Obama's Social Security # goes to Court-Complaint in federal district seeks evidence of suspected f

[snip] a dead mans ssn is personal? i assumed that meant it wasnt being used anymore, so this is new to me

according to t/c i cannot post others personal information.. however, this ssn belongs to someone who has been dead for forty years, and i believe doesnt fit into that category

in no way is this ssn usable
this is not personal information, as the president ssn is classified and unavailable to the public.
when run through an onboard police ssn check, the result is the same, but the policeman was fired

so, either this is true, or the person faked their death and it is their personal information. on a conspiracy website in which the point of this thread is to prove rather or not this is obamas ssn, or just one of them, this is extremely valuable information. any leo that doesnt believe this story should have the opportunity to run it themselves.

know that your job may be compromised upon doing so. is it not worth it?


To reiterate, posting of his, or anyone’s, SSN# is not acceptable on ATS.
Mod Note: Terms & Conditions of Use – Please Review This Link.

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
according to t/c i cannot post others personal information.. however, this ssn belongs to someone who has been dead for forty years, and i believe doesnt fit into that category

Actually, in many places dead people are still considered people and their personal information is still personal information even after they die. Crazy aint it? Post it over and over again, it is going to come down anyway. So I have to ask how you can confirm who it belong to - this dead person with no personal information you speak of?

in no way is this ssn usable
this is not personal information, as the president ssn is classified and unavailable to the public.
when run through an onboard police ssn check, the result is the same, but the policeman was fired

Link to what you are talking about?

so, either this is true, or the person faked their death and it is their personal information.

Didn't you just say that being dead made this no longer personal information? I just want to make sure I am following you.

on a conspiracy website in which the point of this thread is to prove rather or not this is obamas ssn, or just one of them, this is extremely valuable information. any leo that doesnt believe this story should have the opportunity to run it themselves.

Have you run it personally?

know that your job may be compromised upon doing so. is it not worth it?

Let us know in two years if it was.

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
this ssn belongs to someone who has been dead for forty years,

This is hearsay. I'm not going to just take your word for it. I have done a LOT of research on this subject over the past couple of days and there's NO indication that this SS# every belonged to anyone else, except for the random date of 1890 listed on the SSN verifier form. .

The SSN Verifier Plus form for Obama's SSN has 3 dates listed as "associated with" the number. They are:

1890
08/04/1961
04/08/1961

The middle one is Obama's birthday, as we all know. What the others are, I have no idea.

No one seems too concerned about the 04/08/1961 date... I wonder why? Because it's a typo, that's why. People make mistakes.

so, either this is true, or the person faked their death and it is their personal information.

So either our president is a common criminal and a fraud, who uses other people's SSNs (for some unknown reason).
- OR -
some old dude faked his death in a complex SSN plot involving the POTUS
-OR-
someone made a typo.

Gosh, that's a hard one...

Both Lexis Nexis and Choice Point are only as reliable as the monkeys that are employed to input data in to those systems. I used to work as an insurance investigator and used both of those databases. From my experience, there was some good information contained within; however, much of it was about as accurate as a preschooler trying to color within the lines.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

"Actually, in many places dead people are still considered people and their personal information is still personal information even after they die. Crazy aint it? Post it over and over again, it is going to come down anyway. So I have to ask how you can confirm who it belong to - this dead person with no personal information you speak of?"


hasnt come down yet, i decided to compromise, so it wont


"Link to what you are talking about?"


otthere is no link to a leo's onboard computer, sorry. sure you can find one though



"Didn't you just say that being dead made this no longer personal information? I just want to make sure I am following you."


right, and faking their death makes them alive, and makes it their personal information.
assuming dead people retain their ssn, what does obama have to do with 1890, and why is it on the ssn believed to be his?


"Have you run it personally?"

yes, yes i have, and its the reason i gave up on trying to debunk this # and started to get more people to try it. maybe when all the cops who try it get fired they will start asking questions.



