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.


Arizona House OKs Birther Bill! here we go....

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 01:41 AM
Well it's about time. Im calling my Ga. rep today and telling him to jump on board.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 01:54 AM
If people who have dual citizenship are unable to be natural born citizens, then President Kennedy was never President, because by the laws of the time, he was a citizen of Ireland. At that time, anybody with an irish born great grandparent could apply for an irish passport. (They restricted it to grandparents later) Worse, his mother was made a countess by the Pope, and his father was a papal knight. Both of his parents were therefore foreign nobility Would that mean that we haven't had a real president since Eisenhower? But Eisenhower accepted a real, not honorary, knighthood, "The Order of the Elephant" from the King of Denmark. It carried personal nobility with it. Therefore, he was also a foreign nobleman. We have to go back to Truman.

Personally, I stand by the 14th amendment to the US constitution. Anybody born or naturalized here is american. And if you were born here, you were not naturalized so you must be natural born.

(By the way, I think that Kennedy stole the 1960 election.)

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 02:18 AM
In Arizona soon we might have a state law that is tailor made for birther conspiracy believers.

So I asked a question. It's a direct question related to the OP.

Yet has anyone bothered to answer it directly?

Arizona says, that you cannot be on the ballot without proving to them that you meet the constitutional requirements for the job of POTUS.

The question is:

If Obama gets on the ballot in Arizona, will that end this conspiracy?

After all, if Obama proves he meets the qualifications for the office of POTUS in Arizona, wouldn't that mean he has been a natural born citizen this entire time?

So what is the answer?

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 02:47 AM

Originally posted by whatukno
If Obama gets on the ballot in Arizona, will that end this conspiracy?

You know why the birthers will not answer? Because they already know the answer!

This isnt about upholding the constitution. This is about being angry about the election outcome, this is about ideology, this is in part about race. This is in part about religion. Nothing will satisfy the birthers until this man leaves office.... and that may not be for another 7 years.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 02:57 AM
reply to post by Southern Guardian

I don't know if I can take 7 more years of this stupid pathetic, idiotic, moronic, retarded, asinine pseudo conspiracy theory!

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:52 AM
reply to post by whatukno

Well the good thing is that you won't have to deal with it for 7 years.

I would say maybe 3, or 2 1/2 years.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 06:54 AM
reply to post by whatukno

I don't consider myself a birther, Wuk, but a person who has questions. However, I'll answer your question directly, as you've asked it several times without any apparent direct answer.


If President Obama gets on the Arizona ballot, that will, for me, end the conspiracy surrounding his natural-born status.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 07:52 AM
If you haven't seen it yet, I posted the most recent Hawaii Law-The Anti-Birther Bill this morning. Here is the link [I think you will find the associated news article worth the read]:

I can tell you it won't be making things any easier-despite the law intentions.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 08:42 AM
reply to post by argentus

Thank you. I wonder why it's so difficult to answer such a simple question?

I am starting to think that it doesn't matter to birthers what facts are presented, it doesn't matter what evidence is shown. They just want Obama out, end of story. They don't care if he is a natural born citizen or not.

They get a "birther bill" a bill designed to appease them, so I ask the question, if Obama ends up on the Arizona ballot after passing the test of this bill, will this end the conspiracy? What do I get? Silence for the most part.

Makes you wonder if people are here for truth, or to just spread lies and disinformation?

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 09:39 AM

Originally posted by Riposte
And this is also why the definition strictly states "in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen" and says nothing about dual citizenship or the declaration thereof.

That's how Emnerich de Vattel defined it. There's no indication that the framers of the Constitution agreed with that definition. In fact, you left out part of your quote:

"I say that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen"

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law Applied to the Conduct and to the Affairs of Nations and of Sovereigns

That's one man's opinion. A foreign man. Certainly not a founding father of our country.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 02:46 PM
Here is the latest on this matter-from the White House:

Arizona "Birther" Bill Dismissed by White House, Slammed by Critics

The Arizona House of Representatives on Monday voted 31 - 22 to advance a bill that would require Arizona's secretary of state to review a presidential candidate's birth certificate before that candidate could get on the ballot in the state.

