Are Anarchists behind the Birth Certificate question?

There have been some reasonable explanations for the Kenya question on other threads which suggest the Kenyan (not US) paternal naturalization laws are responsible for the claim for Kenyan citizenship. That in no way voids the US laws which he apparently qualify for since he passed a security check no doubt at some point. No good can come from these kind of statements which erode the faith in a united government. Do you have a better idea that won't involve some kind of civil unrest due to a complete lack of faith in your leadership. You can't polish a terd and that is what this man (your POTUS) was left with. If at any time the legitimacy of the executive branch should have been questioned it was the previous one. It doesn't matter who is the president right now, the forces that are driving your economy and lifestyles down the tubes have been at play for a long time and nobody did anything about it. He's the guy that was there when the camel's back broke. I don't know it just sounds like a Anarchist to shout "foreign interloper" as a rally cry.

Well, I think first and foremost people who think constitutional law is worth upholding question whether he was born in the USA or not.

I don't think it really makes a bit of difference if he's not -- because he has already been vetted by our system. So, he probably is a natural born citizen, but even if he's not, the senate is not going to impeach him. At least not anytime soon.

Either way, I think what matters most are his actions. So far, he's failed that test. I don't care where he was born. Just what he's doing as president.

It's just a bunch of trolls and a whole lot of stupid people behind it. They have been proved ignorant on numerous occasions but they still carry on talking to themselves. It is so pathetic I feel embarrassed for them.

reply to post by Kaytagg


No doubt the constitution matters, it's just funny to hear people make a big deal about this particular constitutional question
when the last administration did tonnes to violate and erode your constitution (wiretap, torture, PATRIOT ACT). Arguments about his effectiveness as a leader based on his policy is totally reasonable and pretty much inevitable with any President of the USA, but that is different from rallying people to deny the authenticity of your government which is where these threads about birth certificates seem to lead.

Ummm no. Anarchists are just a scapegoat in this thread.

I am an "anarchist" at heart. Meaning, I think it is the "perfect" way to be. However, to do such a thing on this earth would be absolutely stupid while we have evil. Anarchy would only be possible among a people who have no evil. Obviously we have evil in this world, and so it is not possible(or atleast a good idea).

Among good people with anarchy, you leave your house for 20 years, come back and it's still there. Among bad people with anarchy, you come back and you've been robbed and so forth. Don't need cops if you don't have crime etc. If you have crime, you need cops.

The founding fathers recognized this, and called government a necessary evil, but an evil nonetheless. Which is a reason behind "limited government", to limit the evil in hopes of being for protection.

So while anarchy would be best in a "perfect" society, I would be very weary of anyone claiming to want that on earth today. Most likely anyone who make such a claim towards anarchy is a "double agent" type. Agent not so much meaning government exactly, but it is typical of people claiming to anarchists as a means of bringing in a new form of government, as the anarchy is obviously not really feasible in our society.

So what happens is they would speak/promote anarchy as a means of getting rid of the current government, and they will pretend to be "good", but they are really just trying to weaken the current government and disband it. Once it is gone, then they come in and bring in their new(usually worse) form of government - which the people will welcome once the evil starts running loose.

As such, even if it was by people claiming to be anarchist, I would seriously doubt it. Anarchist are just used as a scapegoat for a bigger agenda in most cases I've seen. The fact the people are organized behind an agenda should tip you off that they aren't "anarchist".

I personally don't give a crap about Obama's birth place. I only wish that was my complaint against him was so petty. But he's just another puppet speaking hollow words and manipulation IMO.

reply to post by badmedia


well said

reply to post by badmedia


I don't mean to scapegoat anyone, Sure if we were all balanced and moral beings we wouldn't need to be so organized and we could enjoy the freedom of true anarchy, my personal experience with anarchy is the violent, mindless type who like to cause a fuss. Too bad more anarchists aren't like you.

Anarchy isn't possible as long as standing armies are willing to go to war on behalf of their elite ruler(s).

Originally posted by Kaytagg
Anarchy isn't possible as long as standing armies are willing to go to war on behalf of their elite ruler(s).

It would be a great step forward if the US army was being used at the discretion of the will of the people not corporate lobbying forces. Restructuring the legislative body to allow for this has nothing to do with this man's birth certificate though.

It's just a distraction and those who are falling for it are playing right into the hands of pundits such as Hannity, Rush and Glenn Beck. They get their minions all worked up and those minions start buying every single word that comes out of their mouths.

It doesn't matter who the president is, we are still screwed and if you replace him with someone else? More of the same.

