Originally posted by TrueAmerican
No one seems to have made any real headway yet on debunking this certificate. If anything, it is seeming more and more to be the real thing to me, unless someone can come up with something substantial to debunk it.

Do you suppose it has anything to do with the fact that:

Mr. Smith has a lengthy criminal background?
Mr. Smith attempted to defraud someone by offering to donate his kidney in a fraudulent scheme?
Mr. Smith is trying to sell the BC on ebay for $1 million.
Mr. Smith purportedly reported his house was visited by the Virgin Mary.

Perhaps the old "Quacks Like a Duck" syndrome. Perhaps this is why people are not lending this credence. Plus with all the other recent fakes, once bitten twice shy.

Sorry for all the cliches.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Do you suppose it has anything to do with the fact that:

Mr. Smith has a lengthy criminal background?
Mr. Smith attempted to defraud someone by offering to donate his kidney in a fraudulent scheme?
Mr. Smith is trying to sell the BC on ebay for $1 million.
Mr. Smith purportedly reported his house was visited by the Virgin Mary.

Perhaps the old "Quacks Like a Duck" syndrome. Perhaps this is why people are not lending this credence. Plus with all the other recent fakes, once bitten twice shy.

Sorry for all the cliches.

See? This is what I am talking about. Not a single one of those things has anything to do with whether this document is a forgery or not. And the bottom line is until a document expert gets this thing in their hands, we are not going to know for sure. And from the way Smith is playing this, it doesn't look like that's going to happen unless someone coughs up some money.

I might remind you all though that Smith said in one of his last eBay auctions that he would allow the winning bidder to bring their experts to examine it- and if the document was not authentic, they would not have to pay. When you hear stuff like that, it can counter everything you said above and more. This MAY be real. And if it isn't, you have to wonder why he would go through all this if he knew it was fake.

I even asked Smith this in an eBay email, when we were exchanging them. I asked him if he was doing this just as a sheer publicity stunt to bring attention to the BC issue. I couldn't even get a direct reply from him on that or anything else. He just refused to talk. All he did was kept emailing me with the new auctions as eBay shut him down and he put up new ones. Then he disappeared.

Main word "supposed" and why are they so many black kids there what is that for credibility i think not. the mans already president the most important thing is well at least he seems to be trying his best.

And he considers the US his home (not like he is talking about Kenya all the time.)

Notice he start all his speeches with a deep sigh now, how would you feel if you were trying your best and people just keep bringing you down with petty stuff. Americans can be real bitches some times and don't get me wrong i was born in Texas raised in the Caribbean (St. Maarten) now living in the Netherlands and also i pass the brown paper bag test (yes I'm mixed). Looking in from outside you people need to get your sh*t together.


America is like a big daycare half you kids want grape juice the other half want apple but you make it seem like there only giving out orange juice. and all you will do is scream until you get it.


the daily show and Colbert report make my day everyday at least they aren't scared to let us see how ridiculous things can really get.

just my two euro cents

No matter what i think there is a hint of puppeteering going on anyway so dont worry even if he isn't American at least there are some old farts that probably grew up in a little all American town running the show.

Its not the face its the politics/politricks that count.

Originally posted by maybereal11
Seriously....TrueAmerican ? We shouldn't let any of it effect our judgement pertaining to the document?

NO, we shouldn't. Because until the document is examined by a professional, no amount of attacking the messenger will make that document any more or any less valid. Prove the document wrong, not the messenger. Or as is common here at ATS, discuss the message and not the poster. If the best you can do is attack the source, then you you ain't done jack as far as I'm concerned. PROVE THE DOCUMENT FAKE. And if you can't, then wait until someone else can.

If any of you have noticed the left leaning news media is using the term "Birthers" to demonize anyone opposed to president Obama's policies and agendas... It is growing in use since they could not make the term "racists" stick to everyone.

The whole birth issue is working for the Obama administration, and seems to be an effective way to question the intelligence of the opposition.

It is a waste of time, a distraction, a means to demonize the opposition.. Ultimately an irrelevant issue. But a great diversion for a lot of suspicious people, as long as they keep planting bits of information and even fabricated evidence just to keep your attention, interest and doubts.

Don't play this game.

