Birthers: We Were Right. The BC is a FRAUD!!! Obama Lovers: Debunk THIS!

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Nevermind, it was my browser. Page 5 to 18 did not show in Chrome but do in IE.

Originally posted by aptness
reply to post by Caji316

 

Why would he present a forged birth certificate — and one that is incredibly amateurish according to the birther ‘experts’ — if he was already under no legal obligation to present any birth certificate, let alone the so called long form?

Are all birther theories illogical and nonsensical?

OK, I'll bite.

How about because obama knows or has been advised (for some reason still unknown) that issuing a birth certificate - even if it is a lousy forgery - would be far better than the alternative of not issuing anything.

And/or

Because obama knows he has a cadre of hard-core believers who will go after anything and anyone saying anything critical of obama, and that these people will post tirelessly to try and debunk anything that seems the least bit critical of obama.

Conspiracy theory at its finest!

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


YEA!! the "Example" he is refering to is a BC from the supposed same place just one day later, so im pretty sre his logic is sound on that....

Im not going to take the time to explain the 18pgs to you, and nobody else prolly will either. If you want to debunk something it helps to have read it yourself. Which is why i read it. But i can't find anything wrong with his presentation, and the guys background kind of does it for me.

Originally posted by centurion1211
How about because obama knows or has been advised (for some reason still unknown) that issuing a birth certificate - even if it is a lousy forgery - would be far better than the alternative of not issuing anything.

Why is it better than not issuing anything though?

If it is, as you claim, a forged birth certificate, and a lousy forgery at that, then he has exposed himself to (more) criminal liability, that could jeopardize everything, even though he didn’t need to release any birth certificate.

Where’s the gain?

Because obama knows he has a cadre of hard-core believers who will go after anything and anyone saying anything critical of obama, and that these people will post tirelessly to try and debunk anything that seems the least bit critical of obama.

If the forgery is so lousy, the birthers will easily prove it as such and successfully get a court or the Congress to address their grievances and act. If it’s so obviously a fake as the birthers contend, then surely no one can deny it.

So, no danger here.

I appreciate it, but I didn’t find any of your scenarios and argument terribly persuasive as to why I should accept the premise posited by the birthers.

reply to post by aptness


Why are you avoiding the actual document posted in the OP? NO, I am not going to explain it. The document speaks for itself, and shows some new problems with the BC that have not been pointed out before. If after you have been through it, and feel like you can point out where this expert has erred, then please do so. Otherwise, your off topic remarks degrading birthers are falling on deaf ears. Character assassinations are not going to work with this document, as this person has taken a considerable amount of time and effort in compiling it. But go ahead and be the fool if you want to be. That's on you. Not us.

Originally posted by grey580
If they can't produce then I'll be convinced his birth certificate is a fraud.

Pretty cool how there is always another step. If only he would just...

Originally posted by Chickensalad
Im not going to take the time to explain the 18pgs to you, and nobody else prolly will either.

Because you cannot.
None of you can.

The first thing I learned about ATS is that there is a rabid cabal of "birthers" rampantly posting threads full of youtube videos that none of them can summarize, explain, or put into their own words.

The joke is getting old.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
NO, I am not going to explain it.

Very old.

reply to post by Runaway1977


This ain't no video, and ain't no joke, either. How about going and reading the darn thing?

:shk:

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by aptness

 

Why are you avoiding the actual document posted in the OP? NO, I am not going to explain it. The document speaks for itself, and shows some new problems with the BC that have not been pointed out before. If after you have been through it, and feel like you can point out where this expert has erred, then please do so. Otherwise, your off topic remarks degrading birthers are falling on deaf ears. Character assassinations are not going to work with this document, as this person has taken a considerable amount of time and effort in compiling it. But go ahead and be the fool if you want to be. That's on you. Not us.

I was just going to point out the same thing. My first post was just playing conspiracy theorist/devil's advocate in answer to a previous post. I was attempting to point out that the more people act like sheeple, the sloppier TPTB think they can be and still get away with whatever they are doing. And I fear they are correct on that.

But then I took the time to read through the entire OP, and the biggest problem I could find with it are the references to wnd.com, which some will use to try and "shoot the messenger" instead of dealing with what is actually in the document.

