It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Birthers are Wrong

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Never said I had anything, but anyone with half a brain can tell the Hawaii short form is forged. Pixelated, odd placement of text ect. I could tell even before I saw the video that proves it's a fake.

The Kenyan with that bull# footprint one I'm not so sure about, but it could be a fake as well. Let's see what this court case does. There are also Democratic nomination documents notarized on the same day. The first says they vetted his Constitutional eligibility, but they didn't end up using it. The second one mentions nothing of his Constitutional eligibility and from what I understand that is the one they submitted for the nomination. Let me know if you can't find those documents and I'll get them to you.




posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by av8r007
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Never said I had anything, but anyone with half a brain can tell the Hawaii short form is forged. Pixelated, odd placement of text ect. I could tell even before I saw the video that proves it's a fake.


Obviously I have seen no such video or I would not have asked you to prove your claim. I see, like most birthers, you would rather backstep from your claim than prove it. Thanks a ton.


The Kenyan with that bull**** footprint one I'm not so sure about, but it could be a fake as well. Let's see what this court case does. There are also Democratic nomination documents notarized on the same day. The first says they vetted his Constitutional eligibility, but they didn't end up using it. The second one mentions nothing of his Constitutional eligibility and from what I understand that is the one they submitted for the nomination. Let me know if you can't find those documents and I'll get them to you.


Why would I want them? I want you to back up your other post before moving on to your next set of useless "evidence." I asked you to prove ANYTHING in your post.

You replied, and still failed to do the only thing I asked. That tells me all I need to know right there.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by coastalite
Furthermore, there are legitimate questions with regards to his school records, transcripts, passport,


Just what are the legitimate questions with regard to his passport?



He traveled to Pakistan at a time when American citizens were not allowed in Pakistan. So, how did he get into Pakistan? He had to be using a passport issued from a country other than the USA. If that is the case then he was not an American citizen, let alone a natural born citizen. Furthermore, when adopted by his step father in Indonesia he became an Indonesian citizen and gave up US citizenship. Then he went back to Hawaii as an Indonesian citizen at which point he would have had to go back through the process of becoming a US citizen again. It's a complicated mess.


etc. Not to mention his father not being American born which that alone throws his natural born citizen status into serious doubt.

No it does not, this shows that you really are not interested in the birth certificate, just against Obama!



From what I understand, his father was born in Kenya. When BHO was born, Kenya was still under British rule, so his father would have been a British citizen, thereby BHO if born allegedly outside the US would be what his father was, British. His mother, if she gave birth to him outside the US, was too young to have met the requirements to pass on US citizenship to her son. Hence, BHO would assume his father's British citizenship. This is part of the confusion. The long-form needs to be released so we can put this to bed once and for all.


However, that doesn't change the fact that the birthers do have legitimate questions that need to be answered.

except that they have been answered many many times.


If they have been answered many many times, then why is it still an issue? You think by ridiculing and labeling people that they are going to just give up their search for the truth? The problem is just the opposite, all the questions have NOT been answered.

FACT: a long-form birth certificate HAS NEVER been released. The long-form will show THE NAME OF THE HOSPITAL and THE DELIVERING DOCTOR'S SIGNATURE. To this day, no one knows with irrefutable 100% certainty what hospital he was born at. Why did BHO claim one hospital, his sister claim another, and his grandmother claim she was there at his birth in Kenya? How could three different family members be confused about something as simple as the place of his birth? Don't you think something is wrong with this? Release the $20 long-form so we can all put this matter to rest.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by coastalite

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by coastalite
Furthermore, there are legitimate questions with regards to his school records, transcripts, passport,


Just what are the legitimate questions with regard to his passport?



He traveled to Pakistan at a time when American citizens were not allowed in Pakistan. So, how did he get into Pakistan? He had to be using a passport issued from a country other than the USA. If that is the case then he was not an American citizen, let alone a natural born citizen. Furthermore, when adopted by his step father in Indonesia he became an Indonesian citizen and gave up US citizenship. Then he went back to Hawaii as an Indonesian citizen at which point he would have had to go back through the process of becoming a US citizen again. It's a complicated mess.


Can you back any of that up because the Pakistan travel thing is BS. American citizens traveled back and forth very freely. There was an advisory in place to American Tourists abroad but there was nothing forbidding travel there put in place by either nation.


