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.

 

Obama's LFBC has CIA-61 handwritten on it - ATS Exclusive

page: 12
123
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


In no way did you answer my questions. Please reread my post and give a proper reply. Especially about how Obama's short form was behind the long form in such a way that it transfered ink to the long form that was picked up by the scan.




posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Focus on what is at hand.

Stop picking on saint and pay attention to the facts.



The fact is that Saint said "THIS IS IT!" then said "NO IT ISNT"... THIS OVER HERE IS IT!

Those are facts... the fact is that Saint is selling everyone a bill of goods and has no internal filter but believes whatever he thinks he sees at the moment...



The lesson from making a mistake is to learn to be humble...
But not to let ones self believe their mistake makes them worthless.



No it doesn't make them worthless... just their ability to be trusted.




for you to act as such only speaks volumes about you and your motives.



My motives are for intellectual honesty... the ability to see that what you see has more to do with what you believe than it does with what actually IS....

Yes I'm sure it does speak volumes....



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
So now that it's established that at least some of the "hidden" words are from Obama's certificate of live birth short form, any good theories on how these two documents came together and one was able to transfer some ink to the other(presumably the long form was laid on top of the short form and ink transfered to the back?)?

well I have been thinking about that.

a plausible time line would be:

Obama born in HI.
Barry changes his name to Soetoro
and gets citizenship in Indonesia.
In which case, it renders his US BC
VOIDED. When he moves back
to go to occidental he is recruited
by CIA at that time and they alter
a new fresh long form and leave the
voided one for archives. Obama
asks for a short form to run in 2007
and gets data off the CIA Long Form
and prints out the short form. Later,
scrutiny ensues over no production
of his long form so he goes back
to get it and it reveals in 2011 that there is
a voided short form underneath the
long form. But that's just a theory


However, if his original and short form were
voided due to changing citizenship, then
he is still not eligible to serve as president
under the constitution.
That's why the VOID means so much on
the copy underneath.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


In no way did you answer my questions. Please reread my post and give a proper reply. Especially about how Obama's short form was behind the long form in such a way that it transfered ink to the long form that was picked up by the scan.


You seem to think that outlandish claims dignify a response...

I don't think so



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
So now that it's established that at least some of the "hidden" words are from Obama's certificate of live birth short form, any good theories on how these two documents came together and one was able to transfer some ink to the other(presumably the long form was laid on top of the short form and ink transfered to the back?)?

well I have been thinking about that.


a plausible time line would be:



DISCLAIMER: Plausible in the OP was that the CIA cooked up Obama back in 1961....

Just so we know what the word "Plausible" means in this context... i.e. it's plausible that three headed aliens gave birth to Obama as a CIA plant hybrid....





Obama born in HI.
Barry changes his name to Soetoro
and gets citizenship in Indonesia.
In which case, it renders his US BC
VOIDED. When he moves back
to go to occidental he is recruited
by CIA at that time and they alter
a new fresh long form and leave the
voided one for archives. Obama
asks for a short form to run in 2007
and gets data off the CIA Long Form
and prints out the short form. Later,
scrutiny ensues over no production
of his long form so he goes back
to get it and it reveals in 2011 that there is
a voided short form underneath the
long form. But that's just a theory


However, if his original and short form were
voided due to changing citizenship, then
he is still not eligible to serve as president
under the constitution.
That's why the VOID means so much on
the copy underneath.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I apologize if this had been covered already, and let me preface this by saying i mean no disrespect at all. On the birth certificate under race of father it says African. In the 1960's would they not put Negro in that box. The mentality of the time was not for political correctness. It would be interesting to see if any african american members on here who were born in the 60's or have relatives who were can check the birth certificates and see what it says on there.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
That's why the VOID means so much on
the copy underneath.


If the supposed VOID were so important, wouldn't it be LARGER than the typeface used on the document and not SMALLER?



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


What outlandish claims? I thought it was established now the the markings on the long form were transfered from the short form?



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 


Nothing brought to light in an ATS thread is every considered "Established" Especially when the OP is that CIA-61 is written on it and the initials of the CIA leader of the time...




posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by lcbjr1979
I apologize if this had been covered already, and let me preface this by saying i mean no disrespect at all. On the birth certificate under race of father it says African. In the 1960's would they not put Negro in that box. The mentality of the time was not for political correctness. It would be interesting to see if any african american members on here who were born in the 60's or have relatives who were can check the birth certificates and see what it says on there.


I think it's because the man was African... plain and simple... he wasn't African American or anything like that... simply Afircan



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Can somebody please embed this for me. I'm not sure if this was posted yet but after some image retouching, I believe this to clearly say "OAHU"

I'm not stating however, that there isn't some serious modifications to this document.





posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


What outlandish claims? I thought it was established now the the markings on the long form were transfered from the short form?


the only thing that had been really established is that this
certificate had oddities and obviously that people would rather
Put each other down than make sense.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
You people are unbelievable. Not only do you see conspiracies in every corner, you call people who disagree with you "sheep" or other names. The whole thread starts out talking about the form being x-rayed, and then, no, it wasn't x-rayed. I'm not the biggest fan of some of President Obama's policies, but really, this birth certificate thing needs a rest.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by boondock-saint
That's why the VOID means so much on
the copy underneath.

If the supposed VOID were so important, wouldn't it be LARGER than the typeface used on the document and not SMALLER?

i don't know.
I didn't write it.
I just found it.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


You didn't FIND anything... you INTERPRETED it...

Geesh

It's not a find until it's been peer-reviewed and accepted... until then, it's simply an interesting artifact
edit on 28-4-2011 by HunkaHunka because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by boondock-saint
That's why the VOID means so much on
the copy underneath.

If the supposed VOID were so important, wouldn't it be LARGER than the typeface used on the document and not SMALLER?

i don't know.
I didn't write it.
I just found it.


You don't know? You don't KNOW? Not knowing something hasn't kept you from posting some incredibly speculative things. So please enlighten me as to why you think the VOID would be so tiny.

Also..

Is it more probable that the VOID is an artifact or that it is part of a grand conspiracy that YOU uncovered?



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 


Nothing brought to light in an ATS thread is every considered "Established" Especially when the OP is that CIA-61 is written on it and the initials of the CIA leader of the time...



Originally posted by Bosko
It's an impression of his short form certificate. This image should make it quite obvious:



If you're still not convinced then I don't know what to say.


Well, there you go. So now that you can see what you apparently missed a few pages back in this thread and you can be caught up....
Go back and read my post and respond now that you have some added knowledge.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Boon, now I REALLY think you are stretching.

If this was voided, as with most legal documents that are voided, there would either be a hand written LAAAAARGGGEEE ALL ACROSS THE PAGE saying:


VOID



That is my understanding of legal documents in order to leave zero room for interpretation.

It would NOT be the same size of the typeface.

It WOULD be plastered across the whooooole thing.

You are stretching. You had an idea, but it was quickly put down. That's cool, but stretching this farther is not helping anything.

ETA: what program did you use btw...


and! to the member asking about using "negro" instead...I think it has to do with his father actually being African. I can understand where, for record keeping purposes, African and Negro would be two different things.


edit on 4/28/2011 by iamsupermanv2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by boondock-saint
 

You didn't FIND anything... you INTERPRETED it...
Geesh
It's not a find until it's been peer-reviewed and accepted... until then, it's simply an interesting artifact

ok, I would agree with that.
I did interpret it from what I saw.
So on to the peer review now.
And I guess if that was you doing the peer
then it would never be accepted right ???



new topics

top topics



 
123
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join