It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Major General says president's eligibility needs proof

page: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   
The people who do not demand transparency, like all that are defending the fact he will not produce a "vault" copy, are the exact reasons this government will never change. Why can't we appease everyone? All anyone wants from him is proof,.. honesty, I don't care if he is pres. but I will not stand being lied to. satisfy our request and all's good.

Think about it!

[edit on 27-2-2009 by xyankee]




posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
All anyone wants from him is proof of honesty, I don't care if he is pres. but I will not stand being lied to. satisfy our request and all's good.

"Proof of honesty" is probably impossible for any human being to provide.
Your assumption that you're being lied to won't change, no matter what documentation was provided.

why can't yall satisfy the "request" of the other 290 million of us, and drop this nonsensical argument?



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by xyankee
I think That Mr. Obama and his supporters should be the "better man" and provide what ever is needed to satisfy the 300,000 people who would like proof. I feel as the president it is his responsibility to keep the peace. THERE IS NO ARGUMENT THAT CAN DEFEND A REQUEST AS EASY AS THIS!

If for no other reason than peace. Is this man that arrogant?

Also, if I was a supporter, I would be angry at him for not putting an end to this. IT WILL NOT GO AWAY! I Think that he is putting himself in danger by not fairly addressing this! The more it gets blown off, the more the pot boils.


The problem is that this will never end with the CTers.
If he presents a birth certificate, they'll just say it's forged.
If her produces witnesses they'll say the witnesses are lying.
If he produces hospital records, of course they'll also say they're faked.

People still think we never landed on the moon for god sake and Cris Angel is a real magic being. You can't cater to those types of people.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Averysmallfoxx
 


Did he say something racist?

Insisting on using the President's middle name is a new phenomenon. 99% of the time I hear it, it is connected to vitriolic criticism. It's use is obviously intended to emphasize his heritage...so, when it's used in the context of a political criticism, I will usually interpret it as a play to xenophobic sensibilities. We can sugar coat that phenomenon all day, but we all know, when we hear people use his middle name, what they're trying to get at...so I'd answer that question by saying yes, he did say something racist. His syntax betrays his true feelings on the issue, as does his insistence on beating a dead horse...



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
they aren't allowed to question the son of God.. All that question must be burned at the stake.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by dankai
WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY! WE LIVE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!!!!!! SO WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS A GREAT SERVICE TO WHAT WE ARE!!!!!


A minority of racists and sore-losers are attempting to subvert and twist the Constitution to overturn the results of the election. That is not a service to the Constitution. They are demanding something the Constitution makes no provisions for; the Constitution does not say someone must provide their original birth-certificate to prove they are a natural born citizen. That minority is seeking to impose its will on the majority who voted for Obama (I was not one of them, by the by); that will disenfranchise 69 million people which would be a dangerous blow to our system.



you are a failure. racism is over get over yourself. a black man finally won, now go back into your hole troll.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by oldgoat
One major thing obamanites skip over is the fact that Hawaii routinely allowed foreign children to obtain certificates of live birth.



The "Certification of Live Birth" posted on the Internet actually doesn't confirm a birth location. "[Hawaii] statute 138 allows foreign born children of HI residents to get HI [Certificates of Live Birth] and get them based on a statement of one relative only," she said. She also said Hawaiian officials, while they confirmed a birth certificate exists, did not exclude the possibility it was "one obtained for a foreign born child." She also cited Obama's immigration to Indonesia at age 5, when he was considered an Indonesian citizen.


Since we're stereotyping people and lumping them all together, let me start with this: One major thing right-wing extremists skip over is the fact that "Statute 138" doesn't even address birth registrations, or birth certificates, at all...

A look at Hawaii's Statutes reveals that 138 pertains to:


[CHAPTER 138]
ENHANCED 911 SERVICES FOR MOBILE PHONES


Apparently the attorney (Orly Taitz) advising this gentleman (Scott Easterling) doesn't even know what statutes are relevant to her case.

Care to try again?



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
This is the dumbest conspiracy thread ever. President Obama was born in Hawaii. You don't think Karl Rove and the rest of the right wing power brokers would have loved to prove Obama was ineligible during the election? They tried. His birth certificate is valid. He was sworn in. Twice. Case closed.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by xyankee
 


BS. If they wanted honesty from him regarding his birth here they would have been satisfied with the state approved birth certificate he presented, the confirmation of the state health officials, the two years his been running in which his opponent, both of which have spent a year digging dirt on him have found nothing, have not questioned his birth right, the reality of the fact that in that 2 years the agencies of the CIA,NSA and the FBI have not been able to come up with a thing to question his eligibility as president.

