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

In my eyes, all Obama would have to have done to clear himself, assuming he was born somewhere else, is come clean. "You know folks, I know you wouldn't have elected me since I was born in ... Etc." But, no, a clearly questionable PDF was put out as "genuine." So, then as an observer, you're like, "What does this mean?" I mean it's clearly sloppy. Are we supposed to discover it as fake? Was it just sloppy work hastily done? Questions.

In all honesty, I really wouldn't care where the president is from, that is, if he really cared about the US, and were working his butt off to improve the condition of America. But, since our country is still being drug into bankrupt conditions, like previous presidents, the information become relevant. I want to know what Obama's intentions are. I want to pull the strings and find out where they go. I'm getting ridiculously tired of worrying about what will happen to America. I just want to move on and rebuild our great country, without dishonest cats getting in the way.

Troy

Originally posted by cybertroy
In my eyes, all Obama would have to have done to clear himself, assuming he was born somewhere else, is come clean.

OK, and what should have he done, according to you, if he was born in the United States?

reply to post by aptness


Obviously Aptness, he needed to be a little more Caucasian. You know really, his refusal to be more caucasian pretty much explains all of the problems this president has had so far.
And the worst part is that he was half way there. He just didn't want to make the extra effort. I don't wanna say typical, but......

(tongue in cheek)!!!

No, Bush sucked too. This isn't racist, as I guess you might have been hinting at. I would have loved for Obama to be doing a great job, but he's not, he's no different than Bush. Has nothing to do with color of skin. Might as well still be Bush. The same thing is happening, and our country is still headed for bankrupt. The people that want to do the right things, don't get heard like they need to. We've got to get past the skin color, past the articulate, good sounding speeches and promises, and look at what really is happening to our country. Obama, if you are truly an honorable and great American, then show us. Where are you at on the real problems we are facing? As far as the Federal Reserve, all I hear are crickets from Obama. Monsanto's monopoly on food, where are you Obama? More crickets. Where are you with Big Pharma, and cracking down on toxic medications? Well, more crickets in the background. Getting spending under control, and eliminating the deficit? More crickets. If you or your administration aren't talking about issues like this, then you aren't working toward fixing the country. That's my problem with Obama and Bush, not Obama's skin color. Bush took a dump on all of us too, white and black. People like Ron Paul are the only ones in the White House who are really covering topics like this.

And, moving back on topic, the birth certificate is not very likely to be authentic. There is no sense in running in this circular argument with some of you guys. All I can say, is look at the PDF, all you really have to do is zoom in, and it's there for you to see. Too many elements of the document are pointing toward, "fake, tampered with, pieced together." But, I'm not so sure that some of you guys are really interested in getting at the truth anyway. Because, you're not even going to entertain the idea that the birth certificate could be fake. I certainly have looked at the idea that the birth certificate could be real, just with errors, but the PDF just isn't supporting that idea at all.

Troy

so.. where is the new information and/or facts/evidence? Looks like the same BS as before, just a different moron saying it...

How long will the simple minded allow this to distract them from the real issues?

Real issue:
Mr president: Israel Must return to itsa 1967 border
BiBi: we have your Kenyan long form birth Certificate
Mr prezident Oh...Israel rules the world!...Master..how do you like your Palistinian children?
microwave boiled or phosphour fried?
.....

reply to post by aceto


How long?

A long time....thanks a lot Hillary

reply to post by TrueAmerican



Well debunking this is easy. He is the president=His bc is real.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by cybertroy
In my eyes, all Obama would have to have done to clear himself, assuming he was born somewhere else, is come clean.

OK, and what should have he done, according to you, if he was born in the United States?

Why is it you don't understand empirical evidence is needed to end this controversy?

Because he is an elected official, and the White House long form .pdf birth certificate has been identified by many as a fraudulent document, there has been much doubt created (of all political parties) regarding the legitimacy of his long form birth certificate dated 2007. The question of his eligibility for presidency based on the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's meaning of "natural born" citizen, also needs to be heard and ruled on by Congress.

The U.S. Supreme Court seems to be denying to hear anything to do with any b/c lawsuit filed due to "standing".

We must write to our elected representatives to request Congress to subpoena the State of Hawaii to submit the official State of Hawaii Department of Health microfiche record containing the image of the original 1961 birth certificate, and any original 1961 birth certificate held by Hawaii, to a congressional bipartisan committee to be analyzed by a panel of experts selected by Congress. The report of the analysis would be released to the public to understand the scientific techniques used to determine authenticity of all Hawaiian records.