The White House has been dismissive of the legislation. "I can't imagine Arizona voters think their tax dollars are well served by a legislature that is less focused on their lives than in fringe right-wing radio conspiracy theories," White House spokesman Bill Burton told CNN.


I smell fear..... sniffffffffff.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 04:52 PM
reply to post by whatukno

I think, Wuk, that much of the discourse on both sides of this issue has been so pat, so repeated, that it has lost a frame of reference. Put another way, I was thinking of doing a thread that incorporated both sides and their pat responses to each other -- sort of a point of reference with supportive links for both sides.

Sort of like the old joke, where people who've heard the same jokes time and time again just shout out a number and everyone laughs. Not to imply that this issue is a joke (although I think you might feel it is), but that like other conspiracies such as 9/11, we've reached a standstill where there is no more new information to discover, so we rehash the old information. Someone finds something not talked about that infers President Obama might not be telling the truth about his birthplace, and the responses at first address that OP, but quickly degrade to a rehashment of the prominent talking points on both sides.

Like 9/11, it would serve both sides to combine efforts to seek the truth, wherever that leads us, rather than defend our positions. BUT! We are human, and we seem to stake our claim in our beliefs.

I'm also one of the ones who would be satisfied to see a longform or vault copy of President Obama's- that would be the end of my questions.

In regard to this particular OP, I said a few pages back (without response) that I see no harm in this legislation. If there is nothing to hide, then all it can do is assure the voting public that the President is who he says he is. Frankly, I'm a tad surprised that Democrats and the White House aren't strongly supporting this legislation, as it would put everything to rest. I still don't see the harm of it, to require presidential candidates to be vetted by a body outside of their own delegation. Maybe someone can answer that question for me. What can it hurt? It can only pull the nation together, IF the President has been completely honest with the nation, as it has been continually reassured he has been.

I had to laugh a bit when I saw this story on Headline News. They were very sarcastic and represented the crazy birthers as "not believing that the President is a citizen." Well, that was never the issue was it? It's OBVIOUS that the President is a citizen. I fondly remember when the news was just reported and didn't have a spin put on it. Entertainment TV. Sadly, I think I get better "news" from Stewart and Colbert.

Now, you're thinking that I really AM a birther aren't you?
Who knows, Wuk. I still have questions. Like 9/11, the pongy scent sometimes wafts from both sides.

Oh, and ............... arguement #31!!! THERE!

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:26 PM

Originally posted by argentus
Sort of like the old joke, where people who've heard the same jokes time and time again just shout out a number and everyone laughs.

I still don't see the harm of it, to require presidential candidates to be vetted by a body outside of their own delegation. Maybe someone can answer that question for me. What can it hurt?

I don't see the harm in a particular body vetting the president's eligibility. I think that's a GREAT idea and am surprised it's not already happening. The problem I have with this particular legislation is that the Secretary of State of AZ (or any state) has sole veto power. What does the Secretary of State know about verifying documents? If there IS a body that vets eligibility, it should be on a federal level and composed of several people including a documents specialist.

The harm (or potential harm) of each state having their SoS vet the presidential candidate is that their politics may enter into it. There's the potential for corruption times 50. The presidency is a federal position and the vetting should be done by a politically balanced group on a federal level.

Now, you're thinking that I really AM a birther aren't you?
Who knows, Wuk. I still have questions.

I think it's good to have questions, and just so you know, I don't use the term birther as a derogatory name. It's just a person who is unsure of the president's eligibility and wants to push him to satisfy those questions. Of course, there are extremists in every group, but for the most part, I don't think "birther" is any more derogatory than "truther". And I'm one of those.

Oh, and ............... arguement #31!!! THERE!

Retort #17B!

That's hilarious!

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 09:34 PM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

Wow! Beautifully researched Bob... This opens a lot more questions about Obama... Unfortunately liberals don't want to know the truth about Obama. Hopes and dreams are way better than reality. That fake green birth certificate could be a blank sheet of paper (it practically is) and it would be good enough for them. I am so glad legislators are stepping up to make sure this travesty can never happen again.

Man... I love their defense.
"Its good enough". Not for me..
"I don't have my full long form BC so its OK for Obama not to have his". ???
"Prove he's illegitimate"... How can we do that he's sealed all his records...