From what I understand, his father was born in Kenya. When BHO was born, Kenya was still under British rule, so his father would have been a British citizen, thereby BHO if born allegedly outside the US would be what his father was, British. His mother, if she gave birth to him outside the US, was too young to have met the requirements to pass on US citizenship to her son. Hence, BHO would assume his father's British citizenship. This is part of the confusion. The long-form needs to be released so we can put this to bed once and for all.


What age should she have been and what law is that, exactly?



If they have been answered many many times, then why is it still an issue? You think by ridiculing and labeling people that they are going to just give up their search for the truth? The problem is just the opposite, all the questions have NOT been answered.


It is simply because some people refuse to believe.


FACT: a long-form birth certificate HAS NEVER been released. The long-form will show THE NAME OF THE HOSPITAL and THE DELIVERING DOCTOR'S SIGNATURE. To this day, no one knows with irrefutable 100% certainty what hospital he was born at. Why did BHO claim one hospital, his sister claim another, and his grandmother claim she was there at his birth in Kenya?


I have no idea what hospital my sister was born in. His grandmother was talking about his BO Sr.


How could three different family members be confused about something as simple as the place of his birth? Don't you think something is wrong with this? Release the $20 long-form so we can all put this matter to rest.


Does Hawaii issue a long form? Not all states seem that issue the same types of BC. Can you show us an example of what you wish you had to look at?




[edit on 1/9/10 by Lillydale]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 



Only if that citizen is going for the job of President...otherwise that would be unecessary.


People always use the argument "I need a birth certificate to get a job.", or "I need a birth certificate to get my drivers licence!" So all things being equal, we must apply your rigorous testing standards to those two things as well with every citizen in the country.

Because you can't just profile this singular president like that and make this singular president go under such standards that aren't in the constitution for one, and have never been done for any previous president for another.

 


But back to the OP, I disagree, I don't think that birthers should stop. I think they should continue their endless search for "truth
" just until every right wing republican is ousted from office.

I think birthers are what is going to help secure a democrat majority in the legislative branch for at least the next election and I do pray that the democrats link any 2012 republican presidential contender with the birther movement.




[edit on 1/9/2010 by whatukno]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 




I think birthers are what is going to help secure a democrat majority in the legislative branch for at least the next election and I do pray that the democrats link any 2012 republican presidential contender with the birther movement.


This is my point. I wouldn't put it passed the White House to try and egg on these ideas to discredit people. The issue I have is that they are a detriment for those of us (Republican or not) that want to debate actual issues.

And for libertarians like me, it makes you seem even crazier.

It is sad that the debate on the issue tends to revert back to
"Well Obama hasn't proved his natural born status."
one replies "You're Racist"

That isn't dialogue.

As for birthers, go ahead, continue to be your own political demise. Just do not stand next to me in opposition.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by coastalite
He traveled to Pakistan at a time when American citizens were not allowed in Pakistan.


Oh dear, that birther lie again - please show us all exactly where and when Americans were banned from Pakistan


He had to be using a passport issued from a country other than the USA.


Why do you think that? How do you explain this www.snopes.com...



If they have been answered many many times, then why is it still an issue?


because birthers refuse to accept a black man is the proper POTUS


You think by ridiculing and labeling people that they are going to just give up their search for the truth?


You are not interested in the truth, going by your silly comments on travel to Pakistan etc here!



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


See for me, the birther issue is fun. It's a complete and total garbage conspiracy devoid of intelligence. It's an easy debate for me. Now when people want to debate me on real issues that the president is doing and what issues are actually relevant, that is a little harder, because I actually have to use some thought. (and sometimes the president doesn't make it easy for me to defend him.)

But the birther issue? Oh that's gold, and the best part is, I can use it against a lot of politicians. The more that jump on this bandwagon, (even for a moment) the better it is for the left, cause you can point to them when they do this and say, hey the guy is crazy as a loon.

I wouldn't put it past the white house to egg this issue on, its just too easy of a target. If it were me running the DNC strategy I would find as many birthers as possible to hold signs up at every right wing event. I would get birthers onto talk shows, news programs for the right as well. Birthers being so nutty do make anyone associating with them look bad and so I wouldn't be surprised if the white house isn't purposely using that tool.