The issue could be resolved once and for all if this evidence was presented. Until this happens (and I doubt it will), we will continue to argue our opposing points on ATS without empirical, tangible evidence to prove anything.

Originally posted by Danbones
Real issue:
Mr president: Israel Must return to itsa 1967 border
BiBi: we have your Kenyan long form birth Certificate
Mr prezident Oh...Israel rules the world!...Master..how do you like your Palistinian children?
microwave boiled or phosphour fried?
.....

edit on 25-5-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-5-2011 by Danbones because: spelling haha.....TARP 90 percent against....we have your kenyan birth certificate in the vault at the to big to fail!

Exactly, the ramifications of this being a badly kept secret, and the potential for blackmailing the POTUS(Inc)
are huge and, to use the governments own terminology A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

For this reason alone, the 'original' of the document issued by the Bloody House must be produced and subjected to UNBIASED forensic analysis.

Originally posted by ontarff
Why is it you don't understand empirical evidence is needed to end this controversy?

The burden of proof is on those making the outrageous claims, such as yourself.

Barack Obama has provided the empirical evidence necessary to end this ‘controversy.’ He has presented two kinds of birth certificate now. The state of the union where he was born attests to his birth there and the legitimacy of these documents. Congress has not raised the issue, and the majority of Americans believe this to be a non-issue.

Your side is proposing a theory for which you have yet to provide any “empirical evidence” to support it. Since, at this point, Barack Obama isn’t required to prove his eligibility, until you get this “empirical evidence” to support your claims, the burden of proof remains on your side.

The question of his eligibility for presidency based on the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's meaning of "natural born" citizen, also needs to be heard and ruled on by Congress.

You are free to petition Congress to address this issue. No one is stopping you. No one is stopping Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Corsi or the other nuts at WorldNetDaily.

The U.S. Supreme Court seems to be denying to hear anything to do with any b/c lawsuit filed due to "standing".

And because they have actual cases and controversies worthy of their attention and time, and because the Courts can’t remove a sitting President, and so on.

Until this happens (and I doubt it will), we will continue to argue our opposing points on ATS without empirical, tangible evidence to prove anything.

No one is stopping you from arguing whatever you wish. Those of us that don’t buy the birther nonsense are only here to refute your outlandish claims with facts, and basically laugh at you.

Bottom line. If Osama goes down he takes Pelosi and the DNC right down with him for certifying he was vetted. Well he couldnt even produce his fake short form for months. The 'vetted' with nothing. Criminal conspiracy and they still never say a legit cert.

Dumb little donkeys.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by ontarff
Why is it you don't understand empirical evidence is needed to end this controversy?

The burden of proof is on those making the outrageous claims, such as yourself.

Barack Obama has provided the empirical evidence necessary to end this ‘controversy.’ He has presented two kinds of birth certificate now. The state of the union where he was born attests to his birth there and the legitimacy of these documents. Congress has not raised the issue, and the majority of Americans believe this to be a non-issue.

Your side is proposing a theory for which you have yet to provide any “empirical evidence” to support it. Since, at this point, Barack Obama isn’t required to prove his eligibility, until you get this “empirical evidence” to support your claims, the burden of proof remains on your side.

The question of his eligibility for presidency based on the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's meaning of "natural born" citizen, also needs to be heard and ruled on by Congress.

You are free to petition Congress to address this issue. No one is stopping you. No one is stopping Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Corsi or the other nuts at WorldNetDaily.

The U.S. Supreme Court seems to be denying to hear anything to do with any b/c lawsuit filed due to "standing".

And because they have actual cases and controversies worthy of their attention and time, and because the Courts can’t remove a sitting President, and so on.

Until this happens (and I doubt it will), we will continue to argue our opposing points on ATS without empirical, tangible evidence to prove anything.

No one is stopping you from arguing whatever you wish. Those of us that don’t buy the birther nonsense are only here to refute your outlandish claims with facts, and basically laugh at you.

Barack Obama has provided the empirical evidence necessary to end this ‘controversy.’

I disagree. The document provided is NOT empirical evidence.

No one is stopping you. No one is stopping Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Corsi or the other nuts at WorldNetDaily.

Is name calling necessary? I respect your argument. Don't be rude.

Those of us that don’t buy the birther nonsense are only here to refute your outlandish claims with facts, and basically laugh at you.

Again you are rude, is this the way you refute cogently? I could say that your inability to appreciate an opposing argument (thus making it "outlandish") by presenting factual information makes me laugh as well. You are entitled to your opinion as is all of the other people who are not aware of all of the detailed information presented in this thread that raises many questions. Using an unbiased congressional committee to utilize the scientific method to identify true empirical evidence is the only way to resolve these arguments that are based only on opposing perspectives of the current information presented.

