"Evidence" from the birth certificate conspiracy, my analysis

page: 3
40
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
You dis info agents are losing. Your king is going to prison.




posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   


Originally posted by Southern Guardian[.......If any of those individuals behind the birth certificate conspiracy are serious about the matter of the president being ineligible, meaning this isn’t some joke to you, I strongly recommend you read the OP and join in the thread.



The agenda of the Obama "birthers" is not truth, their agenda is simply to feed and prolong the controversy and emotions forever, regardless that the truth disproves their whole position.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Good OP! A S&F for your hard work, but the arguments will continue until the Long Form is released to the public. There are some serious questions that could be put to rest if they would release it. There will be no consensus on this subject until some serious questions are put to rest.

If in fact Obama was born in Kenya, the laws on the books at the time of his birth stated if a child is born abroad and one parent was a U.S. Citizen, which would have been his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother would have had to live ten (10) years in the United States, five (5) of which were after the age of fourteen (14). At the time of Obama’s birth, his mother was only eighteen (18) and therefore did not meet the residency requirements under the law to give her son (Obama) U.S. Citizenship. The
laws in effect at the time of Obama’s birth prevented U.S. Citizenship at birth of children born abroad to a U.S. Citizen parent and a non-citizen parent, if the citizen parent was under the age of nineteen (19) at the time of the birth of the child. Obama’s mother did not qualify under the law on the
books to register Obama as a “natural born” citizen.

Section 301(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27, 1952, 66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S.C. §1401(b), Matter of S-F- and G-, 2 I & N Dec. 182 (B.I.A.) approved (Att’y Gen. 1944). Obama would have only been naturalized and a Naturalized citizen is not qualified and/or eligible to run for Office of the President. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section I, Clause 4.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Elepheagle
I will be getting married soon and they will be requiring of me my SHORT FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE to verify that I am indeed a U.S. born citizen who is who I say I am.

That's all.


Are you admitting to believing that serving as the President of The United States should require the same authentication of identity as getting married?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
pretty thorough...

and i must admit you are good at giving responses... i'll leave it at that for now.

would you please address this in your research?

www.israelnationalnews.com...



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Didnt Obama sit on the board of the company who runs factcheck.org?

I guess that wasnt in your research you idiot @#$!@#$

You're losing battle spook.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I see a bunch of people who are bitter that their guy lost and they're grasping at straws to try to "fix" it, even if it'll never happen.

Why don't you folks who doubt, post YOUR birth certificate so I can see that you're qualified to actually vote? I know I'd be satisfied with your argument that you're qualified to ask for his birth certificate at that point.

That doesn't mean he has to prove anything to YOU though. His right to privacy is just as valid as any of yours. I'm pretty sure that people with more resources and connections than you have tried to "invalidate" the election and he's still the President of the United States.

My hope is that people would put as much energy into building up this country as they do in trying to tear it down, we'd live in a better society.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Why did Obama's Grandmother , siste rand brother say he was bone in Kenya did they know difference between Hawaii and Kenya. Did they not know it mattered.

That birth certificate just says he was born not where.

They can't even decide which hospital he was born in, maybe the first one said was not even built yet.

Why hide everything about your life unless you have something to hide, they say Oh it's private, if your President of the United States nothing is private, what's to hide?

What did he do what's he hidding, that one guy said he was crack-head fag I don't know but those crack-heads are weird.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
wow the government spooks are really scared about this.

Is this a coincidence because Orly lawsuit broke yesterday worldwide?

Your corrupt government is going down.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I just dug through all member profiles that are supporting Obama and i only found 2 that were members before 2009, all others have joined ATS from Feb 2009 until now.

Hmmmm



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I've been going around and around with Whatyouknow in regard to the issue of "legal standing", in this thread.

It's my assertation that the cases filed in regard to President Obama's place of birth were NOT heard, but dismissed due to not having "standing" to file them.

I also believe that the only body that the courts do recognize as having legal standing is Congress, and the SCOTUS. Obviously, both are supportive of the President and are not going to file suit themselves.

Let's examine more precisely what "standing" means. It does NOT mean, as some have inferred, a lack of evidence.



Standing, sometimes referred to as standing to sue, is the name of the federal law doctrine that focuses on whether a prospective plaintiff can show that some personal legal interest has been invaded by the defendant. It is not enough that a person is merely interested as a member of the general public in the resolution of the dispute. The person must have a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.

The standing doctrine is derived from the U.S. Constitution's Article III provision that federal courts have the power to hear "cases" arising under federal law and "controversies" involving certain types of parties. In the most fundamental application of the philosophy of judicial restraint, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to forbid the rendering of advisory opinions.

Once a federal court determines that a real case or controversy exists, it must then ascertain whether the parties to the litigation have standing. The Supreme Court has developed an elaborate body of principles defining the nature and scope of standing. Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed. A defendant must be the party responsible for perpetrating the alleged legal wrong.


standing

The person must have a personal stakein the outcome of the controversy.

Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed.