You don't become president unless you're compromised. Clinton had his women problems. Bush, sr his secret CIA dealings. Reagan had his astrology. Obama has his birth certificate. As soon as Obama stops doing what the elite want, it will be two flicks of a lamb's tail, and the problem of his birth certificate will be all over the mainstream media like mj's death. I don't think the elite will play this card unless it's something mighty important they want him to do, such as nuke Iran.

Originally posted by American_Soviets
You don't become president unless you're compromised. Clinton had his women problems. Bush, sr his secret CIA dealings. Reagan had his astrology. Obama has his birth certificate. As soon as Obama stops doing what the elite want, it will be two flicks of a lamb's tail, and the problem of his birth certificate will be all over the mainstream media like mj's death. I don't think the elite will play this card unless it's something mighty important they want him to do, such as nuke Iran.

This may be a little off topic, but I've been under the impression you couldn't even become a contender unless they had WAY more dirt than a measly birth certificate on you. Hey, I'm not making any accusations here .

How can you ask your neighbors son fight for a Commander In Chief that didn't provide the requested materials instead he legally blocked disclosure some how... and its now a court challenge, and I'm sorry, but you can not ask a natural born citizen to die for a Commander that isnt.
its that simple and I support all efforts in getting to the bottom of this Presidential HiJacking...

Originally posted by BornPatriot
How can you ask your neighbors son fight for a Commander In Chief that didn't provide the requested materials instead he legally blocked disclosure some how... and its now a court challenge, and I'm sorry, but you can not ask a natural born citizen to die for a Commander that isnt.
its that simple and I support all efforts in getting to the bottom of this Presidential HiJacking...

Really, so it is ok to die for a person so long as they were born in the same area as you? Seems pretty silly to me.

The way I see it, the opposition to those out there trying to seek the truth are doing everything that they can to make these people out to be the bad guys. I read some statements(especially from here) from people who are so far up Obamas rear that they feel as if they have to defend this "Not so important issue" to the death. If these "truthers" want to waste their time(or not waste it) on a topic that they feel is important, then who are you to say they cant by following suit with name calling? If these so called "truthers" (as many of you have labeled them) were so far reaching for something to grasp on, then why do you all give them so much ammo by continually mocking them? Seems to me that they have struck a deep chord with many of you because they may be onto something that could change history forever, that you dare not try to think about. Instead, you mock these people and give them names like they are some sort of vicious cult.
You say that they are wasting their time with something that is unimportant, but why is it you spend just as much time trying to defend someone that you do not even know? Sure you know who he is, but you dont know him on that level, you probably couldnt even fathom the amounts of stuff that you DO NOT know. So to go after people who are trying to find out the truth is pretty damned pathetic if you ask me.

Op-when i say "you" in this paragrpah, it is directed towards the people who continually mock others who are in search for the truth, not you(unless you are part of that group).

reply to post by Common Good


Personally, I hate seeing ignorance and disinformation spread around. We get enough of that every day in the MSM and from partisan web sites. I would give up arguing if I knew no one else would be pulled into the disinformation and partisan propaganda campaign they're waging, but I know that won't happen, so the best thing I can do is refute the ridiculousness with facts, law, and logic.

When people come to a place like ATS and start using fake news sites like WorldNetDaily, Wordpress, and Blogspot and preaching they show proof of anything, it really irritates me, especially when there's been so many threads on here before the election where it has been shown time and time again using US law and real evidence that he was born in the US.

The "birthers" (I don't know what else to call them) usually post something from WND or wordpress, claim it's proof, and then when they're refuted or shown it's wrong, they begin to fall back on the "just show us" argument when it's not his responsibility to prove to you beyond a doubt where he was born when he has released ample evidence to prove it to the majority.

Then, the "birthers" (usually the same ones or someone with a new account), move on to the next birther thread and start circulating the same false "news" articles and blogs, most of which are either fabricated or quote themselves and other "birther" news sources, as facts. They're once again backed into a corner with actual facts and US law, fall back on the "just show us" and "I care about the Constitution" argument, and then slink off for awhile to wait for the next thread so they can rehash their bunk arguments.

The best and most hilarious aspect of this "conspiracy" is, at the heart of it all, the logic they use to support themselves. They say the only solid proof Obama can show to prove he is a natural born citizen is a long form birth certificate, because that's what WND, Orly Taitz, and Berg say. They'll then post a twisted piece of propaganda from WND or some tiny web site in Africa and claim everything in it is sound. Hilarious.

