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

As someone else stated, if Obama presented us a piece of toilet paper as his BC...as long as it had that authorizing signature, it would be considered his BC.

All the little stipulations and errors people are lingering on don't matter. If anything, people should be questioning the authorizing signature. Has there been any word from the authorizing signature, that is the deciding factor.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

If I was going to put my money where my mouth was, I'd take a digital picture of my REAL BC, which I have had since I turned 18 and my mother gave it to me. And I GUARANTEE you, there would be no such anomalies. Everything is where it is supposed to be. And so what is YOUR reason why Obama didn't just do the same, with his REAL BC, the one in his possession?

Oh, he lost it?

Too easy.

LOL...yeah...taking a picture with a camera is the EXACT same thing as scanning and running it through optimizers.

I don't have my original long form BC...I don't think my mother does either. The ONLY one I have is the short form...which everyone accepts with no problems.

Give it up...Obama is your President...and it is looking like he will be until 2017.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by coop039

 

It could be correct. I got mine from CT in 82, 049 is the first three in my SS. I really have no idea how they choose the numbers though.

Q18: Is there any significance to the numbers assigned in the Social Security Number?

A: Yes. The first three digits are assigned by the geographical region in which the person was residing at the time he/she obtained a number. Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving westward. So people on the east coast have the lowest numbers and those on the west coast have the highest numbers. The remaining six digits in the number are more or less randomly assigned and were organized to facilitate the early manual bookkeeping operations associated with the creation of Social Security in the 1930s.

Link

I am going to dig a little, maybe it is possible to find out where each number is issued. Also the fact that he actually used the number would have to be verified as well.

edit on Wed, 18 May 2011 10:03:58 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

Im curious how they found out the SS number belonged to someone who died in 1890. And how did they find out Obama has this number?

reply to post by chuckk

The US Constitution, the highest law of the land, states the requirements of being President, primarily a minimum age and a natural born citizen. The primary method of proof is one's birth certificate which is very uniform across the 50 states and it is produced at the birth hospital at birth, it has the date, time, mother and fathers name and addresses, a certification from the head of obstetrics, their name and signature, that they witnessed a live birth and the data contained herein is correct under penalty of law. THIS ORIGINAL TYPE BIRTH CERTIFICATE WAS NOT PRODUCED BY OBAMA, THIS IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR SINCE WE CAN QUESTION THE DOCTORS AND NURSES WHO WERE IN ATTENDANCE.

I DEMAND to see President Abraham Lincolns original long form BC....with all the information you just described on it.

If he can't produce it....I'm calling fraud.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Intelearthling
All the flak that the liberals threw at conservatives for 8 years during the Bush administration about us being "sheeple" and so forth is just coming back around to liberals who say Obama can do no wrong.

Who is saying that Obama can do no wrong? Only you.

Hello BH.

I didn't say Obama can do no wrong. The attitude that Obama supporters have about him only shows what they believe about him.

The only thing, well two things, that Obama has done right since January 2009 is to give the green light for Navy SEALs to kill the Somali pirates and the green light for the Pakistan/Osama raid.

Everything else he does is, IMHO, just plain wrong.

See? I didn't say he could do no wrong.

reply to post by coop039


Sites like here you can type in a SS number, and see if they are reported dead.

Originally posted by coop039
I am at work and dont have time to read every page. But I got up to page 11 and did not see anyone else mention this. Has it been debunked or addressed yet?

From the Social Security Administration website—

The Area Number is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1972, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the State in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be the State where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1972, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant's mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, either prior to 1972 or since.

Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving westward. So people on the east coast have the lowest numbers and those on the west coast have the highest numbers.

Note: One should not make too much of the "geographical code." It is not meant to be any kind of useable geographical information. The numbering scheme was designed in 1936 (before computers) to make it easier for SSA to store the applications in our files in Baltimore since the files were organized by regions as well as alphabetically. It was really just a bookkeeping device for our own internal use and was never intended to be anything more than that.

Obama’s house in Hawaii had the zip code 96814 and the zip code for Danbury, Connecticut is 06814. Someone in SSA could have simply mistyped the first digit of Obama’s address zip code and instead of a 9 they entered a 0.

In any event, the SSA says “one should not make too much of the ‘geographical code.’” The SSN theory is pretty weak.

Originally posted by coop039

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by coop039

 

It could be correct. I got mine from CT in 82, 049 is the first three in my SS. I really have no idea how they choose the numbers though.

Q18: Is there any significance to the numbers assigned in the Social Security Number?

A: Yes. The first three digits are assigned by the geographical region in which the person was residing at the time he/she obtained a number. Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving westward. So people on the east coast have the lowest numbers and those on the west coast have the highest numbers. The remaining six digits in the number are more or less randomly assigned and were organized to facilitate the early manual bookkeeping operations associated with the creation of Social Security in the 1930s.

Link

I am going to dig a little, maybe it is possible to find out where each number is issued. Also the fact that he actually used the number would have to be verified as well.

edit on Wed, 18 May 2011 10:03:58 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

Im curious how they found out the SS number belonged to someone who died in 1890. And how did they find out Obama has this number?

Since the Social Security Administration was created in the 1930's, I don't believe that a person that died in the 1890's had a SSN.

At least that's how my thinkin' works.

The guy may have been born in the 1890's...

reply to post by TrueAmerican

ROFL. The very fact that it is scanned, supposedly using OCR, in an age where digital cameras are a dime a dozen, and they could have just taken a picture of the damn thing in the book (which is in a secret vault) - should be enough to raise suspicions right there!