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 10:32 PM
reply to post by argentus

You might be different, but there are others that say that Obama can't be president because his father was not american. They just differ on whether the father has to be american, period, or whether the fact that the father's citizenship was hereditary makes Obama a dual national and therefore not natural born. Then there are others that say that he can't be president because he was adopted by a foreigner and became a foreigner. Or he was elected under a false name. There will always be an excuse to cry "He's not the president."

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:14 AM
Well, the actual goal of the birthers is achieved.

Great! Way to go birthers! You just destroyed the 4th Amendment for everyone. Pat yourselves on the back! Good going!

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:06 AM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

HA! Dammit, I WAS going to use 17b!!! hmmmmm. I'll get back to you on that, when I've framed a proper response.

One of the facets of this legislation that I would object to (and I admit I haven't been able to find it to read it) is the inference that it might be used to require only President Obama to produce the documents to verify eligibility. For it to have any usefulness at all, it must be required of ALL presidential candidates. And, as you said, the persons or group that actually do the vetting are worrisome -- no point in replacing one potentially-biased group with another. How do we find an impartial body, and are their parameters for vetting the documents measurable and objective?

reply to post by christianpatrick

I'm not trying to be different. I'm just simply saying that I have questions regarding President Obama's eligibility, and perhaps most-importantly -- I don't KNOW for a fact either way as there is evidence on both sides of the issue that is persuasive, at least to me. I would like to KNOW the truth regardless of the direction it takes, and I believe that there are many, many people that feel the same way. yes, I realize that the President is not required to satisfy me or anyone else.

It seems obvious that there are those that want President Obama gone and will latch onto any and every reason to attempt to produce that result, however I also think it's a mistake as well as an ad hom generalization to characterize ALL those who question the President's eligibility as falling into that category.

Likewise, I think it's a HUGE and possibly intentional mistake to characterize all "birthers" or even most of them as being racists as the core of their objections and questions. It's an easy charge to make, and one that is not defensible. How does one prove they are not a racist? The statement is a show-stopper, and I believe it is frequently used with full knowledge of that and for that reason.

Of course, as I've read repeatedly on these threads, anyone with a dozen brain cells to rub together that doesn't know that President Obama is everything he says he is is obviously a moron, racist, blithering idiot, or all of the above. A few seem to take care to be fair, and support their ideas with sound research -- BenevolentHeretic, as just one example.

ETA, Patrick I wasn't inferring that you resort to any of the above distractive arguments -- just stating what I see all too often.

[edit on 23/4/10 by argentus]

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:10 PM

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Riposte

It's obvious you have made up your mind already. As I stated before, the United States does not recognize laws in other countries. If Obama has dual citizenship, he would have to formally declare that to the United States State Department. Do you have any proof he has ever done this?

But back to my original question. The question you purposely decided to avoid just to keep on spouting your already debunked statements and opinions.

The question I asked, the one that you avoided is.

In Arizona they are proposing a law, that would require Obama to prove to the Secretary of State in Arizona that he is eligible for the office of POTUS. Now, if he does pass the requirements in Arizona, thus proving his Natural Born Citizenship Status. Will that be the end of this Conspiracy Theory for you?

It's a simple question. Does it end it? It's a Yes or No question. I am not asking for a rehashing of your tired already debunked theories. I am asking the above question.

They will never... ever.... ever... ever... ever... let it go. Jesus Christ himself could descend from Heaven on the 6:00 news and say that he personally delivered Obama in a Hawaii hospital and the birthers would howl and call him a liar and crucify him all over again.

Truth is not what they are interested in. Running him out of office is all they want.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:35 PM
reply to post by Angus123

That's fine rhetoric, Angus. I respect your posts, in general. You are not a "birther", right? And yet you had the bald-faced audacity to speak for them.

I'm hoping that you'll consider the source of your insults, and realize that a large amount of the American citizens have questions, just as I do. To proclaim that no amount of evidence will EVER solve this issue makes us all look like hacks, and by all, I mean the "birthers" as well as the "believers". Labels. Logical fallacies. Buncha bullcrap, and I for one am tired of it.

1. President Obama could put this all to rest, cause the populace to stand down by producing and sharing a few documents -- many of which were closed to public view on the first day of his taking office.

