It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:38 PM
reply to post by Maxmars

If the parties are the ones in charge of checking into these things, then the entire system is screwed. I don't see how it could be that, as the 2 parties are not part of the constitution or the rule of law itself.

I posted above about JB Williams, but I'm not trying to detract from the topic itself. Just that I think his history and such should be known and kept in mind - this guy writes propaganda nonstop.

He is a partisan hack, which has nothing to do with the validity of the issue itself, but does IMO mean to proceed with caution.

But I am unsure how this is somekind of protection for those people. They still signed the other one, which was notarized.

As well, shouldn't each state be the ones who check and make sure the document is correct/legit? How did all states accept it without care if the above was done for their protection?

I'm not an Obama supporter, and I think he has already broken many things in the constitution. I wonder why nobody points those things out? Do they not want to be made to follow those things if/when they get back in power or something?

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:55 PM
reply to post by badmedia

It is valuable information, and I for one, appreciate it. It can be said that even those who labor to create controversy through fraud are as much a problem as those who refuse to scrutinize the issue.

Putting something like this on the line takes some courage. Especially if you know it is still of undetermined credibility.

The problem we face, if we are truly interested in fact and truth, is the eagerness of those who react rather than investigate.

I find this an interesting example of a social-engineering factoid. Truth and fact are considered weapons and treated as tools by those with an agenda. Whether it is we who are being scammed, or the presenter of the documents, then that in and of itself is a telling act.

I have said it before and I will say it again. The political machinery of this country is corrupted from within and without. Their goal to achieve dominance overshadows nearly everything they do. Even the good things.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Maxmars]

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:20 PM

Originally posted by Maxmars
Putting something like this on the line takes some courage.

So does that mean you think hoaxers are brave? I suppose counterfeiters and document forgers must equate to heros by your standards. Since when is disinfo a noble act?

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:35 PM
Max, I am very proud to have you on my friends list. Your way with words is incomparable. Although I know sometimes you probably hate to see me on yours! (I can be a real idiot sometimes).

You know, one thing is certain for me here. I don't have anything invested either, and if this turns out to be a hoax, so be it. It won't be the first time I've eaten crow. But lack of critical examination of these things is potentially letting those who seek to subjugate us have their way unimpeded. And I'll eat all the crow I need to, to make sure that don't happen.

And another thing is also certain to me. If every single person that has commented on this story so far between the two threads had just taken a bit of focused time to really dig on this, like BH for example, this may have ended long before it got started. But at this rate, it seems we're going to be here a while.

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:36 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Following is a copy of the email I just sent to Orly Taitz:

Subject: Hi Orly, Critical new evidence of DNC coverup, could be vital to your case

Hi Orly,

First let me state I am firmly behind you all the way in your case against a would be usurper to our Presidency. And here is another breaking story you should most definitely be aware of: It is proof of a DNC conspiracy to intentionally remove the constitutional requirement clause from their final document submitted to the states. You may find a way for this to help increase the efficacy of your Keyes case.

I am the member TrueAmerican from and have ongoing discussions on this here:

and here:


Sorry to burst your bubble Sherlock but your big internet "scoop" might be a tad late.

According to this site:


Your lawyer lady pal was already aware of this document way back in November of 2008. Wonder why she didn't include it in her current "lawsuit?" (I use the term loosely.)

Her Post in Comments section #21:

BTW, anybody catch the typo in both documents? The word through is misspelled. Just sayin'. (Im a recovering former English major.)


[edit on 11-9-2009 by kinda kurious]

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:46 PM

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Originally posted by Maxmars
Putting something like this on the line takes some courage.

So does that mean you think hoaxers are brave? I suppose counterfeiters and document forgers must equate to heros by your standards. Since when is disinfo a noble act?

Interesting take. But I think I spoke plainly enough to not have to play that old game.

Once upon a time everyone agreed on everything. This is not that time.

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by kinda kurious

That's fine, so? Maybe one of her attorneys didn't feel like going up against the DNC and getting their career ended, like the Obama administration threatened (and worse) with the network talk show hosts?

Or did you not see the linked thread in the OP of the media manipulation?

That helps a bit, but is really inconsequential to this story. I was merely making sure she knew about it. But your post takes the tone with me that somehow I feel I should retaliate by calling you Columbo. Of course, I would never do that.

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:02 PM
This is so Bizzare having two documents of the same people signing both documents(N P) and others and notarized!

Having done research and kept up with the latest updates, when Barry has already spent $ 1.5 million dollars of our tax money trying to keep his records sealed,

You have to ask yourself, What the H*ll is Going On!!!

This thread is going to get hot here quick! There are Many very Nervous people that will do and say anything to try to make this go Away!!!

Have my popcorn, cheetoz, Pabst and barco-lounger ready for the show!

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

You are most kind. I really want to remember, as often as possible, that despite my unfortunate cynical tendencies, there are people who really are interested in the truth. People, who are compelled to reason by nature.

While reason often leads us to different conclusions, it is not by disrespect that we expand what we know. I accept your OP in the way t was intended, and acknowledge explicitly that I REJECT the paradigm of negativity which seems to be the standard fare accompanying the mere mention of the subject.

The 'natural' force which separates and isolates communities of people, bears a partisan stench which lingers and permeates every exchange. Yes there are those who seek the conflict - some revel in it - as can be evidenced by their online behavior. Others were born to think in group it would seem.

I have yet to be so lucky as to find myself convinced that this political system of our is not broken at a most fundamental level. Therefore I find most of their actions as a group suspect. Their loyalty to each other is more powerful than their loyalty to our nation - our nation - whose every noble achievement is diminished by those who proclaim to represent us... most of them refer to America as a Democracy - they seem to implicitly deny the meaning of Republic. Sadly, this includes our current leadership.

