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.

 

A Few Questions for "birthers"

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Surfrat
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Some people refute motherhood and apple pie; watch and listen to the facts


If you're implicating that refuting the 'birther hoax' is ignoring the facts, I feel obligated to inform you that you are wrong.

All of the evidence points toward 'birthers' grasping at straws and ignoring contrary evidence when it is presented to them (usually in favor of youtube videos from birtherreport or other biased websites with agendas).


What contrary evidence are you referring to?




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Surfrat
Jerome Corsi: White House Running Scared Over Latest Discovery of Obama's True Origins 1/3
www.youtube.com...
Jerome Corsi: White House Running Scared Over Latest Discovery of Obama's True Origins 2/3
www.youtube.com...
Jerome Corsi: White House Running Scared Over Latest Discovery of Obama's True Origins 3/3
www.youtube.com...

Have any evidence from someone who isn't selling a book about the illegitimacy of the BC? If you read my link, he was refuted in 2008.


Do you have ANY intelligent remarks/observations to make, or is your capcity for critical thinking limited to dismissing the whole argument because it's put forward by someone who is selling a book?

So you are believing someone who is selling a book, whose claims have all been debunked, and are claiming that for thinking critically I am unintelligent?

Why do you want something to be wrong with the BC?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Surfrat
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Some people refute motherhood and apple pie; watch and listen to the facts


If you're implicating that refuting the 'birther hoax' is ignoring the facts, I feel obligated to inform you that you are wrong.

All of the evidence points toward 'birthers' grasping at straws and ignoring contrary evidence when it is presented to them (usually in favor of youtube videos from birtherreport or other biased websites with agendas).


What contrary evidence are you referring to?

If you read the link you would see Obama's birth announcement in a Hawaiian newspaper, the short form BC, with raised seal, etc. Plus the original BC release (the layers in the PDF have been debunked, see above for links). What straws do the birthers have left to grasp at?

So far there is zero verifiable evidence that the BC is fake. Why do you want it to be fake so badly?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
[

Do you have ANY intelligent remarks/observations to make, or is your capcity for critical thinking limited to dismissing the whole argument because it's put forward by someone who is selling a book?

So you are believing someone who is selling a book, whose claims have all been debunked,




and are claiming that for thinking critically I am unintelligent?



Do you understand the difference between 'being critical' and 'critical thinking'?

Probably Not




Why do you want something to be wrong with the BC?


Where have I said I want something to be wrong with the bc?

Have you read the book?

By the way, you didn't answer my preivous question, but I'll answer it for you. Tha answer is 'NO'.

Do you really think that people here on ATS are so unintelligent that you just have to state 'It's debunelieked' for them to believe you>

How aboutt showing us how it's debunked? It's put up or shut up time,
edit on 22-5-2011 by wcitizen because: P



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 

All of the birther nonsense is debunked:
Here, in 2008, Corsi himself is debunked
Fake BC layers nonsense debunked in this post:

Originally posted by adeclerk
By the way, here is why the BC had layers in it:
Optical Character Recognition in Adobe Acrobat, and a more simplified explanation for the less technically inclined here.

Can we put this conspiracy to rest finally? But, by all means continue to fund Corsi by buying his book.

ETA: Another Link explaining this. Plus a Moderator explaining it.
edit on 5/22/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by adeclerk
It is troubling that so many birther threads are appearing with such an appalling lack of reliable, independently verifiable evidence about the supposed "fake" birth certificate. So I have a few questions for the "birthers", please address this OP point by point:

1. If the BC is fake, how did Obama get a position in the highest office of the U.S. Government? Don't you think the government would be better at background checking than that? (Especially considering how rigorous the background check for the FBI is, the POTUS position has to be several orders of magnitude more rigorous).


1. Its not uncommon for executives to obtain high-level jobs due to lying on their resume. At least one case a year seems to make the news. If you trust the government do do a stellar job of background checks, I won't bother wasting my time with an argument. Thoughts?
edit on 22-5-2011 by civilchallenger because: (no reason given)

Make your own "fake" birth certificate and try to join the Secret Service. I'm willing to bet you won't get too far into the interview process.

edit on 5/22/11 by adeclerk because: spelling


you got that right! you need someone elses social security number and a name change too



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   
I checked the layers on the first day it was released... I haven't paid much attention to this argument for one reason:

IT DOESN'T MATTER

Whatever the truth behind this, or why the BC was released in 5 layers and all the other possibilities...

the general public in America does not care. It comes down to Psychology... no matter the proof people will not care until blood runs in the streets and we're fighting over food.

So to answer your original question? we have so many threads on this because people like the anxiety of arguing



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


I gotta give you credit for having the balls to scrap with "birthers".

They hate to be wrong, hence their insane quest to be right.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
I checked the layers on the first day it was released... I haven't paid much attention to this argument for one reason:

IT DOESN'T MATTER

Whatever the truth behind this, or why the BC was released in 5 layers and all the other possibilities...

the general public in America does not care. It comes down to Psychology... no matter the proof people will not care until blood runs in the streets and we're fighting over food.

So to answer your original question? we have so many threads on this because people like the anxiety of arguing


Dug around a little and saw the layers myself. They scanned the document into Adobe Acrobat X, which automatically uses optical character recognition to create layers from scanned documents. Case closed.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by adeclerk
 


I gotta give you credit for having the balls to scrap with "birthers".

They hate to be wrong, hence their insane quest to be right.

I'll debate the insane if it turns at least one birther away from ignorance.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
So does anyone have any contrary, undeniable evidence showing that the BC is indeed a fake?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
So does anyone have any contrary, undeniable evidence showing that the BC is indeed a fake?


