|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 01:38 PM by FlyersFan
|
Originally posted by whatukno
There is indeed a threat. Its a threat to progress. If Birthers are indeed allowed to continue this debate over and over, and the white house has to
repeatedly defend itself over and over and keep on with this issue the problem becomes that of being bogged down by this.
Whatukno .. the only one doing any 'bogging down' is Obama. Simply releasing his Birth Certificate would end most of this. Unless, of course,
there is something on that certificate that would kill him politically or show that he's ineligible.
There can be no other explaination for his actions.
Oh .. and I'm sure that Obama is capable of releasing his BC AND of doing the bidding of his NWO masters in their attempt to make America Marxist -
both at the same time - without being 'bogged down' by the 5 minute phone call to Hawaii to say 'I say release my Birth Certificate'.
He'd be less 'bogged down' by just releasing it then in handling all the teams of lawyers he's got running around the country trying to shut
people down from getting to see his Birth Certificate.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 01:47 PM by whatukno
|
reply to post by FlyersFan
But he already has. He has released his birth certificate. That document was verified by Hawaii as genuine and that it is a fact that Obama was born
in Hawaii.
This hasn't stopped this issue in the slightest. It immediately was deemed fake.
Not the one that was supposedly faked by some guy with photoshop I am talking about the one that is on factcheck.org.
The issue won't stop with a re release of his birth certificate. It's already been proven that it won't stop this issue. Nothing will because it's
a psychotic condition.
It's like those that believe that Obama is a secret Muslim terrorist.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 01:47 PM by jam321
|
Today is the birthers who are being labeled, a few months ago it was veterans, tomorrow will be another group, and in the end all Americans will be
labeled.
Criticize and label who you can today because tomorrow it may be your turn to be criticized and labeled for your beliefs.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 02:18 PM by Avenginggecko
|
Originally posted by Majic
The Real First Refuge Of A Scoundrel
Let's not forget "Birthers" blight crops, sour milk and frighten children. 
The very fact that there's such a raucous, obnoxious crowd of "Bommies" opposing the call for validating the President's origin of birth suggests
there's something to hide.
If President Obama's place of birth is truly legitimate, then absolutely nothing the "Birthers" say or do could possibly change that.
So why the fuss? Why blow smoke where there is no fire?
If they didn't feel threatened by the inquiry, why bother to organize a campaign to demonize the
inquirers in the first place? 
"Bommies" are saying that Obama has validated his place of birth. "Bommies" are saying that Congress has validated his place of birth.
"Bommies" are saying Hawaii has validated his place of birth, twice.
And yes, there is a radical, right wing, racist element in the birther group. I'm sure the whole movement is not, but it is there.
This is a source someone posted in the "Resolution says Hawaii Obama's birthplace" thread.
incogman.wordpress.com...
The author is racist, anti-Jewish, and a white supremacist. When this is a source used to defend one side of an argument, it's only natural that
people start making the assumption (however incorrect it might be) that this group might represent a racist hatemongers.
I think "Bommies" (Obamabots, Obamazombies, Obamatrons, anyone who thinks the birth conspiracy is bunk) get irritated when the same blogs and "news
sources" perpetuate the conspiracy with proven lies, falsehoods, and propaganda.
And as far as ad hominems go, don't you think you might be guilty of the same thing?
From your source an ad hominem is an informal fallacy where you have the argument:
Non-birthers appear to be threatened and hiding something about the situation because they are organizing a "diversion campaign", therefore the
claim that Obama is born in the US must be false.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 02:43 PM by BlackOps719
|
This is nothing but more defamation and purposeful slander used by this puppet government and it's loyal media lap dogs to crucify and villify
dissentors and anyone who would oppose the regime.
This is straight out of the propaganda handbook, discredit anyone who questions by falsely labeling them as corrupt, racist or perverted. All they
have to do is print lies day after day and run news story after news story bashing these people and slandering their character.
Racists, holocaust deniers???? Really? Im suprised they don't just come out and say that all who question Obama's place of birth are also
unrepentant pedophiles who spit on babies and hate Jesus
One thing I will say about this banana republic administration that we are currently suffering under....they will use the media to destroy public
opinion without hesitation. The propaganda has now become so blatant it would seem that they no longer have any desire to conceal or hide what they
do.
Just keep on telling those same lies repeatedly and eventually they will start looking like truth. Straight out of the cold war box of tricks, would
make Nikita Kruschev proud if he were here today.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 03:33 PM by Majic
|
Bom Shelter
reply to post by Avenginggecko
I'm glad you picked up on my example.  
I deliberately injected the word "Bommies" to make a point about the use of the epithet "Birthers"
-- that the use of such tactics is a resort to ad hominem, the real first
refuge of a scoundrel.
