My Thread was Censored.!! New Video on Obama BC Issue.

Originally posted by TheUniverse
Funny how my thread riled people up alot of people wanted to keep replying to my thread about the video because they wanted to discuss about why it should be taken down and oh Obama threads to many close them all.

But this thread was about a different issue related a video i found that hadn't been posted on ATS yet to my knowledge and i found the video extremely compelling even getting enough replies to hit the front page. But yet albeit most of the replies were trolls.

Censorship is what i deem it to be nothing more nothing less.

edit on 17-5-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/093b2b2c5f35.jpg[/atsimg]

Do you ever give up? Your evidence is flawed and has more holes then food strainer and the vids posted have already been debunked and disproven.

Now you are trying to get the "Rant" forum dominated by Birther threads.

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Why are you posting these other images?

I haven't really been involved in threads discussing the finer points of the law on this issue so I didn't know what HRS 338-17.8 meant and didn't realize that you were talking about that. I just thought the other images might be helpful to have at hand.

You addressed the one you called "the supposed forgery." At the bottom, HRS 338-

It would have been very hard for that to be written 20 years before it existed much less used to obtain said certificate.

It would depend on when the certificate in question was applied for and this could also involve the reason for the application for an altered birth certificate.

The ammendment to HRS 338 numbered 17.8 was enacted in 1982, as it states at the bottom of the law itself as shown on the capitol.hawaii.gov website.

www.capitol.hawaii.gov...

Correct me if I am wrong but you are saying that citing that ammendment, HRS 338-17.8, at the bottom of the birth certificate, is an obvious mistake made by the person who forged this document. You may be right. It would be very stupid and obvious, to anyone seriously vetting the document.

I would like to hear from someone familiar with the practices of the Registrar of Vital Statistics in Hawaii on this point, because I think one might interpret the notation at the bottom of the birth certificate as a specific request, indicating reasons, for the issuance, sometime after 1982, of an altered birth certificate.

The specific alteration requested might be clarification in the form of a change, noting that Barack Obama II, was in fact born in Kenya. This factual alteration may have been verified by the Registrar's office at the time of the request through means of an affadavit from Obama's grandmother, or some such way, involving her.

Hence the reference to HRS 338-17.8, which makes specific provision for issuance of that type of birth certificate.

Note: The blank at the bottom of the birth certificate is "23. Evidence for delayed filing or alteration."

It is also interesting that the top of the document in question has had the serial numbers removed, rather clumsily, since they also removed the letter C in certificate and had to write it in. The actual numbers in a scenario like the one I am suggesting might be two decades out of sequence if what I am saying is true.

Why would Obama or his family attempt to assert that he was born in Kenya at that time? It may have been to substantiate claims he was making at the time of being a "foreign student", if such claims were made.

I'm just putting forward an alternative interpretation of the reference to HRS 338-17.8 on the document.

reply to post by boncho


Thank you for your support Boncho You know me as the Reptilian Over Lord XRaDiiX in a different Universe. Peace be with you.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


When did the first video i posted get debunked? Can you expound on this. Links threads?

reply to post by ipsedixit


Many will doubt the truth in times of universal deceit and the truth shall set you free.

Many will praise the establishment and revel and indulge in the information fed to them as if everything was true.

They do not want to question the establishment

They wish to praise it and uplift the establishment to god like status.

They have feeble minds willing to succumb to the propoganda without questioning the OS.

One of the Greatest Authors who ever lived George Orwell puts it into a concise statement for me.

"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

When did the first video i posted get debunked? Can you expound on this. Links threads?

Do a search of ATS on your own time as I will not sit here and do your work for you, not going to happen. Your thread got shut down because of the violent nature that you started to employ and are posting here to try and disprove something that isn't there and like I've said previously, please form an original thought.

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

Many will doubt the truth in times of universal deceit and the truth shall set you free.

Many will praise the establishment and revel and indulge in the information fed to them as if everything was true.

They do not want to question the establishment

They wish to praise it and uplift the establishment to god like status.

They have feeble minds willing to succumb to the propoganda without questioning the OS.

One of the Greatest Authors who ever lived George Orwell puts it into a concise statement for me.

"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

You are misquoting Orwell as this has nothing to do with what Mr. Orwell was saying so stop right there., The truth he spoke of was greater truth. Ask yourself and your entire criminal cabal why is this previously debunked and non-issue so damn important that it takes priority over job creation, economical recovery? And please form an original thought and tell us how you truly feel.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I haven't really been involved in threads discussing the finer points of the law on this issue so I didn't know what HRS 338-17.8 meant and didn't realize that you were talking about that. I just thought the other images might be helpful to have at hand.

So you were not really paying much attention to your own "evidence?" That is more than telling, don't you think?

It would depend on when the certificate in question was applied for and this could also involve the reason for the application for an altered birth certificate.

The ammendment to HRS 338 numbered 17.8 was enacted in 1982, as it states at the bottom of the law itself as shown on the capitol.hawaii.gov website.

www.capitol.hawaii.gov...