Originally posted by ontarff


I disagree. The document provided is NOT empirical evidence.

Whether you disagree or not is extremely unimportant. The only one's who are important are those that can remove a sitting President, and they have been satisfied by the Empirical evidence. Whether or not you agree? Who cares.

No one is stopping you. No one is stopping Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Corsi or the other nuts at WorldNetDaily.

Originally posted by ontarff
Is name calling necessary? I respect your argument. Don't be rude.

They are nuts. Rude or not, you're delusional with respect to your choice of how you view evidence versus theory. That is rude too, doesn't make it less accurate.

Those of us that don’t buy the birther nonsense are only here to refute your outlandish claims with facts, and basically laugh at you.

Originally posted by ontarff
Again you are rude, is this the way you refute cogently?

He refuted it cogently aplenty throughout the course of this thread and in many other threads as well. You birthers just seem to use the weapon of last resort, cherry picking apart statements to make it appear as though every other sentence you write is furthering your credibility, meanwhile the OTHER 299 million Americans who disagree with you, DO in fact, laugh at you. So I imagine you would have to deal with all their rudeness as well.

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by ontarff


I disagree. The document provided is NOT empirical evidence.

Whether you disagree or not is extremely unimportant. The only one's who are important are those that can remove a sitting President, and they have been satisfied by the Empirical evidence. Whether or not you agree? Who cares.

No one is stopping you. No one is stopping Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Corsi or the other nuts at WorldNetDaily.

Originally posted by ontarff
Is name calling necessary? I respect your argument. Don't be rude.

They are nuts. Rude or not, you're delusional with respect to your choice of how you view evidence versus theory. That is rude too, doesn't make it less accurate.

Those of us that don’t buy the birther nonsense are only here to refute your outlandish claims with facts, and basically laugh at you.

Originally posted by ontarff
Again you are rude, is this the way you refute cogently?

He refuted it cogently aplenty throughout the course of this thread and in many other threads as well. You birthers just seem to use the weapon of last resort, cherry picking apart statements to make it appear as though every other sentence you write is furthering your credibility, meanwhile the OTHER 299 million Americans who disagree with you, DO in fact, laugh at you. So I imagine you would have to deal with all their rudeness as well.

You are correct that the fact that I disagree is irrelevant. The point is made to emphasize an opposing view.

...and they have been satisfied by the Empirical evidence.

I will argue it is subjective evidence submitted by the State of Hawaii and predominantly accepted by Congress and many others (without comprehensive consideration of other recent pertinent facts) as legal proof.

I respect your opinion but I am offended that you think I am delusional because I disagree. I will not argue anything with a person like you or anyone else who continues to support their premise with ad hominem language.

What "pertinent facts"? Were these "pertinent facts" subjected (by you) to the kind of empirical study that you seem to be demanding of others? Please explain how they were.

Originally posted by userid1
What "pertinent facts"? Were these "pertinent facts" subjected (by you) to the kind of empirical study that you seem to be demanding of others? Please explain how they were.

OK, I am willing to say "interesting allegations and findings identified in this thread" in lieu of "pertinent facts" if it provides better clarity and understanding. I am not demanding anything from anyone. I would like to see a report based on an investigation conducted by an official unbiased group of experts using empirical tangible evidence. We have already proven that the Earth is not flat!

Originally posted by ontarff
We have already proven that the Earth is not flat!

I'm still holding out for a consensus on that one - I see no sense in being hasty.

o.k., here's the real deal. Forget about the 'where was he born' arguments.
The only thing that means anything at this point is that Barack Obama became part of a criminal conspiracy to commit fraud when he entered himself into the chain of evidence by producing a BC forgery and calling it 'the real long form BC'
He's a provable criminal for that fact. He said it in front of the whole world. That truth cannot be deminished in any way.

Here's proof.

______beforeitsnews/story/667/168/Expanded_Analysis:_Forged_Birth_Certificate;_Not_Necessary_to_Prove_Birthplace;_Facing_Forgery_Charges_Conspira cy_to_Commit_Forgery..html

Originally posted by roadtoad
The only thing that means anything at this point is that Barack Obama became part of a criminal conspiracy to commit fraud when he entered himself into the chain of evidence by producing a BC forgery and calling it 'the real long form BC'

This theory is equally absurd.

The Department of Health of the state of Hawaii has vouched for the certificate Obama has presented. It’s like accusing the President of forging a 20 dollar bill the Department of Treasury says is authentic.

He's a provable criminal for that fact.

There is no fact. Only your delusion.