So please... cut the BS... this isnt about "whaaa all we want is honesty" anymore, it is about the new democratic elected president folks on the rightwing fringe have spent for 1 years calling a muslim, anti-christ, commie etc and now his president but the conservatives cant hack it.

And then folks here go about how "whaaa i need to show my birth certificate to get a licence whaaa", 95% of americas use the certificate of live birth to do that, the birth certificate you folks always brag about that is used in general is not the longer form birth certificate, it is the shorter form. Seriously who the hell uses their long form birth certificate to get a licence or what not? Who the hell wants to present ID that tells how you were born, whether your head came out first or what color your ass was... seriously who would use that as evidence? Nobody.

So cut the "whaaa we just want honesty" bull... this fringe conspiracy has gone beyond any reason.

[edit on 27-2-2009 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Your post is in response to mine? I think we're in agreement on the issue...



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by nicholaswa
 


sorry wrong person.

2nd line.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by nicholaswa
 


Because, as a country of the free, under the constitution, If even ONE single voter would like more proof to be sure of who they are voting for; they should have it, PERIOD! I know if it was me, Id say "sure here you are, can I help answer any other questions you have"! That is what is right, common curtsy, not hiding information.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by xyankee
Because, as a country of the free, under the constitution, If even ONE single voter would like more proof to be sure of who they are voting for; they should have it, PERIOD!


Can you point out to us where in the Constitution it allows you, one single voter as you put it, look at Obama's vital records?

Thank you.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nicholaswa
 


Meh I think your just making a play on it because you already feel a certain resentment on the issue so your going to push the little details to entertain the assumption that a man is something you cant confirm or deny because thats what you want to believe so bad. Syntax or not he didn't say anything RACIST you just feel he intended to and intentions just like opinions are not tangible evidence of anything.
Dont get me wrong here, I am not racist and I think the idea of someone from a different race being at the helm is an idea that should have happened long ago. How long can White people sit there and say they are NOT oppressors when no one but white men have won the presidential election since the beggining? I just think the timing sucks and maybe that it was all setup so that after a DISMAL 8 years behind the worst president (in my opinion) in American history, change like BIG change (like a Black President or a Women President) would sound so good who could resist?? A bit coincidental (and by that I mean NOT) that all of a sudden after generations upon generations of WHITE presidents, all of a sudden the PTB just grant a black man the presidency "just because". In my opinion a lot of if not all our presidents have been TOOLS and perhaps with the exception of Kennedy....But you see what happens when your not a "TOOL" is what I think Kennedy's assasination was about and that said, how did Obama get to where he was before he had realized his ambitions without major help?


[edit on 27-2-2009 by Averysmallfoxx]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by xyankee
 


Really? Under the Constitution, huh? Where does it specify that your rights as a voter include making unreasonable requests like that? You have a right not to vote for him, because you think he's (insert term here). You have a right to dislike him, but you certainly have no right to demand an amendment to the election process, just because you have a strong suspicion that he is a (insert term here).

That's like saying I should have a right to approve the budget before I pay taxes...would be nice, but the world doesn't revolve around me, nor should it stop because I have a question.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
I'm thinking he was thinking in an IDEAL situation yknow? Because I dont think that is something we WOULD get even if we HAD it in the constitution. *sigh*....



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Here we go again with another case of dreadful dogma riding on the show-me-the-birth-certificate-for-it-is-written . . . medieval chant.

Since when have the human abilities been influenced by the place of birth alone?
Gee, I got to leave Paris right now and go back home to Phoenix, Arizona to give birth, so my son wouldn't be born naturally stupid or something.

Of course, the kid is born stupid, not because of being delivered in Val-De-Grace hospital, but due to the maternal genetic inheritance.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


You are completely wrong and obviously never been in the Millitary.

A retired General holds all kinds of power. The kind of power that can bring 10's of thousands to the point, active or not.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by j2000
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


You are completely wrong and obviously never been in the Millitary.

A retired General holds all kinds of power. The kind of power that can bring 10's of thousands to the point, active or not.


Thank you for that very pointedly defense of my logic on that particular issue, star'd.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Sounds to me like your the one crying; obviously, you have no idea what your saying or why. I could care less who makes it to office. White, black, yellow, red, male, female, as long as they can do the job, and meet the criteria. If you read the reason that there are questions, you, as a patriot, should also want to make sure he is who he says. It would be better to question and be proven wrong, than have to find out the hard way.

On the outside chance that he usurped the office, can we charge all that hindered justice? You should not have a problem with that since your so confident your right.
Right?



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join