Investigators: Obama using Connecticut Soc. Sec. Number!!

Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Simple.

I believe that Obama has a possible CIA connection and I am following a trail. Have been for awhile. Nothing new.

If Obama were involved (or his mother which I believe is where it started) it would explain how or why he obtained a SS# from CT. It would also explain why he would be issued a number of social security numbers. One possibly being a repeat number which is illegal, but not for the CIA.

Not following at all. Why would he need a fake SSN to be a CIA asset? Why would he need multiple SSNs to be a CIA asset?

Proving there is a CIA link would explain a number of "inconsistencies" or "oddities" surrounding his background.

Going to a private school while his mother was on food stamps and she was obtaining a PhD....world extensive travel with little to no money.....visiting Pakistan at a time when, although allowed, US/Pakistan relations were not friendly....obtaining Indonesian citizenship and still retaining US citizenship....complete inability to access records....etc.

I believe people have oddities in their backgrounds. I believe a few can be chalked up to coincidence, happenstance, or error. I believe in coincidences and oddities, not just quite so many. Don't get me wrong -- much of what has been written regarding Obama is not true. But some of it, there are still questions that may not amount to a "crime" or his "ineligibility" to be President, but they are things that I believe the American people have a right to ask and/or know. And no, this does not mean everything in his life.

Just as an FYI even though it is off-topic, I had been participating in Crop Circle threads until I was labelled an "alien makes them" believer simply for participating. Here, I am automatically a birther. I stopped participating in those threads, and it seems I will no longer participate in these either.

Should anyone care? Nope. But it begs the question -- how many other people have been chased away from a discussion simply because, once labelled, there is no discussion. It becomes an automatic attack from the "opposing side". You can no longer state something without it implying or trying to prove the "big picture". Sometimes, just proving the little things along the way, leads to big discoveries.

To me, questioning is the only path to truth in everything.

Hey thanks, that is a lot of stuff there but I was just wondering if you could simply answer my question. If you are not a birther, why do you think he needed a fake or multiple SSNs? That is specifically what I asked and seems to be specifically NOT what you answered. I understand you think he is a CIA asset or some other secret thing but NOT born in Kenya, right? So what does this SSN thing have to do with that? Being in the CIA or not, why not just give him a SSN like every other person in the CIA?

What would be the purpose? The point?

Originally posted by Libertygal



On this link you will see the Selective Service application. The SSN is redacted. However, below the first images, you will see a screenshot of the Selective Service site return.

Here is another link with an investigation done by Debbie Schlussel which shows an image of the document received via the FOIA along with an image of a scan of the envelope.

I know you have me on ignore so I do not expect a response but I want to thank you for proving what this is really all about.

The scan of his BC is obviously fake according to you based on...looking at it.

This scan of something with a bad signature on it is just automatically true based on...looking at it.

No agenda there at all.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


You too have done a pretty good job. I just didn't have time earlier-had to go out.

As far as when you say: you guys. At the beginning of this thread I indicated I didn't think they had much, without knowing the SS#'s etc.

I agreed that they may have found some oddities etc. Since then more oddities have been brought up. This thread has been a great outlet for many to express many sides of this controversy. And it is that.

The two PI's made their complaint in respective courts, that is their right. There is a process of law-it will be followed. If it is determined more examination is warranted, so be it.

Me personally, wouldn't be surprised but not for any deep plot by the CIA or anything like that. But, if true, more of a young rebellion type, maybe trying to get a little extra for college/living. I've had tough times in my life, I won't judge him for that type of activity then.

If there are any consequences to pay-pay them. That is our system. But I feel that he could really put a stop to this chatter and speculation by giving what people want to see. I think it would go a long way in getting support behind him again.

As it is now, more and more people starting to ask more and more questions. All chipping away at the legitimacy of this Presidency. When he could make it all (most) go away with one or two authorizaton forms.

I would think as man being President would want to look out the Oval Office, across the big City, thinking how he got to that spot that shares with only a few others & think that every American stands with him in the common interest of the USA. Not millions questioning his citizenship, his childhood, his loyality, his honor etc.

He could do himself a lot of good letting access to those records. He should welcome it with open arms. IMO.

He isn't being a uniter, he's being a devider.