Firstly - there is a congressional memo attesting to the FACT that no-one vetted obamas elligibility!

Secondly Obama has not presented a Birth certificate - he has shown a scanned copy of what he alledges is his BC - one that numerous experts in the field have since concluded is a manipulated document!


Why on earth would you suppose that would satisfy anyone with an enquiring mind?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

Firstly - there is a congressional memo attesting to the FACT that no-one vetted obamas elligibility!

Can you provide a source?


Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

Secondly Obama has not presented a Birth certificate - he has shown a scanned copy of what he alledges is his BC

He requested his BC from the Hawaiian state government, got it and released scans of it. If you look in the OP you can see the original short form in someones hands. Go to whitehouse.gov to see the original BC in PDF form.


Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

one that numerous experts in the field have since concluded is a manipulated document!

Who are these experts? Names? Sources?


Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
Why on earth would you suppose that would satisfy anyone with an enquiring mind?

If any of what you stated was factual, it might cause the critical thinkers to question. Although critical thinking is seriously lacking in the birther community.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
Firstly - there is a congressional memo attesting to the FACT that no-one vetted obamas elligibility!
JohhnyBGood fails to mention that in that Congressional Research Service memo they admit no previous President or candidate was ever vetted. He also omits that in that memo, the natural born citizen definition he endorses and spreads here on ATS as another motive for Obama’s ineligiblity is completely dismissed.


Secondly Obama has not presented a Birth certificate
He has. The Certification of Live Birth he presented in 2008, months before the election, is his birth certificate. It’s a physical document, there are no layers, it’s certified by the state of Hawaii and is valid for all legal purposes.

You don’t accept that document? You and every other birther have the right to not vote for Obama in 2012.

Until you birthers have proof of anything you claim, no one in their rights minds will take you seriously. The only ones that do are those that already believe, for one reason or another, that Obama can’t legitimately be the President of the United States.

Until then, these birther conspiracy theories rank between the “world is flat” and the “queen of England is a reptilian” conspiracy theories.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Actually questions have been raised (and investigated) about the elligibility of many candidates for political office in the US before - but the point remains contrary to what OP states there was never any formal vetting of Obama's elligibity by any gov agency - I don't care what they did for previous presidents I never suspected them of being anti-american, or foreign nationals.

A short form BC may be accepted for many common purposes of ID - but given the ease with which one can be obtained without actually having been born in Hawaii - it is not PROOF that he was.

a scanned copy of his long form BC is likewise not PROOF of anything - the original, delivered to document experts for investigation would go a long way to constitute PROOF of elligibility.

Don't try to hide behind the precedent of previous presidents or play the race card yet again - fact is Obama has not provided the slightest PROOF of his elligibilty to be president - but has done everyrthing he can to prevent anyone from seeing any document that exists revealin what name and nationality he was using at the time!



From A to Z: What's wrong with Obama's birth certificate? Examine for yourself mounting evidence that president's document isn't genuine Read more: From A to Z: What's wrong with Obama's birth certificate? www.wnd.com...


www.wnd.com...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 

Already been debunked, show through from the short form birth certificate since they were stacked in the tray at time of scanning. Next.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 

Already been debunked, show through from the short form birth certificate since they were stacked in the tray at time of scanning. Next.


So.......you have moved on to creating straw man arguments to obfuscate the issue now - you must be real proud of yourself!



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
A short form BC may be accepted for many common purposes of ID - but given the ease with which one can be obtained without actually having been born in Hawaii - it is not PROOF that he was.


Thanks to birther threads on ATS, I know this is false. Care to share your source since this entire post seems to hang on this? How would finding out you were wrong change things? Will it change things? I have been skimming Corsi's book and reading stuff like this and I have to say that birthers themselves are very convincing in that all I see them claiming are things that are later corrected with real sources. I would like to see that go down a different way for a change so can you please supply a valid source?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 

Already been debunked, show through from the short form birth certificate since they were stacked in the tray at time of scanning. Next.


So.......you have moved on to creating straw man arguments to obfuscate the issue now - you must be real proud of yourself!

Where is the straw man? Have a look here, it's just one of the many posts that has debunked this.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
I don't care what they did for previous presidents I never suspected them of being anti-american, or foreign nationals.
Your suspicions are immaterial. The President doesn’t have to convince every single whackjob that has ‘suspicions’ about him to their personal satisfaction.


A short form BC may be accepted for many common purposes of ID - but given the ease with which one can be obtained without actually having been born in Hawaii - it is not PROOF that he was.
Nonsense. Hawaii’s certification of live birth is accepted proof of citizenship for all purposes. You should ask some citizens of Hawaii how they’ve been able to get a passport since 2001.


a scanned copy of his long form BC is likewise not PROOF of anything - the original, delivered to document experts for investigation would go a long way to constitute PROOF of elligibility.
The long form birth certificate, scanned or not, doesn’t change the authenticity of his certification of live birth the state of Hawaii issued to him.

“Delivered to document experts for investigation”? And when those experts found his certificate to be authentic then they’d also be part of the conspiracy. You did the same goal post moving with the long form birth certificate. No one falls for your birther BS anymore.


Don't try to hide behind the precedent of previous presidents or play the race card yet again
“Race card yet again”? I dare you to find a post where I’ve played the race card. What is this? Your “preemptive defense against accusations of racism”? Pathetic.


fact is Obama has not provided the slightest PROOF of his elligibilty to be president
Fact is that Obama is the only President to have, prior to an election, publicly disclosed proof of eligibility.

You’re free to reject that proof, as we are free to mock you for believing the most absurd and ignorant conspiracy theory to ever show up on this website.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join