"Let us know in two years if it was."

and let us know if this suspicious "debunking" over and over in this thread is worth it. if you arent going to help find proof, and will just split hairs in every post, what are yo doing here?

have you run the number? if not shut up

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


because two typos, and the REAL birthday makes sense on the POTUS ssn, i mean hes leading the country, but this little set of "typos" gets overlooked?

say i get pulled over by a leo and my ssn contains the same typos. i will be prosecuted forr ss fraud unless i can prove it is just a typo. can obama prove it is just a typo? bc he wont even show people his longhand BC toget everyone to shut up

so why isnt he being investigated? oh ya, the potus is above the law

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
any leo that doesnt believe this story should have the opportunity to run it themselves.

WRONG

Any law enforcement officer that runs any kind of information retrieval on any information that is not directly connected to an active case is guilty of violation of privacy laws, just like any citizen would be that is not a law enforcement officer.

The idea that just because a cop is a cop they have some 'right' to wander freely through databases of private information not connected to an active case is extremely dangerous.

Any cop that ran any SSN without cause should lose their job.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
this ssn belongs to someone who has been dead for forty years,

so, either this is true, or the person faked their death and it is their personal information.

So either our president is a common criminal and a fraud, who uses other people's SSNs (for some unknown reason).
- OR -
some old dude faked his death in a complex SSN plot involving the POTUS
-OR-
someone made a typo.

Gosh, that's a hard one...

absolutely right, no other president has had this discrepancy, and nearly all of them were common criminals
like u said, this is a tough one.
we all know obama would never lie his way into the seat of potus, a job that gives him ANYTHING he wants

thats just silly, hes a god fearing christian after all

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
otthere is no link to a leo's onboard computer, sorry. sure you can find one though

I did not ask for a link to a computer. I asked for a link to what you were talking about. Someone getting fired for looking it up?

right, and faking their death makes them alive, and makes it their personal information.

assuming dead people retain their ssn, what does obama have to do with 1890, and why is it on the ssn believed to be his?

I honestly cannot tell you but I am still not sure what you believe is personal information and why it changes when someone dies. I do know though that it hardly says that it belonged to someone else. It is just a date on a search.

yes, yes i have, and its the reason i gave up on trying to debunk this snip and started to get more people to try it. maybe when all the cops who try it get fired they will start asking questions.

Again, what cops are you talking about?
What cops have gotten fired for looking this up?
What did you find whene you looked it up?
What good is firing them for looking it up?
Wouldn't that kind of be too late?
Wouldn't getting fired be a really good reason to go public with what they found?

and let us know if this suspicious "debunking" over and over in this thread is worth it. if you arent going to help find proof, and will just split hairs in every post, what are yo doing here?

I do not need it to help. He is in office. You want him out, not me. What goal should I be working for? Stopping you? I would rather watch you all play.

What would you like me to find? If you are serious, then stop giving tidbits of annecdotes and being cagey. Let's get to it.

have you run the number? if not shut up

Shut up?

Then I guess your next post really needs to be both proof you ran it and what you found when you did or you might need to shut up. Although, I would never suggest such a thing.

When you get done stomping your feet and yelling, let me know what it is you want my help with. I feel confident I have enough here to help you out all you need.

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
any leo that doesnt believe this story should have the opportunity to run it themselves.

WRONG

just like any citizen would be that is not a law enforcement officer.

Any cop that ran any SSN without cause should lose their job.

and yet they have websites that allow the "joe average citizen" to look up ss numbers? they just let insurance agencies do it trusting the info will not be misused.

if thats the case, why is there no protection on said sites? a twelve year old boy can search the sites, but will he be arrested for information retrieval when all of the information was posted and left unguarded.

btw, that went out the window for leo's a while ago with the patriot act

you say its illegal to run information on people not directly involved in an open case but they can run license plates all day, without even stopping the car they are searching on. they dont get fired

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
no other president has had this discrepancy,

What are you talking about? I have been around a while and I've never heard of anyone doing the searches on a previous president. We don't know their SSNs, nor have we seen their birth certificates, their college theses, their transcripts or their passports or any of the other personal information people are demanding this president shows.