2. The American citizens have "no standing", as according to the powers in legislative assembly, to force these issues in court. Hundreds of cases have been issued, and it has been deemed that only CONgress and the SCOTUS have "standing" to hear these cases. What is there to loose by hearing them -- have you asked yourself that? I just want to know, regardless of the outcome.

3. I believe that removing President Obama from office at this (insert Bush Senior gesture) juncture would be calamitous to the United States of America. I think it would separate the nation in a way that has not occured since the Cival War.

4. Still, I think we, the people, of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America, deserve to know the truth. Then, we can decide how to deal with the repercussions of the findings.

5. I hope, truly, that it can be proven that President Obama is all he proclaims to be. I hope to be able to prove it. I don't believe it is so, but I want to follow the trails and evidence, because I don't want this great nation to be torn, and I don't want civil wars to break out in the U.S.

6. Not everyone dissects these issues as we do here on ATS. My own father sends me things that are derisive of "birthers", as he believes that anyone -- including myself -- that even question the President's eligibility are whackamoles, and worthy of only being interred in a razor-wired camp. He fought in the Korean War, and yet he believes that suppressing free speech and questions are appropriate. I love him and that will never change. We simply disagree as to the evidence.

7. Why would the President, who loves his country, not release all his documents for our view, to put to rest all of this angst, to allow even the quirky Orly Taiz trials to be heard? This is the most persuasive thing against the President, in my opinion. Those that have nothing to hide, fear nothing.

8. I hope he's for real. God, but we need a real person who can help foster in better times, sounder economic policies, truer humanitarian legislation that helps those than cannot help themselves. Please don't pander to the big money, President Obama. We, the people need you on our side.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:54 PM

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by whatukno
If Obama gets on the ballot in Arizona, will that end this conspiracy?

You know why the birthers will not answer? Because they already know the answer!

This isnt about upholding the constitution. This is about being angry about the election outcome, this is about ideology, this is in part about race. This is in part about religion. Nothing will satisfy the birthers until this man leaves office.... and that may not be for another 7 years.

Books on how simple it is to fool the system:
The I.D. Master (Copyright 2002) by John Q Newman
#The Delayed Birth Certificate -- how to obtain one in any name you want
# How to create a fake employment history -- and back it up
# How to create an education history -- complete with real transcripts
# New identity after 9/11 -- what to expect, and how to slip through the cracks

Fake certifications and certificates are EASY.. 1st president of china Sun Yat-sen was state verified as hawaiian born too.
In March 1904, he obtained a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,[7] issued by the Territory of Hawaii, stating he was born on November 24, 1870 in Kula, Maui[8]

Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866 to a Hakka family in the village of Cuiheng, Xiangshan

Dime a dozen illegal aliens in los angeles get fake papers.. it's common, and easy... call your local PD and chat with any forgery detective.

Most people lack the expertise to know the difference between a certificate & certification... it's hilarious that obamas altered certification was accepted on blind faith.. believers didn't take the few seconds of time to critically analyze it and understand the alteration made it invalid and legally useless. Call your local police background investigator, ask about ID forgeries and how easy they are..

It happens, a-lot... if illegal aliens and low life forgers can do it, it'd be easier for the establishment.. the gop/dnc have cultists who unquestionably believe anything their party leaders say, along with a massive propaganda machine to rally their flock to defend their dear leader while and demonizing skeptics.

the gop/dnc worked "nazi-hard" for these aggressive wars / oppressive laws (compare hitlers enabling act with the patriot act, then lol in horror), billions are on the line along with the empires chess game on the world stage.. after the 'bad bush' abortion, obama is a perfect useful idiot for the good cop acting job to keep the empires violent-resource-grabbing-wars-for-profit agenda rolling over brown strangers in their homes.. all with a smiling face... because of a few pieces of easy to obtain "secret" state certified paper put forward by a known liar..

Believers are easy to fool...they ignore history lessons that scream "DO NOT TRUST PARTY LEADERS!!" imagine how different history would be if more 1930 germans refused to accept their party leaders word?, rather than believe hitler they rallied to oust him? .. millions of lives would have been saved... the same goes for post 9/11 USA as history repeats... party leaders lie, believers believe and strangers die because of it.

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in