Personally, I'm neutral on the question of President Obama's eligibility for office. I don't know, one way or the other, and nothing I've seen so
far persuades me either way.
But when I see political minions resorting to name-calling where simple facts should suffice, my suspicions are naturally aroused.
What's the truth? I don't know. But I doubt it will be forthcoming from people who think epithets and facts are interchangeable.  
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 04:06 PM by Hazelnut
|
reply to post by whatukno
Just one point I'd like clarification on if you please.
"the white house has to repeatedly defend itself over and over"
Once would do it. Produce the Original. End Of Story. sigh
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 04:12 PM by antmax21
|
lol @ Australia..
Wow and I thought we had some idiotic media types...that is just pathetic. As for the BC issue...I am more concerned about the entire selective
service issue.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 04:14 PM by BlackOps719
|
reply to post by Hazelnut
That's the whole point in a nutshell, thank you. By feeding the speculation and refusing to provide the proof that is being asked for the Obama
administration is causing 99% of the drama.
Produce the certificate and the problem goes away!!
I am saying produce the genuine, original BIRTH CERTIFICATE from the state of Hawaii, the same one that was created on the event of Obamas birth.
Release it to the media, let bi-partisan officials review it, and if it is determined to be genuine, authentic and contains all proof of legitimacy
then the problem will go away and no further actions would be necesarry.
NOT a "certificate of live birth", not some faxed or reprinted copy of a copy of an altered original...the actual birth certificate.
If he HAS a birth certificate on file as they claim and that file would verify direct proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was born in the US,
then why not make all of these neo-cons eat crow by producing damning evidence that would shut them all up for good?
No more passing referendums and moratoriums and resolutions that he was born here...PROVE IT.
Otherwise shut up and don't complain when people want to know the truth.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 04:23 PM by Stormdancer777
|
Suborned in the U.S.A.
The birth-certificate controversy is about Obama’s honesty, not where he was born.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
article.nationalreview.com...
WHO IS THIS GUY?
Before January 20 of this year, Barack Obama had a negligible public record. He burst onto the national scene what seemed like five minutes before his
election to the presidency: a first-term U.S. senator who actually served less than four years in that post — after a short time as a state
legislator, some shadowy years as a “community organizer,” and scholastic terms at Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard that remain shrouded in
mystery. The primary qualification supporters offered for Obama’s candidacy was his compelling life story, as packaged in 850 pages’ worth of the
not one but two autobiographies this seemingly unaccomplished candidate had written by the age of 45.
Yet we now know that this life story is chock full of fiction. Typical and disturbing, to take just one example, is the entirely fabricated account in
Dreams from My Father of Obama’s first job after college:
Eventually a consulting house to multinational corporations agreed to hire me as a research assistant. Like a spy behind enemy lines, I arrived every
day at my mid-Manhattan office and sat at my computer terminal, checking the Reuters machine that blinked bright emerald messages from across the
globe. As far as I could tell I was the only black man in the company, a source of shame for me but a source of considerable pride for the company’s
secretarial pool. They treated me like a son, those black ladies; they told me how they expected me to run the company one day. . . . The company
promoted me to the position of financial writer. I had my own office, my own secretary, money in the bank. Sometimes, coming out of an interview with
Japanese financiers or German bond traders, I would catch my reflection in the elevator doors — see myself in a suit and tie, a briefcase in my hand
— and for a split second I would imagine myself as a captain of industry, barking out orders, closing the deal, before I remembered who it was that
I had told myself I wanted to be and felt pangs of guilt for my lack of resolve. . . .
As the website Sweetness & Light details, this is bunk. Obama did not work at “a consulting house to multinational corporations”; it was, a
then-colleague of his has related, “a small company that published newsletters on international business.” He wasn’t the only black man in the
company, and he didn’t have an office, have a secretary, wear a suit and tie on the job, or conduct “interviews” with “Japanese financiers or
German bond traders” — he was a junior copyeditor.
What’s unnerving about this is that it is so gratuitous. It would have made no difference to anyone curious about Obama’s life that he, like most
of us, took a ho-hum entry-level job to establish himself. But Obama lies about the small things, the inconsequential things, just as he does about
the important ones — depending on what he is trying to accomplish at any given time.
That's what I want to know, who is this guy.
article.nationalreview.com...
He is a compulsive liar.
How many Americans know, for example, that as a sitting U.S. senator in 2006, Obama interfered in a Kenyan election, publicly ripping the
incumbent government (a U.S. ally) for corruption while he was its guest and barnstorming with his preferred candidate: a Marxist now known to have
made a secret agreement with Islamists to convert Kenya to sharia law, and whose supporters, upon losing the election, committed murder and mayhem,
displacing thousands of Kenyans and plunging their country into utter chaos?
I knew.