Edit to add: I got caught up. No, I don't think they're anarchists. I think they are hard-right conservatives that refuse to take the blinders off and see the forest for the trees. While they sit there and beat their chests about the Constitution and hope that a highly disproven theory somehow becomes factual, Obama and the Democratic majority are passing sweeping legislation to dramatically change the reach and power of the government. But, I guess if they'd rather spend their time railing against his birth place instead of the laws he's pushing through, then that's their choice.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by Avenginggecko]

reply to post by Common Good


I think the main reason people react so violently to the question of the bc is because they see what the neo-cons did to this country in the last 8 years. They run out of time and are replaced and then they see the same supporters of those neo-cons start to blame the new administration for the bailout and economic hard times that were the doing of the neo-cons in the first place. Are people actually stupid enough to put these feinds back into power? Looks like it could be. I just read a thread from Julie Mills telling me to fear Sarah Palin's return. I would hardly do that.

Moreso I fear ignorance that would allow someone like George W Bush to get elected again. I am not that pleased with Obama but he's a damn sight better than Bush that's for sure. People are reacting so strongly to the bc issue because why would anyone really believe that someone could become President without being elegible. Could anyone really believe that? Really? I know there is a lot of ignorance out there but GW Bush, Sarah Palin and Birthers are just too much for me to believe so I guess I react strongly sometimes to the relentless Obama bc threads.

Oh and just who requested a bc from Obama that he refused to show? Show me the evidence that any government agency or Federal election agency requested his bc and he refused. Show me the proof that Obama spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars" to hide his bc. These claims are absurd imo and sound like Rush, Hannity, Beck type of nonsense.

reply to post by Avenginggecko


Worldnutdaily aside, this issue has been circulating ever since the primaries, not by WND,or Berg, but by people just like you and me who had that 'WTF' moment. Maybe he is a Natural Born citizen, maybe hes not. Do we really know for sure though? No we do not. If he indeed does have a BC from Hawaii, why would producing it not be in the interest of "closure" for the American people? Why all the charades and all of the sidestepping and legal fees paid out to avoid such a simple issue? Wouldnt it be in Obamas best interests to show the people of whom got him elected that he does indeed posses the proper credentials to hold office? Also, I hear people say "Hey, its the govt, they would have screened him and made sure he was proper before he got in office", really? We all know how the govt works, does anyone in here really believe that someone actually did the preliminary qualification screenings? IMO posting a picture of a short form on the internet is hardly official. If he treated all of our national problems the same way he is handling the birth certifercate issue, nothing would ever get done. He needs to just end this controversy once and for all, cause all it is doing is creating more seperation and hate amongst the people.

Does it make anyone in here feel good that what these politicians are doing is making them hate their neighbors more and more each day because of views that the politicians and not the people themselves hold?
Ever since Obama was elected, I have personally seen more hate amongst each other than I have ever seen. Its okay to hate Bush, but its NOT ok to hate Obama, and if you have anything negative to say about the man, you are automatically labeled. This is the way that they want you to act, its all an act people. The moment you get off of the squirrels nuts, the sooner it will be that you find your own. Question EVERYTHING.

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Avenginggecko

 

Worldnutdaily aside, this issue has been circulating ever since the primaries, not by WND,or Berg, but by people just like you and me who had that 'WTF' moment. Maybe he is a Natural Born citizen, maybe hes not. Do we really know for sure though? No we do not. If he indeed does have a BC from Hawaii, why would producing it not be in the interest of "closure" for the American people? Why all the charades and all of the sidestepping and legal fees paid out to avoid such a simple issue? Wouldnt it be in Obamas best interests to show the people of whom got him elected that he does indeed posses the proper credentials to hold office? Also, I hear people say "Hey, its the govt, they would have screened him and made sure he was proper before he got in office", really? We all know how the govt works, does anyone in here really believe that someone actually did the preliminary qualification screenings? IMO posting a picture of a short form on the internet is hardly official. If he treated all of our national problems the same way he is handling the birth certifercate issue, nothing would ever get done. He needs to just end this controversy once and for all, cause all it is doing is creating more seperation and hate amongst the people.

Does it make anyone in here feel good that what these politicians are doing is making them hate their neighbors more and more each day because of views that the politicians and not the people themselves hold?
Ever since Obama was elected, I have personally seen more hate amongst each other than I have ever seen. Its okay to hate Bush, but its NOT ok to hate Obama, and if you have anything negative to say about the man, you are automatically labeled. This is the way that they want you to act, its all an act people. The moment you get off of the squirrels nuts, the sooner it will be that you find your own. Question EVERYTHING.

I believe you are missing the point. I certainly am not endorsing any policy decision that has been made by his administration. I think anybody can be happy at least symbolically having a black president as a step towards mutual respect with your "neighbors". The US intelligence network is far more advanced than anyone especially themselves would ever want to admit, so yes I have a strong feeling they knew everything about this guy before he was elected. He's your POTUS, deal with it!

double post hehe

[edit on 07/17/2009 by Mumbotron]