Finally, my years on ATS have repeatedly shown me that when someone resorts to insults and deflections, it is almost always a signal that they have nothing left to debate with. Intellectually they are done.

I don't know what, if anything, will come of this. But IF even part of the OP is true, there are a bunch of people leading all the way up to president obama that some explaining to do - at the very least.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Sorry if you missed my point.

You present an argument you do not understand via youtube or 18 page essay and subsequently refuse to actually discuss it.

Happy?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
The document speaks for itself

Oh, I agree.

If after you have been through it, and feel like you can point out where this expert has erred, then please do so.

OutKast already pointed out one fallacy.

Another easily spotted ‘untruth’ is the one the author implies, in pp. 2-3, that Obama’s recently released certificate doesn’t have a seal.

If I wanted to waste my time and read all these pages I would probably be able to spot many more fallacies and lies, but I would most likely end up addressing every other birther claim already posted here on ATS extensively and accordingly debunked.

Otherwise, your off topic remarks degrading birthers are falling on deaf ears.

If any of my remarks are off topic the moderators will surely deal with them appropriately.

Character assassinations are not going to work

That’s rich, coming from a group of people that routinely accuse one person from numerous crimes without any proof whatsoever.

Please keep us updated on how the courts and Congress react to this “undeniable proof.”

Originally posted by centurion1211
I don't know what, if anything, will come of this. But IF even part of the OP is true, there are a bunch of people leading all the way up to president obama that some explaining to do - at the very least.

Let's make this the jacket cover.

Now, reel me in.

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by Chickensalad
Im not going to take the time to explain the 18pgs to you, and nobody else prolly will either.

Because you cannot.
None of you can.

The first thing I learned about ATS is that there is a rabid cabal of "birthers" rampantly posting threads full of youtube videos that none of them can summarize, explain, or put into their own words.

The joke is getting old.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
NO, I am not going to explain it.

Very old.

edit on 17-5-2011 by Runaway1977 because: (no reason given)

No, because there is no reason why he should. If someone wants to know what's in it, they need to read it, period.

there are about 10 letters which have been copied and pasted ... created some pix ... havent found this to be discussed anywhere in detail,....









did a test by myself and typed 50 "i" letters and none matched as we can expect after a 2-fold procedure of pixel variation: 1) typewritten 2) document is scanned in

reply to post by aptness


Ok, and how is it you explain away this?

Mr. Tim Adams also signed a notarized affidavit (Figure 15) “swearing he was told by hissupervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapiolani Medical Center inHonolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities.”

A copy of the signed affidavit is provided.

So suddenly now there IS a long form?

I mean THAT is just one minor problem.

reply to post by ManMadeWorld


One of your links has the most interesting evidence I have ever seen.

Letter E symbolizes eye and spells "I"

Originally posted by wcitizen
No, because there is no reason why he should. If someone wants to know what's in it, they need to read it, period.

I was under the impression things were presented because someone had something they wanted to share. As long as you point out the intention of our OP is not to share information but to make it available then I feel little loss in showing it the same respect.

This is a pretty compelling analysis imo.

The case against BHO is really gaining strength.

An affidavit, an excellent expose of why the document should be considered a fraud, and serious questions about a seemingly fraudulent use of a SS niumber.

It's not looking good. These are impeachable offences if only there was a judiciary which would act with integrity.

I hope the author of this analysis remains safe. I'm shocked that they made his details public.

reply to post by Runaway1977


because there happened to be a lot of "i" letters and even dots of "i" (not the body part of the i) [how insane can it get you see here] and "l" letters exchanged ... E also kind of "I"

not 1 single 1 dot matched when I typed in 50 i's with my own typewriter and scanned it in.

are you making fun out of this concrete evidence? you Obama supporter?

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by wcitizen
No, because there is no reason why he should. If someone wants to know what's in it, they need to read it, period.

I was under the impression things were presented because someone had something they wanted to share. As long as you point out the intention of our OP is not to share information but to make it available then I feel little loss in showing it the same respect.

I was under the impression that links were posted so people could read the info themselves.