title gladly and without reservation even though none of them qualify as "experts" in anything, even their claimed field of experience in most cases. It reminds me that in my field we used to say an expert was anyone more than 50 miles from home or in some cases a little drip under pressure.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

John Woodman Challenges Corsi and Company to a Debate

Who is online