His choice, not mine.

reply to post by anon72


Typical MO. Post tons of threads from neocon smear sites, (WND) then act like a coy impartial party. IMO, by spreading disinfo under the auspices of legitimate inquiry, you do ATS a great disservice and drop these numerous nugget threads as if this place is your own personal litter box.

The poster you mention has done more to discredit and disprove this ruse with erudite sources and solid logic. Pleas to receive same fall upon deaf ears. If you took the time to read the data provided you'd recognize that the evidence to refute these claims is undeniable and there is zero factual basis to these accusations. Pure suspicion and speculation peppered with giant leaps of fiction.

Please spare us the impartial referee act. Thanks.


[edit on 14-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by K J Gunderson


My intention was to be clear. I wasn't avoiding anything.

Try this:

-- The CIA would make having multiple social security numbers possible.
-- The CIA would have the ability to apply for a social security number from anywhere for a person they were protecting.
-- Having the CIA involved would also explain how, without proof of Obama spending the millions himself to seal records, all of his records got sealed so efficiently and effectively. The man's background is locked down better than Fort Knox! And it started as a candidate, not just as President.

The average American citizen can not have multiple SS#s. Nor would the average American citizen apply for a number in Connecticut while living in Hawaii.

Again, it, at this point, is nothing more than "odd". However, I find that "odd" things usually have a reason. All I'm trying to do is find out what it is.

Is that a better explanation?
Thanks for your respectful reply and questions.

Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

My intention was to be clear. I wasn't avoiding anything.

Try this:

-- The CIA would make having multiple social security numbers possible.

Why?

-- The CIA would have the ability to apply for a social security number from anywhere for a person they were protecting.

Why bother?

-- Having the CIA involved would also explain how, without proof of Obama spending the millions himself to seal records, all of his records got sealed so efficiently and effectively. The man's background is locked down better than Fort Knox!

And it started as a candidate, not just as President.

But what I asked was WHY??????

The average American citizen can not have multiple SS#s. Nor would the average American citizen apply for a number in Connecticut while living in Hawaii.

Again, it, at this point, is nothing more than "odd". However, I find that "odd" things usually have a reason. All I'm trying to do is find out what it is.

Is that a better explanation?
Thanks for your respectful reply and questions.

No, not even a little. With all due respect, you did not even attempt to answer my question. Will the third time be a charm?

Originally posted by lpowell0627
The average American citizen can not have multiple SS#s.

Never say never:

Over the years, some people have been issued more than one Social Security number. This usually happens when the information entered on the original application for a Social Security number doesn't match the information on a later application.

Examples of non-matching information:

The name may be shown differently or a nickname is used.
The date or place of birth is not the same.
A stepparent's name is given instead of a birth parent's.
A parent gets a number for a young child and the child later fills out an application as part of a school lesson on Social Security.

We also might assign more than one Social Security number if a person sends in two applications within a very short time. If the first application has not been processed before the second one arrives, our computer system will not be able to identify a match.

Source SSA

Numbers happen. You were saying?

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Numbers happen. You were saying?

I thought he was saying that Obama needed more than one or at least one fake SSN to be a CIA asset because......................................................?

It just seems to be taking a little while to get there.

reply to post by K J Gunderson


Agent Double Obama. Well this explains EVERYTHING.

At least I can sleep at night knowing all the Birthers will get Scooter-gated for attempts to expose CIA operatives.


[edit on 15-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

www.wnd.com...

Google clamps down on Obama's Social Security story
Now offering warning that some sites referencing dispute 'may harm' computers

Posted: May 15, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Internet behemoth Google apparently is clamping down further on consumers' access to a report about President Obama's Social Security number, which points out the number was designated for a Connecticut applicant, by warning that some sites carrying information on the situation "may harm your computer."

WND had reported two days earlier, in the wake of the revelations about Obama's Social Security number and the questions raised by the report, that Google was suppressing access to information about the report, linking to completely unrelated stories when consumers would search for the issue on the site's news tab.

Now a similar search of the web portion of the site brought up several warnings. For a reference to the report at hunsbergers.net, another at cleanclock.com, and a third at ccweldingco.com – all just on the first page – Google warned "This site may harm your computer."

Because some people like to rumor monger, don't they?

reply to post by Libertygal


It has already been said in these threads by other posters that Libertygal's links have been throwing up warnings. Now either there is something wrong with them or people on ATS have a huge influence on the people that run google?

reply to post by K J Gunderson



While I'm no fan of birthers or SSNers, for what it's worth, I've had no issues with her links.