WHEN DID INFORMATION SUDDENLY BECOME A BAD THING?
While it is all well and good to belittle the birth-certificate controversy, without it we’d know only what the media and Obama himself would tell
us about his multiple citizenships, which is nothing. As noted above, we now know Obama, by operation of British and Kenyan law, was a citizen of
Kenya (a status that lapsed in 1982, when he turned 21). That’s something voters would find relevant, especially when Obama’s shocking 2006
conduct in Kenya is considered. But we don’t know about his Kenyan citizenship because the media thought it was newsworthy. We know it only because
of the birth-certificate controversy: Pressed to debunk the allegation that Obama was born in Kenya, his embarrassed supporters felt compelled to
clarify his Kenyan citizenship.
By contrast, the question whether Obama ever was an Indonesian citizen is still unresolved, as are such related matters as whether the foreign
citizenship (if he had it) ever lapsed, and whether he ever held or used an Indonesian passport — for example, during a mysterious trip to Pakistan
he took in 1981, after Zia’s coup, when advisories warned Americans against traveling there. By the way, many details about that journey, too,
remain unknown. Obama strangely neglected to mention it in his 850 pages of autobiography, even though the 20-year-old’s adventure included a stay
at the home of prominent Pakistani politicians.
There’s speculation out there from the former CIA officer Larry Johnson — who is no right-winger and is convinced the president was born in Hawaii
— that the full state records would probably show Obama was adopted by the Indonesian Muslim Lolo Soetoro and became formally known as “Barry
Soetoro.” Obama may have wanted that suppressed for a host of reasons: issues about his citizenship, questions about his name (it’s been claimed
that Obama represented in his application to the Illinois bar that he had never been known by any name other than Barack Obama), and the undermining
of his (false) claim of remoteness from Islam. Is that true? I don’t know and neither do you.
But we should know. The point has little to do with whether Obama was born in Hawaii. I’m quite confident that he was. The issue is: What is the
true personal history of the man who has been sold to us based on nothing but his personal history? On that issue, Obama has demonstrated himself to
be an unreliable source and, sadly, we can’t trust the media to get to the bottom of it. What’s wrong with saying, to a president who promised
unprecedented “transparency”: Give us all the raw data and we’ll figure it out for ourselves?
article.nationalreview.com...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 04:52 PM by whatukno
|
reply to post by Hazelnut
and reply to post by BlackOps719
Obviously not because he did release his COLB and it didn't do anything to shut down this issue.
www.factcheck.org...
www.politifact.com...
www.snopes.com...
But if that weren't enough to slate the thirst of people questioning this issue. It was verified not once...
www.kitv.com...
but twice.
news.yahoo.com...
But that's still not enough to convince people. Nothing is going to satisfy those that are opposed to Obama. It's just not going to happen. There is
nothing on the Birth certificate that anyone needs to be aware of except peoples names that violate privacy laws. Those people could potentially be
put in danger if their identities are known.
The fact of the matter is and I have argued this point many times. Citizens do not vote for the President. They vote for electors. So Citizens not
having voted for the President do not have any right to view this mans 4th amendment protected personal papers unless he wishes them to.
Those people who wish to pry into the president's personal life only wish to do so to try and discredit him or find some other reason to slander and
humiliate him publicly, there is no great truth they are looking for other than dirt.
So besides endangering the 4th Amendment, and trying to discredit a person they don't like politically there is no great truth that (only to please
Majic) "the people that believe in this issue" will find in the birth certificate that Hawaii has on record and has verified that fact.
reply to post by Stormdancer777
This is nothing but a witch hunt and not a great expose into learning the truth. There is no constitutional basis for the President to have to
disclose all of the information that the writers of the national review want.
If people wanted to know what this man stands for and what political policies that he would enact while in office. Perhaps looking at his
congressional voting record would have been more appropriate.
If anyone was actually interested in this as truth they could look up a lot of amazing facts here...
www.votesmart.org...
[edit on 7/30/2009 by whatukno]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 05:05 PM by Stormdancer777
|
sitemason.vanderbilt.edu...
Why Obama's birth certificate issue won't go away: Vanderbilt expert
Why Obama's birth certificate issue won't go away: Vanderbilt expert
ShareThis7/30/20092:18 pm
The controversy over President Obama’s birth certificate will not go away as long as he refuses to release sealed records, including the original
birth certificate, according to Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University.
“I believe that the president should end the speculation by being transparent about all aspects of his background,” Swain said. “In fact, it can
be argued that the president belongs to the people and to scholars, biographers and others who are entitled to know every aspect of his past. Only
great men can ascend to this height, and their lives should be examined and studied for the lessons they offer.”
Swain said that what is posted online for the president is a certificate of live birth. “It is the failure to release the long form that keeps
suspicion alive,” she said. Swain noted that she strongly disagrees with those who want to criticize Americans, including journalist Lou Dobbs, who
continue to raise the issue.