But as far as the racist issue goes, if people were truly honest, you would find that many birthers are in fact pursuing this because of Obama's race. It is sad, but it's the truth, none of them will admit it to be sure, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a motivation for some.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Here is a video where a image expert gives testimony that the Hawaii short form is a fake. It goes into quite a bit of detail using standard image analyst techniques.



The DNC documents:


THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.





THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively:




This proves that witch Pelosi was in on the conspiracy. Why the change in text? Why two notarized documents and why was the second one with less wording and not vetting on eligibility used?

Here is the source for these documents:

www.canadafreepress.com...

This one goes a little more in detail trying to get through if they are significant or not. The author concludes it is at least worth investigating. Plenty of debate from both sides of the fence and author seems to play devil's advocate:

www.therightsideoflife.com...

I think it is quite clear that Obama is not eligible to stand President of the United States. It's not a race issue. It's simply an issue of adhering to the Constitution. There are very good reasons that we have those requirements and to subvert them only leads us further down the road of losing all our freedom and inalienable rights!

[edit on 10-1-2010 by av8r007]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by av8r007
 


We really do hate going over this over and over.

This all has been brought up before, it all has been shot down before.

There aren't two different forms. There are in fact 50 different forms, one for every single state in the union. Each state got it's own form. Some have the constitution clause in the heading, others do not. If you want to know why Pelosi did that, you have to ask her.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by av8r007
Here is a video where a image expert gives testimony


and here is how stupid and wrong that testimony is
top10badguys.blogspot.com...

another birther lie, he is not a image expert!
barackryphal.blogspot.com...
"Ron Polland/Ron Polarik has no discernible expertise in computer forensics, digital imagery, or document examination.

His trade is in statistics and surveys. He has no degrees relating to computers or technology. He is not a computer expert; he has used computers. He is not a scanner expert; he has used scanners"



I think it is quite clear that Obama is not eligible to stand President of the United States.


wrong, he is eligble, and is the POTUS


It's not a race issue.


Yes it is, but you do not like to admit that!


It's simply an issue of adhering to the Constitution.


which Obama has done, but you do not like that!

and still birthers make themselves look sillier and sillier with every fake website and fake analysis that they post here

[edit on 10/1/10 by dereks]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Yes there are different forms for each state. But why two different forms for the State of Colorado? Do you have a link to the posted requirements of Colorado to submit a nomination form?

[edit on 10-1-2010 by av8r007]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by av8r007
 


The second one is for South Carolina. SC as you can see by the received by stamp.

And before you ask, no I am not going to link you to each and every state's requirements. It's your job to look up this information, I just set you straight when you misrepresent it.


[edit on 1/10/2010 by whatukno]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


I am attempting to look it up. However if you are privy to that information and know for a fact that South Carolina does not require it then why not post it? Or is it that you haven't looked for it yourself and are just assuming that it is the case with SC?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by av8r007
 


Someone else did in another thread, they in fact went through and posted links to a lot of different election commissions around the country. I just can't remember which birther thread it was in to be honest. I would point it out to you and save you some time, but there are dozens of different birther threads, and each thread tends to be hundreds of pages long.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by av8r007
Here is a video where a image expert gives testimony that the Hawaii short form is a fake. It goes into quite a bit of detail using standard image analyst techniques.


Seeing as how your "imaging expert" is really a BS artist who lies about his degrees and has a lofty view of himself according to his myspace page, are you starting to rethink the places that have been feeding you this BC garbage to begin with or is this now a search for sources that will eventually back up what you already believe?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
What did the founding fathers mean by Natural Born Citizen? That is the real question and it has a simple answer: Natural Born Citizen = Blood and dirt. In other words, a natural born citizen is born of citizen parents (blood) and born on native soil (dirt).

Doesn't matter where Obama was born; Obama does not qualify because his father was not a citizen, did not want to be a citizen, did not intend to be a citizen, and did not try to be a citizen.

Is this important? Well... Is the Constitution important? Is the law important? Do we just make up the rules as we go along? Do we make up some rules for some people and other rules for other people? Is Obama above the law? Who else is above the law? Who in their infinite wisdom gets to decide who is above the law?

Obama is a Constitutional lawyer. Of course Obama knows the law, and knows that he is holding the office questionably at best, fraudulently at worst. No one is more qualified to address this issue than Obama, but he refuses to - even spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in court (and he is now using our money and our lawyers). And, of course, Obama knows how to game the system and get away with it. (Perhaps even by focusing the argument on his birth certificate, rather than his parentage).