Originally posted by Rren
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

While I'm no fan of birthers or SSNers, for what it's worth, I've had no issues with her links.

Just because you had no issues means nothing. Malware is often surreptitious in nature. What programs have you used to check her links with?

reply to post by K J Gunderson


Just AVG (free edition). Have you noticed any problems? What did you use? I wasn't making the accusation, so perhaps I shouldn't have got in the middle... just reporting in. No problems on my end, so far as I'm aware.

Originally posted by Rren
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Just AVG (free edition). Have you noticed any problems? What did you use? I wasn't making the accusation, so perhaps I shouldn't have got in the middle... just reporting in. No problems on my end, so far as I'm aware.

No, it is more than fair to get in the middle. I did not check them either so I am not speaking from experience either. I have seen two other posts pointing out that certain AV software had marked them as risky links. It just seems a little odd to see people saying that here a few days ago and have Google reporting it now. I find it hard to believe that any posters here convinced Google to go with the same ruse they were pulling here.

The reason I ask what you used is because I know most of the malware I have had in the past has been backdoor, keylog type stuff that never presented any issues until I found out I had them. They mostly came from websites I visited.

At this point I did not follow her links because she presents more than enough "information" for me to go look elsewhere for confirmation of any of the things she is pushing.

I have been weary and waiting for anyone to come back and report they used the same software as the other poster and it came up clean or someone else to confirm it came up dirty. Now Google is saying it and to me that is something. I could be wrong, like you I guess I should not get into it but it just seems a bit odd to me. Perhaps someone else out there that has good AV software wants to go check?

It might be that the Corporate office of Baskin Robbins applied for a Social Security Number for Barack Obama, its offices were out east because of its foreign ownership, point of application may have been Connecticut thus explaining the SSN.

As to the large numbers of SSN's that are attributed to Barack Obama all around the country, has anyone considered that Daddy Barack Obama may have impregnated a large number of gullible college girls before returning to Kenya and that some of them also named these bastard offspring after the Daddy Barack Obama?

In the end this will turn out to have an end that is a very interesting story, but just not the kind of end the "Birthers" are imagining.

Originally posted by Rren
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

While I'm no fan of birthers or SSNers, for what it's worth, I've had no issues with her links.

I know and you provided a couple of great sources / links refuting claims.

FWIW, I realize EVERYONE thinks Wkipedia is a joke but here is their link/warning:

www.orlytaitzesq.com... -- Official web site (potential malware and redirect warning, copy and paste into your browser at your own risk)

(Bottom of page.) en.wikipedia.org...

Just sayin. Not suggesting "Don't go there." Just be advised. I've had recent issues on both Mac and PC. (The PC had VERY robust AVS / firewall.) I also posted a link with warning from another independent site.

ETA: More corroboration here:

2010 IMPORTANT UPDATE
From people who understand these things better than I do, on February 12, 2010:
Malwarebytes AntiMalware is reporting a malicious IP associated with Orly’s site. Google and Firefox have not yet detected it.

Deep in Malwarebytes’ description is a chart showing that the redirection in boing747.net can send you to Trojan zbot. This bot is intended to target online banking. In other words, it is a very dangerous piece of malware.

ohforgoodnesssake.com...

BTW the virus I got on my PC was of JavaScript origin. I've set my preferences now to disable. My .02¢

Bottom line..........Don't Taitz me bro.

[edit on 16-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by lpowell0627


my first 3 #'s match where i was born/lived. I think you will have a hard time finding anyone with more than a couple ss#s from states that they didn't live in. If in fact he did have multiple #s from states where he didn't live (Obama) I don't know ,but if he did- something ain't right!

reply to post by kinda kurious


I was told by social security I am only allowed 10 cards issued to me for my lifetime. This kinda worried me b/c I'm already on #4 or so and I'm only in my early thirties.Does this only count for my original number? Would it be possible for me to get say...20 different numbers, each with the ability for me to get 10 replacement cards? Or.. would there be a max limit of 10 #s with 1 card each(no replacements)...Etc...

[edit on 16-5-2010 by theyrout2getus]

reply to post by theyrout2getus


I'm not precisely sure what you are talking about.
Are your cards getting washed in the laundry?

Why not get it laminated? It will last longer.