Other sealed records that Swain has called for the president to release include those pertaining to his education, foreign travel and state
legislative business.
Carol Swain is available for media interviews at carol.swain@vanderbilt.edu.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 05:17 PM by BlackOps719
|
reply to post by whatukno
Like I said.....show the original birth certificate and get it over with. Oh wait...why would he possibly not be able to do that?
Maybe because there isn't one to produce?
Block out the names to protect privacy, then there is no issue.
Show the original, signed, dated and confirmed birth certificate or face whatever criticism is rendered. Not doing so does only one thing and that is
make people even MORE suspcious that there is a cover up going on.
Why not just do the easy thing...the right thing and the sensible thing...and just produce the damn original already?
Why is this such a difficult concept for Obamaphiles to grasp? What is being hidden?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 05:22 PM by whatukno
|
reply to post by BlackOps719
Like I said.....show the original birth certificate and get it over with. Oh wait...why would he possibly not be able to do that?
Maybe because there isn't one to produce?
Block out the names to protect privacy, then there is no issue.
Except that people would just say that it is a forgery or not a legitimate copy if any alterations were made.
This isn't about the truth remember? It's only about vilifying a man that people don't like politically. If it were about the truth than the COLB
along with the statements made by officials in Hawaii would have been more than enough. But because it's about a witch hunt no amount of proof is
going to slate the people who only want to vilify the POTUS for whatever reason.
Show the original, signed, dated and confirmed birth certificate or face whatever criticism is rendered. Not doing so does only one thing and
that is make people even MORE suspcious that there is a cover up going on.
Why not just do the easy thing...the right thing and the sensible thing...and just produce the damn original already?
Why is this such a difficult concept for Obamaphiles to grasp? What is being hidden?
Or show the document AND still have no one believe it anyway.
So really, what is the point of showing a piece of paper that no one would believe?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 01:34 AM by acrux
|
Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by acrux
Bravo! Excellent OP! You've rolled every possible invective into it, except perhaps accusing people who question President Obama's nationality as
being reptoids. Work that in somehow, okay?
You could use some work on the Zionist angle too. I suggest Rense for further quirky citations.
Don't forget to say "birthers" at least twenty times. Rinse. Repeat. Really top quality reporting.
Shoot the messenger? No way!!! I'm all for the time-honored method -- stoning. It's always served "us" well, right? RIGHT?
Did you even read my post, I just presented it saying how biased it was, sounds like you must have been stoned when you read it & got all muddled.
[edit on 31-7-2009 by acrux]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 01:49 AM by Totakeke
|
reply to post by whatukno
So really, what is the point of showing a piece of paper that no one would believe?
At least then he could say, "Well, we tried, but they don't believe me." But he won't even do that.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 01:55 AM by TheAftermath
|
Obamanuts are rapidly gaining ground on Israel supporters when it comes to throwing out the bigotry card.
Any criticism whatsoever simply cant be attributed to his idiotic policies, so it must be racism right obama supporters?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 01:58 AM by whatukno
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 06:01 AM by FlyersFan
|
Originally posted by whatukno
He has released his birth certificate. That document was verified by Hawaii as genuine and that it is a fact that Obama was born in Hawaii.
That document that was on the internet was an admitted fake by Jay McKinnon. Those nummys in Hawaii 'confirmed as genuine' a confirmed fake ... and
they 'confirmed' a document that was on the internet instead of a real life copy. No official in their right mind would confirm something posted
on the internet as 'real'. They'd have to see it in front of them to evaluate the document and say if it's authentic.
the one that is on factcheck.org.
Pretty sure that's the same one that Daily Kos had up. And factcheck is run by Annenberg. Obama was on the board of directors for Annenberg and
Annenberg is a big $$ donor to the Obama campaign.
Besides .. that's 2007 ... where's the original?
The issue won't stop with a re release of his birth certificate.
How do you know? He hasn't tried that yet.
Nothing will because it's a psychotic condition.
 I'm not psychotic.
ANYWAYS .. back on subject .... I'm not a right-wing militant. I'm not anti-black. I'm not racist. I'm not a holocaust denier. The article is
just garbage and the people who wrote it are pathetic in their agenda.
[edit on 7/31/2009 by FlyersFan]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-7-2009 @ 06:21 AM by argentus
|
reply to post by acrux
Did you even read my post, I just presented it saying how biased it was, sounds like you must have been stoned when you read it & got all
muddled.
....... and who created the sensationalized thread title? You or I? Yes, I read your post, read your source for the OP. Agree it was full of
hyperbole and was probably written to provoke a reaction, much like your title. Mission completed.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
<< 1 2 3 >>
|
|
|