This is only being demanded of OBAMA. No other previous president.

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
Any cop that ran any SSN without cause should lose their job.

It's amazing how people scream and cry about their privacy being breached, but when they want something private from someone else, then all the rules change? I don't think so.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's amazing how people scream and cry about their privacy being breached, but when they want something private from someone else, then all the rules change? I don't think so.

It's right there in your sig. Far too many people don't want a free society, they want THEIR society. There has been zero pieces of evidence with even the slightest credibility to support these claims, yet far too many people want this particular president to prove he is innocent of these charges.

It's actually pretty funny.

reply to post by Sinnthia

Where in any of this law does it state you must release your SSN to anyone that asks for it?

OK follow the dotted line.

#1 There are 19,523,741 one person businesses and 25,392,478 small businesses in the USA. the 2002 census said that MOST of the 19.5 one person businesses were sole prop. This means they are not incorporated and therefore their business does not have a separate tax number. The file their business taxes under their SSN. Some of the other small businesses are also not incorporated because it is blasted expensive and Accountants charge you extra if you are incorporated (Been thre done that)

#2 How to instruction for filling out a 1099

...On the form itself, you need to enter your own information in the top left box. You should include your name/business name, full address and phone number. Next, enter your tax identification number in the box directly below. Just to the right of that box, enter the tax identification number of the person you are issuing the 1099 to. Below those two boxes, enter the name of the person and their address.... ezinearticles.com...

#3 How many people are going to come looking for your tax number?

....SMC Business Councils, a top small business group in Pennsylvania, says it surveyed its members and discovered that a typical small business in the state currently sends an average of 10 1099 filings a year.

But the new rules would blow out that average to more than 200 filings a year. slumz.boxden.com...

How many small businesses already buried under tons of red tape, are going to take the time to run a security check on a person a day??? More over how much is that check going to COST them???

What is a shop keeper who sells office supplies or hardware or lumber or parts for delivery trucks going to do. Turn away a customers until he has time to run a security check???

This is going to be one BIG FRACKIN mess come 2012 and it is going to cost YOU in higher costs of goods and services and in lost of jobs due to the loss of many small businesses and the discouragement of potential new businesses.

Congress and Obama have their collective heads wedged in the arse of a donkey!

Originally posted by crimvelvet
OK follow the dotted line.

OK, I did that. Thank you. Now please.

Follow my question.

Where in any of this law does it state you must release your SSN to anyone that asks for it?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
no other president has had this discrepancy,

What are you talking about? I have been around a while and I've never heard of anyone doing the searches on a previous president. We don't know their SSNs, nor have we seen their birth certificates, their college theses, their transcripts or their passports or any of the other personal information people are demanding this president shows.

This is only being demanded of OBAMA. No other previous president.

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
Any cop that ran any SSN without cause should lose their job.

It's amazing how people scream and cry about their privacy being breached, but when they want something private from someone else, then all the rules change? I don't think so.

its not private when its required to serve. they were asking for this since before he was elected. its happened before (this was even long ago before it was all done by fallable computers, and people who put typos on ssn sites

naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com...

ill gladly keep looking for more, but i have to wade through all of obamas crap.

i never said i wanted him out, i said i wanted the truth, and not in two decades. he can stay, idc, but he should be able to put all of us at ease, and is clearly not interested in that

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
its not private when its required to serve.

Can you please provide some statute, law, provision, etc. that requires the president publicly disclose his or her SSN in order to take the position?

Thank you.

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
its happened before (this was even long ago before it was all done by fallable computers, and people who put typos on ssn sites

naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com...