Correct me if I am wrong but you are saying that citing that ammendment, HRS 338-17.8, at the bottom of the birth certificate, is an obvious mistake made by the person who forged this document. You may be right. It would be very stupid and obvious, to anyone seriously vetting the document.

I would like to hear from someone familiar with the practices of the Registrar of Vital Statistics in Hawaii on this point, because I think one might interpret the notation at the bottom of the birth certificate as a specific request, indicating reasons, for the issuance, sometime after 1982, of an altered birth certificate.

So you have no problem believing a law from 1982 was referenced in 1961 then? Do you think Marty McFly was the registrar?

The specific alteration requested might be clarification in the form of a change, noting that Barack Obama II, was in fact born in Kenya. This factual alteration may have been verified by the Registrar's office at the time of the request through means of an affadavit from Obama's grandmother, or some such way, involving her.

Hence the reference to HRS 338-17.8, which makes specific provision for issuance of that type of birth certificate.

Note: The blank at the bottom of the birth certificate is "23. Evidence for delayed filing or alteration."

It is also interesting that the top of the document in question has had the serial numbers removed, rather clumsily, since they also removed the letter C in certificate and had to write it in. The actual numbers in a scenario like the one I am suggesting might be two decades out of sequence if what I am saying is true.

Why would Obama or his family attempt to assert that he was born in Kenya at that time? It may have been to substantiate claims he was making at the time of being a "foreign student", if such claims were made.

I'm just putting forward an alternative interpretation of the reference to HRS 338-17.8 on the document.

edit on 17-5-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

Your "alternative interpretation" still relies on time travel to work. I do not believe Obama is half alien nor employed time travel. Your assertion that his family asserted he was born in Kenya is based on what I have no idea. I cannot even believe we are actually discussing the possibility that someone time traveled 20 years as part of this. That is kind of too much for me.

Originally posted by Runaway1977
So you have no problem believing a law from 1982 was referenced in 1961 then? Do you think Marty McFly was the registrar?

Would you mind dropping the "I'm the smartest kid in the class" vibe and the scintillating witticisms that come with it? Let's just stick to the topic.

I'm not sure how this document was produced or what the standard procedures of the day were. I'm not saying the document does not have oddities on it.

Did they in cases of requests for an "altered" birth certificate simply take the old one, complete with dated signatures from the time (1961), photocopy it, blanking out the info to be changed, and reissue it with a reference to the reason for re-issue (and the number of the 1982 amendment governing re-issuance) in space number 23?

There are signs that this document we are looking at has been altered through accident or design.

There are other peculiarities about it as well, including the signature of Obama's maternal grandmother, rather than his mother on it and the information that he was born in "Honolulu 1", but in a hospital in Kenya, Africa.

This stuff is so off the wall different from the expected sorts of information one would be looking for, that instead of communicating "fraud" in big bold letters it has the unmistakeable ring of authentic truth, standing there in baggy pants looking awkward.

I don't want to put words into the OP's mouth but that seems to me to be the thrust of this thread. I think there is something to this and would like to see a careful analysis of the document done by someone knowledgeable.

Maybe that has been done and I just haven't seen it. If you know about it post a link.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Would you mind dropping the "I'm the smartest kid in the class" vibe and the scintillating witticisms that come with it? Let's just stick to the topic.

The moment someone smarter shows up. Until the topic is no longer time travel, we are kind of stuck with it.

I'm not sure how this document was produced or what the standard procedures of the day were. I'm not saying the document does not have oddities on it.

Time travel is more than an "oddity."

Did they in cases of requests for an "altered" birth certificate simply take the old one, complete with dated signatures from the time (1961), photocopy it, blanking out the info to be changed, and reissue it with a reference to the reason for re-issue (and the number of the 1982 amendment governing re-issuance) in space number 23?

So you are suggesting he was issued a Hawaiian birth certificate under a law that did not exist for 20 years that sat around waiting for that law so that it could be amended to become legal according to that law? I am definitely the smartest kid in this class.

There are signs that this document we are looking at has been altered through accident or design.

You mean this fake one that says he was born in Kenya? You do not say?

There are other peculiarities about it as well, including the signature of Obama's maternal grandmother, rather than his mother on it and the information that he was born in "Honolulu 1", but in a hospital in Kenya, Africa.

This stuff is so off the wall different from the expected sorts of information one would be looking for, that instead of communicating "fraud" in big bold letters it has the unmistakeable ring of authentic truth, standing there in baggy pants looking awkward.

Uh ok. So time travel is so out there, it must be true?

I don't want to put words into the OP's mouth but that seems to me to be the thrust of this thread. I think there is something to this and would alike to see a careful analysis of the document done by someone knowledgeable.

Because the time travel part is not enough for you?

Maybe that has been done and I just haven't seen it. If you know about it post a link.

edit on 18-5-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

Sorry but I am really not interested beyond that point. Until someone produces evidence that time travel is possible, I have no desire to examine this particular document any further. If you are really asking if it has been covered then you need to ask yourself why it was sent here for being a duplicate thread.