Many ATSers continue to state this.... "fact" ... as if it's not in dispute.
Not only is it untrue, but it's an intentionally fabricated lie, part of a political propaganda hit piece, created by birthers to justify their
Can I back up my assertions?
Why yes I can:
Let's look at a few things...
One, it's a number from a dead guy from CT.
OK, why CT?
Because it begins with 042.
Birthers claim that this is ROCK SOLID PROOF is was issued to someone in CT... but is it?
The Social Security Administration says no:
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
So, that's not true. And the birthers know it. See if it stops them from lying though.
Next it was issued to someone from 1890.
Where does 1890 come from?
Why it comes from an affidavit in the Susan Daniels in the Barnett v. Obama
It is ... wait for it... NOT A DATE.
Look for yourself:
So, that's another lie.
And guess what, two lines above that number is Obama's actual birth date... on the same document... and above that you know what it says? Ready to see
just how much these guys are lying to you?
"SSN not found in Social Security Death Index"
In other words, the place that the birthers get the 1890 number from CLEARLY STATES that the number is not in the Death Index. It also clearly states
that the number belongs to someone named Barrack Obama born in 1961.
Try and get your head around how much the birthers have been lying to you... not accidentally.
They have been very deliberately lying and generating political propaganda...
I wonder why?
PS: If you want a good laugh, Orly Taitz, birther queen, got her law degree from an online "university," whih may explain why her earnings as a lawyer
so far have amounted to... -$20,000 dollars. Worst lawyer ever.
edit on 29-1-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)