Originally posted by Walkswithfish
But a great diversion for a lot of suspicious people, as long as they keep planting bits of information and even fabricated evidence just to keep your attention, interest and doubts. Don't play this game.

Brilliant observation and I can only add that "Birthers" is a fitting term.
Most who doubt Obama's eligibility are the same who would blindly pursue
ANY claim despite its source, probability, likelihood or true motive. There seems to be an infinite supply of mental midgets anxious to capitalize on this issue despite it's perversity.

Perhaps when this is all over, the term "Birthers" can replace the "Right to Lifers."

As my main man Napoleon would say:

"Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake."


[edit on 25-8-2009 by kinda kurious]

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Perhaps when this is all over, the term "Birthers" can replace the "Right to Lifers."

What is it you believe "Birthers" and "Right to Lifers" have in common? Their concerns seem to me to be entirely different. What are you trying to say?

Originally posted by earlywatcher

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Perhaps when this is all over, the term "Birthers" can replace the "Right to Lifers."

What is it you believe "Birthers" and "Right to Lifers" have in common? Their concerns seem to me to be entirely different. What are you trying to say?

Merely that "Birther" has a better ring to it. Less words. Will fit nicely on placards,
bumper stickers and T shirts.

Especially since I've always thought that the opposite of "Pro Life" is not "Pro Death."

I'd say their "concerns" are quite the same. I recall the Notre Dame commencement address for starters. Pro Life = Anti-Obama, Birther = Anti-Obama. That clear enough?

[edit on 25-8-2009 by kinda kurious]

Originally posted by oneclickaway
Well done for actually researching something though....I am shocked....Pity the same enthusiasm wasn't shown for finding out who your president actually is.

It is not my nature to question the character of someone who has already earned my trust. For example, it is too late to do a background check on my spousal unit.

Thanks again for pointing out my error above. Stuff happens. I now owe you one.

It is not my nature to question the character of someone who has already earned my trust. For example, it is too late to do a background check on my spousal unit.

this is very sad. it means that once someone convinces you by telling you what you want to hear, that you will never verify if they follow throw. i think if you looked closely at obama's attitude and behavior you might be appalled, but then maybe not. maybe you want to live in a place where the government makes all your decisions. did you like bush? did you defend him? once this country is fully transformed you will need to accept and agree with whatever your leader is doing, and you might not always like the leader as much as you do obama. something to think about.

Originally posted by earlywatcher
this is very sad. it means that once someone convinces you by telling you what you want to hear, that you will never verify if they follow throw.

(sic)

Please do not put words in my mouth, I said " Earn my trust" NOT "tell me what I want to hear". Big difference.

Besides if ANYONE in our country is so repulsed by the direction or course of the government or its duly elected leaders, then I suppose they are free to migrate elsewhere. It wouldn't be a first.

Originally posted by kinda kurious

You asked for my personal opinion, I suppose there are no wrong answers.

I'll be looking forward to another bread sandwich reply (3 slices of bread-no meat, although filling lacking any nutritious goodness) as to why I'm wrong.

is this your way of telling me that my own opinion isn't as "nutritious" as yours? no, don't bother to tell me that i'm putting words in your mouth. i undertand it was just a cheap shot you had to take because it's what you do.

you mention things that many people have done in the course of their lives to grow up and become fine solid adults. though most people don't get to attend elite colleges. what was that adversity part again? I didn't know about the magna cum laude from harvard. i didn't think we knew that much about his grades. possibly the only noteworthy item on this list was president of harvard law review. not necessarily something that qualifies him as president but uncommon. he also wrote bestselling memoirs at a very young age. that's uncommon too.

I don't see anything on your list involving his time as part of the chicago political machine where he developed his political backing. don't see anything about his time in illinois senate. don't see anything about us senate, of course he was pretty busy running for president during most of his time as us senator.

he certainly gives a fine speech. and he has a clever team. that's what got him elected.

i don't see anything on your list about his achievements since he became president. things like the stimulus bill he rushed through without anybody reading it (trust me i know what i'm doing). the apology tour of europe. cap and trade. appointing "czars" who run various parts of the economy and funded by government but who have not been vetted or authorized by congress.

or don't you expect a president to do anything worthy of trust once elected.