I do not put it past them to 'assign' tasks to their especially loyal contingents to be prepared to supply the angst in any discussion in this area. And I have felt this way for a long time now.

That's why I find posts as your most encouraging. As for the detractors, they are to be expected. But I think it's unrealistic to expect many to be more like BH who is, as you opined earlier, a class act. We shall see what we shall see; and those who refuse to see, should get out of the way.

But I ramble
- sorry about that - bad habit... this baby is all you!

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Maxmars]

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by CoffinFeeder

You know that works both ways right? If I saw it on the net , and you saw on the net that it is not true, then we both ASSumed. But I am not assuming anything, I have done all the investigating I need to, and I am not paranoid so I can let it go, he is a citizen.

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 12:11 AM

Originally posted by Maxmars
....this baby is all you!

Oh not hardly, this baby is all ATS. All of us. Everyone's opinion counts, it just depends on which pile you stack their chips.

BH was just an example, and actually I may not have been as gracious to some others here, who have also contributed to the thread(s). I just wish sometimes their intent with said contributions came more from a spirit of collaboration than one of contempt. But I am to blame for that. Heck, look at how I wrote the OP. I should have just said it way differently, and in that spirit. Like "hey guys, take a look at this. Let's figure out if this is real or a hoax."

I have a whole lot to learn about how to write a post with that tone, and not let the heat of the moment and the passion to get it out there consume me beyond proper deliverance. What can I say folks? Sorry? It is what it is.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled de-programming?

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 03:50 AM

The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie

First problem with this headline is that 'theory' and 'fact' are both being used in the same sentence.

Second problem: any Tom Dick or Harry could have made up the forms you are showing and put them out here in internet land.

Third problem: Where are the 'facts' I see none presented here.

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 04:11 AM
only read first page,of this thread , but the OP's link was updated

go to page 3 of this link

it is hawaii's official one and it contains the cons. phrasing

so his theory is being blown apart ,,, as i bet we get each state one his theory will be further washed down the drain

sorry for all those hoping this woul;d be the golden goose

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:13 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:36 AM

Originally posted by Electro38
So where are the "facts", and proof? Anyone here ever study science beyond high school? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just really curious.

Why do so many seemingly intelligent people automatically believe that digital images garnered from the internet are "real", and use these images as proof?

I still haven't seen any proof that these images are real. Let's suppose they are real, untouched digital photos of US government documents, is anyone here an expert in government documents?

Also, how is it we, the members of a UFO/conspiracy web forum can easily uncover "real" gov. documents on the internet and from some guy's blog, and yet the people who have much more in resources/money and capabilities (i.e. the republicans, etc.) cannot find any of this evidence, or have no knowledge of it?

It doesn't take an A in high school science to figure that one out.
Just common sence. THEY are all in the same back stabbing COUNTRY CLUB.

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:17 AM

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

It doesn't take an A in high school science to figure that one out.
Just common sense. THEY are all in the same back stabbing COUNTRY CLUB.

I agree, it doesn't at all. But there should be rules established now on ATS that restricts the use of the word "Proof" and "real" in thread titles.

If anyone here has ever studied science, forensics, etc. you will know why I get so annoyed by the use of those words in these thread titles. Not only is there no real proof but the people defending such garbage lack the abilities to establish their claims of "proof" and authenticity!

To the people defending this digital image, go learn the term "scientific process", or easier yet go look up the words "real" and "proof" and then learn to apply the meaning of those words to the # you post!

(Stop trying to make all of your thread titles look like sensationalized tabloid garbage headlines. This trend is suggesting we, the people who are reading your thread titles on the front page are idiots who are only attracted to ridiculous/sensationalized claims, exclamation marks, and the use of the annoying OMG!!! OMG!!! childish thing. Some of us aren't 13 years old or complete idiots.)

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Electro38]

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:35 AM
A lot of people here apparently have a tremendous amount of free time, what with all of the researching and searching the web and then composing these huge thread posts, etc.

That's good but please learn more about "scientific process" and learn to apply that to your work before using the words "proof" and "real". Maybe those claims can be tempered by adding the words "possible", or "potential".

You efforts are in vane if you make such claims before they can be proven or authenticated and it doesn't help your cause, just keeps making it seem more and more desperate and ridiculous.

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 11:59 AM
If we're all in agreement that the signatures are either forged or photo-copied then, why are we giving any credence to the document itself ? Whose to say that the amended/omitted document is even real?

Listen, after being hoodwinked by Jones this week, I ain't falling for too much of anything circulating on the Internet anymore. He really toughen my skin!
Besides, PhotoShop is a pretty good companion to hoaxers!

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 12:30 PM

Originally posted by space cadet
I can tell that the signatures on the first document have been superimposed onto the second document. Acually I bet a first grader could tell you that.

It looks as if one just did.

I hate this whole BC business. It's something I've just avoided. I was hoping this thread was going to be about something else.

So I read your post and thought, "great". Then I looked at the signatures.

There are differences.

Alice Travis Germond's signature is very different.

I would say that Shalifa's commision date expiration ( the second line in it) is completely forged as well, and the 'N' in Nancy Pelosi as well. Other than those two forgeries, the rest is an exact photocopy.

No it isn't. I really hope someone comes up with something better than this but I find the whole topic so stupid and dreary I'm off to more interesting threads.

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 12:37 PM
Yeah well before you naysayers utter another word, there has been a crucial new development in the sister thread starting here:

An ATS member has written and received from the state of SC A COPY WITHOUT THE CLAUSE. This ain't going anywhere just yet.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in