As far as the birth certificate... Obama, by his own admission, was adopted by his stepfather in Indonesia. At that time, Obama's original birth certificate should have been replaced with an amended birth certificate showing Lolo Soetoro as Obama's father. The original birth certificate showing Barack Sr. as Obama's father should have been sealed. No one should have access to that birth record without a court order. Not even Obama. It's possible Obama's 2007 birth record is a forgery, but also true and accurate.

The funny thing is, Obama could have been honest about it all and still gotten the people's vote, and it would have been a moot point. There is always room for debate and honest differences of opinion. And we do have a legal process for amending the Constitution. Some people would still grumble about it, much like some people grumbled about Bush being "selected not elected," but respected the peaceful process. Instead, thru his fraud, deception and bully tactics, Obama has not only created a Constitutional crisis, but a crisis of confidence as well.

The Birthers and everyone who respects and values the Constitution are being backed into a corner (if not by the eligibility issue, than another issue - there are plenty to choose from). Denying them every peaceful, legal and Constitutional means of redress of their grievances is our greatest folly. If we decide the Constitution means nothing, then we have no rights, and we have nothing.

Peace & Light - Mia



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by MsMia
Natural Born Citizen = Blood and dirt.


Where do you get that from? Source?


In other words, a natural born citizen is born of citizen parents (blood) and born on native soil (dirt).


where is that stated in the constitution?


Do we just make up the rules as we go along?


birthers certainly do. Obama is a natural born citizen of the USA


knows that he is holding the office questionably at best, fraudulently at worst.


wrong, Obama is the valid POTUS


At that time, Obama's original birth certificate should have been replaced with an amended birth certificate showing Lolo Soetoro as Obama's father.


once again we see the ignorance of the birther, that just does not happen


The original birth certificate showing Barack Sr. as Obama's father should have been sealed. No one should have access to that birth record without a court order. Not even Obama.


So if someone was born in a foreign country, but adopted by USA citizens then they are a natural born citizen with a US birth certificate.... see how the birthers get all confused with their stories!


The funny thing is, Obama could have been honest about it all and still gotten the people's vote,


He was honest about it, and was voted in as the POTUS


Instead, thru his fraud, deception and bully tactics, Obama has not only created a Constitutional crisis, but a crisis of confidence as well.


Exactly what fraud, deception and bully tactics are you on about?


The Birthers and everyone who respects and values the Constitution


birthers do not respect the constitution...


are being backed into a corner (if not by the eligibility issue, than another issue - there are plenty to choose from).


exactly what other issues are you on about?


Denying them every peaceful, legal and Constitutional means of redress of their grievances is our greatest folly.


no one is denying them that - why do you think they are being denied that?

and we have nothing.


well, you certainly have nothing stopping Obama being the President!

Peace & Light - Mia



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Sorry, the so called "birthers" are NOT wrong! Also it is not just about the birth certificate any longer, its about the fact that the man has spent over 2million dollars in legal fees to hide his past.

He will not provide the following information:
1 Certified copy of original birth certificate
2 Columbia University transcripts
3 Columbia thesis paper
4 Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups
5 Harvard University transcripts
6 Illinois State Senate records
7 Illinois State Senate schedule
8 Law practice client list and billing records/summary
9 Locations and names of all half-siblings and step-mother
10 Medical records (only the one page summary released so far)
11 Occidental College Transcripts
12 Parent’s marriage Certificate
13 Record of baptism
14 Selective Service registration records
15 Schedules for trips outside of the United States before 2007
16 Passport records for all passports
17 Scholarly articles
18 SAT and LSAT test scores
19 Access to his grandmother in Kenya
20 List of all campaign workers that are lobbyists
21 Punahou grade school records
22 Noelani Kindergarten records are oddly missing from the the State of Hawaii Department of Education.
23 Page 11 of Stanley Ann Dunham's divorce decree.

I will not hold my breath until he provides these things because he is a liar and a traitor. We know next to nothing about Zero's past and the people who defend him on this point are without doubt the dumbest people on the planet.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by expat2368
 


So um... I have to ask.

What exactly would you like to do with his SAT scores? What are you going to learn there? His college had to see them. Why would you need to see them?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join