So, it's a matter of the courts interpreting standing as an inability of those filing suit to demonstrate damages.

Now, how can any suit against a sitting President be brought to court? It apparently can't happen, even though it seems clear that IF the President wasn't a naturally-born citizen, that the PEOPLE have been damaged.

For the People by the People............ unless you have the iron to quash it. If the People, the rightful and legal citizens cannot challenge the State, then that is NOT Due Process. That is a Presidential coup. Thus, the POTUS will always be able to keep hidden his long form.





[edit on 15/7/09 by argentus]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by epete22
You dis info agents are losing. Your king is going to prison.


lol-- yeah. How did you find out about Our plans to make Obama the King?? Who put you onto us? Was it someone in our secret NWO club??



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by epete22
I just dug through all member profiles that are supporting Obama and i only found 2 that were members before 2009, all others have joined ATS from Feb 2009 until now.

Hmmmm


So if that's how you qualify your statements that would mean that seniority gives your comments more weight? That doesn't seem very democratic.

Or does that merely disqualify MY statements because you oppose mine and I haven't been here as long?

Quite a welcoming bunch you are. I'd been hesitating commenting just because of those comments, but now that I see I can just ignore people here, it makes me feel a little better if things get too "hot".



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by grahag
 



My hope is that people would put as much energy into building up this country as they do in trying to tear it down, we'd live in a better society.


That is my wish as well. As it stands, this issue is polarizing the nation, rather than galvanizing it. If President Obama is in posession of the document that can cure this situation, why wouldn't he show it?

The citizens of the U.S., more than ever, (IMO) have a need to work together, united with the POTUS they elected. If he has subjugated the Constitution to get into office, the longer it goes on, the greater the division. If he has not, the simple showing of the document will make this issue go away, and we can all go on with the business of repairing the damage to the U.S. systems and economy.

In a very real sense, it is a global issue.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
The NWO folk know they can pull Obama from office if they desire by merely showing he is not a legal US Citizen. This is how they 'control' him. If the gets out of line or chooses to abide by his Conscience (if existent)....and neglect the will of the NWO folk...they pull is papers out and remove him from office.

Obama's first job out of college was working for Henry Kissenger...the Kiss-enger of Death. This should be warning to everyone. Who financed his education? Any answers? This is a topic that is still in debate though your intellect and thorough examination should determine the Truth?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by livinginacardboardbox
 
Yes that was good link, it would be great if someone could dig up airline records of Obama's mothers flight to Kenya in Aug of 61, that would really sink his ship cause it would prove his mother was in Kenya at time of his birth.

I myself wondered how how he ended up be born in Kenya, his mother was visting the inlaws, but what's the big deal it's just a technicality he should of be born on U.S. soil.
Maybe they can make Kenya the 51st state of these here United States, that will fix it, won't it.



[edit on 15-7-2009 by googolplex]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by havanaja
 



The agenda of the Obama "birthers" is not truth, their agenda is simply to feed and prolong the controversy and emotions forever, regardless that the truth disproves their whole position.


I am not a "birther". I despise that term. My agenda is the truth, regardless of the outcome. It's a valid question with an ever-growing amount of evidence. It's not a frivolous question, and I don't have any goals of prolonging the controversy, nor of attacking the President.

I want the truth, and I'm not alone in that wish. Simple. Simple question. Simple solution.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

There is one way for the administration to then find it necessary to release the birth certificate, that will most probably happen when those behind this birth certificate conspiracy actually come up with the solid proof they need to indicate Obama was born off American soil


How about the fact that his Grandmother said he was born in Kenya?

-E-



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by epete22
 


now how did i know this one would be brought up so your implying what?.. that all obama supporters on ats are?.......
and that they are all disinfo agents ,cia, blah blah blah im sorry but come on, be serious here. Just because someone opposes your views DOES NOT make then cia,mib,disinfo agents and all the other letters in the alphabet. to me that is just a lil tad paranoid even to think like that.

And for clarification on whether African is a race what the heck does it matter? seriously here in the UK we get census forms etc and i have seen many people put African down as what they are etc does that mean that they are all hiding something? As someone said previously its starting to sound like sour grapes from people who voted for the other guy and that certain people don't like the fact there is a black dude in the white house.

whilst there is alot of other more serious issues arising over the world that deserves a hell of a lot more attention people are worried about the presidents birth certificate.

The state feels there is no case to answer, his short certificate was authenticated by the correct people but still people wanna see his full certificate and by not showing it means that he is what? an alien from mars? seriously people get a grip, i for one wouldn't show my full certificate to anyone who isn't in authority to even see it, i dont want the common joe to see all my details and my parents personal details what right do they have to see it? none.

but one thing is certain even if he did show his long certificate etc etc the conspiracies would never die, the new one would be that its a forgery.

people need to chill and conspire about things that actually matter in this world.

and for clarification i am not American, im from the UK and therefor not a supporter or any president so cant be called one



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by googolplex
 


President Obama was born in 1961 -- at least according to the majority of the limited information available.





new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join