I am not sure what good Chester does for the birthers. About 120 years later and he still has not been impeached so...I am not sure if that is supposed to help or hurt your cause?

reply to post by Sinnthia


because we all know you can impeach dead presidents
rationalliberty.com...

the fact is that it is easier to have everyone fighting over where he was born, when that doesn't matter

his father was a kenyan citizen, therefore british commonwealth citizen
so is obama under the same uk statutes

but the longer we bicker about him not being born in hawaii, the more he can get away with not having renounced his british citizenship



furthermore, WHY is nobody required to check eligibility of presidents? you see the issue here? they dont even ask, let alone require it. they just assume nobody in their right mind would try to fake it. i mean, who would elect someone who hasnt proved their eligibility?

well they all have been. yo are right, they werent required to prove it, but thats just a gaping hole in upholding one of the most important parts of the constitution.

now they are finally getting around to making it a law to require documentation, but that still means obama would get off scot free

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

because we all know you can impeach dead presidents
rationalliberty.com...

I am pretty sure you got my point. He did not die in office. If the man held that office illegally then that means that many things that happened during his presidency would have to be re-examined by courts left and right. He would have been tried for a crime at some point before he died if not having his presidency rescinded post mortem. I did not think I really had to explain all that.

the fact is that it is easier to have everyone fighting over where he was born, when that doesn't matter

Exactly why if I were him, I would continue to let you all get all excited over it between now and the next election and spend all your time and energy on it. When he is back on the ballot, you all might wish you had spent some time seeing who else was running and what they stood for. Of course, I am willing to bet that most of you plan to vote against him no matter who runs against him. NO MATTER WHO.

his father was a kenyan citizen, therefore british commonwealth citizen
so is obama under the same uk statutes

This has been covered soooooooooooo many times. Have you actually bothered to look into this at all or are you just repeating something you heard or read somewhere?

but the longer we bicker about him not being born in hawaii, the more he can get away with not having renounced his british citizenship

I am sorry, which birther argument are you going with here? He is not legit because he was not born in Hawaii or he is not legit because his dad was a British subject? Are you going for the double AC?

by your logic, you dont have to prove anything to be potus.

What logic? What exactly are you referring to because the best I can guess is that you did not really understand what I wrote.

you seriously dont think that his credentials werent made public to at least a few people tasked with making sure they are accurate?

I am sorry, what? I just really cannot even wrap my head around that at all.

made public to at least a few people

Whaaaaaaaaaaaa?

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I am pretty sure you got my point. He did not die in office. If the man held that office illegally then that means that many things that happened during his presidency would have to be re-examined by courts left and right. He would have been tried for a crime at some point before he died if not having his presidency rescinded post mortem. I did not think I really had to explain all that.

shouldnt have, it explained nothing

Exactly why if I were him, I would continue to let you all get all excited over it between now and the next election and spend all your time and energy on it. When he is back on the ballot, you all might wish you had spent some time seeing who else was running and what they stood for. Of course, I am willing to bet that most of you plan to vote against him no matter who runs against him. NO MATTER WHO.

he wont be eligible in at least 5 states so far, the list is growing as well, so if he gets elected and you break a law that he signed in one of the states where he is ineligible, nothing will happen to you, and you can fight his eligibility legally (if he is elected, of course)

This has been covered soooooooooooo many times. Have you actually bothered to look into this at all or are you just repeating something you heard or read somewhere?

[www.uniset.ca... theres where it say it black/white

I am sorry, which birther argument are you going with here? He is not legit because he was not born in Hawaii or he is not legit because his dad was a British subject? Are you going for the double AC?

oh he was born in hawaii, but that doesnt matter at all whether he was or not, it just appears that way (not a birther btw, just someone looking at this gaping hole in requirements for presidency and not liking it

What logic? What exactly are you referring to because the best I can guess is that you did not really understand what I wrote.

since there is no specific law outside of the constitution, there is no requirement to prove you are natural-born to become president=your logic

Whaaaaaaaaaaaa?

his political party...cmon now, keep up.... in a few states its required for the nominating party to see his eligibility, but requires nothing more than a statement that said credentials were viewed. soooo he can show it to his own party and we have to go based on their word. thats making it public to certain people in case you didnt make the connection

you should go back to sleep