Are you SERIOUS???

You think that is the official procedure hospitals or state governments do when a copy of the original birth certificate is to whip out the Sony and snap a picture??? Could you imagine the outrage coming from people, most likely YOU, crying about how that isn't official procedure, blah blah blah???

Next time I have to sign a contract and send it back to someone...I'm just gonna snap a pic with my camera phone....you know...because that is so much more official than scanning it and turning it into a PDF.


The arguments are getting so silly....it's so much

No no, Obama needs to be man and provide the picture of the original BC in his possession. Not a scan. Not OCR. Just a simple digital snapshot of the real deal, complete with raised seal, and the stamps it would likely have on it from international travel. Does anyone even know when his first passport was issued? Because I know for a fact I traveled out of the country as a kid with just my BC, no passport, as it has several stamps on it. I didn't get my passport till I was older.

Yeah....I'm sure Obama is gonna get right on that.

You birthers need to realize that you are a small minority...him releasing his LFBC closed the case...only ones that are left questioning it have an agenda or an illness. Take your "pic".

reply to post by Intelearthling

I didn't say Obama can do no wrong. The attitude that Obama supporters have about him only shows what they believe about him.

Kindly give some examples of Obama supporters on saying he can do no wrong.

Specifically...give an example of me saying it, since your comment was directed towards me.


I will wait for your evidence to back up your claim...or an apology that you were talking out of your arse.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
LOL...yeah...taking a picture with a camera is the EXACT same thing as scanning and running it through optimizers

THAT is a flat out lie. Of course I would expect nothing less from the likes of people like YOU.



If I just took my digital camera right now and took a picture of my BC, I could then just transfer the jpg with no changes whatsoever and upload it. NO scanners, no optimizers, no NOTHING. The exif data would show the make and model of the camera, date taken, and no Photoshop or Illustrator involved.

Who the heck are you trying to fool? I swear!

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Why don’t you scan your birth certificate? That’s how you reproduce what’s in the PDF, not a digital picture. It’s pretty obvious why you don’t do that.

Hey there are digital pictures of Obama’s certificate too. What are the anomalies there?

reply to post by butcherguy


Ok, so still, how did this guy get Obamas SS#? And if it is indeed connected to a man born in 1890 how did Obama(if true) get it? Im sure its not that easy to get someones SS# is it? Particularly the presidents?

It seems to me that if Obama really has someone elses SS# then that would be the ammo people want, and all this quibbling over the BC problems is worthless.

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by alphabetaone

 

nice to know the Deniers of the fraud really don't have constructive reasoning. Just ignore the evidence.

As many deniers would say nothing to see here move along

When we expose the truth.

I think those words are absolutely applicable when it's TRUE.

One need not ignore evidence to use the "move along" principle if moving along is all that's left as logic.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
I find this insulting as an ATSer. We can do much much better than this. I wonder if this birther conspiracy is meant to dumb down this website from real issues we should concerned about?

I want to second this, and I applaud you for that.

I don't think it's by design to dumb down ATS though, I think it's more one of ATS becoming a social site than a critical thinkers site. When any website at all goes the way of social inundation, legitimacy of information often suffers, in our case, it is suffering a slow painful death.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid,

... and his parents...
... and the State of Hawaii ...
... and Congress...
... and the Motor Vehicle Commission ...
... and the State Department ...


ALL vouch for his citizenship, but you have conclusive evidence to the contrary with Adobe... priceless

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours


Are there really people that still judge someone from the colour of their skin?

No.

But there are plenty who judge the veracity of their CLAIMS by it. Not to mention, they are (guaranteed) judging him by his FATHERS name..... you throw a "Hussein" at anyone in the USA and the religious right is going to scream "Terrorist" and "Muslim" and "Illegitimate" all in the same sentence.

Originally posted by darrman
reply to post by TiM3LoRd

 

i feel happy that you don't need convincing..

,, you just want to incite action..

great..

so while we act in verbal and written manors ..

sit down and get out of the way......

its ok --tim lord 3 .. the big boys will fight this one for you.......

wow! illusions of grandeur much?

listen up butter cup, i have never needed anyone to fight my battles for me. i do just fine on my own.

and anyway US politics has no immediate bearing on my life. i dont live there. Of course i know well enough that US policy has an impact on the world at large but its more a trickle down effect. So the actual legitimacy of your president is a moot point.

What you genius's with your detective kits cant seem to wrap your minds around is the very simple fact that Obama is as much a puppet as Bush was. The fact that Bush was re elected a 2nd term proves 1 of 2 things.

1. The election process is a scam and the 2 party system is a con job to give you the illusion of choice.

OR

2. The majority of Americans that voted in that election are the biggest bunch of morons this side of the 20th century.

you decide which is the more likely scenario.

Oh and while your taking "action" by being so brave on here why not file a lawsuit against Obama for misrepresentation. Show us all how "the Big Boys" do it.

"He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight." - Sun Tzu

reply to post by TrueAmerican


I don't understand why people will not get it through their head that Obama's certificate is authentic and he is indeed a US citizen. If only you and so many of the other birthers were to put this much effort into something worth arguing...

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Last blogspot site I visited was infected with spyware and viruses.
all blogspots have 0% credibility, I personally would not be surprised if thats the Op's blog he trying to get hits for.