Obama's hidden birth certificate now exposed

reply to post by hellobruce

none of the above and no, Obama hasn't shown anything, let alone his certificate of live birth.
and, since you don't even know when BCs were initiated, i'll pass.

funny thing tho, just today while in the TC office, yet another youngin' was able to clearly understand why the posted document is anything but 'legal' and that sure was a nice experience. [legal paper examples do speak a thousand words ]

Originally posted by Honor93
Obama hasn't shown anything, let alone his certificate of live birth.

Oh dear, en.wikipedia.org...resident_Barack_Obama%27s_long_form_birth_certificate.jpg
and
en.wikipedia.org...:BarackObamaCertificationOfLiveBirthHawaii.jpg

You are looking very silly about now....

Still waiting for the previous Presidents birth certificates... hold on, they never had to show them.

to clearly understand why the posted document is anything but 'legal'

Poor Orly Taitz and other birthers have yet to work that out! They have also not yet worked that the Constitution does not say president must show their BC....

reply to post by hellobruce

hmmmm, where do any of those provide evidence that BHO (any of them), posted or provided that image ??

yes, you are ... got anything substantial ?

you'll be waiting awhile as i don't participate in fence matches - besides, this isn't about any other POTUS.

no other POTUS had a high ranking member of the Muslim Brotherhood for a father.
no other sitting POTUS had a questionable origin.
and no other POTUS refused when asked.
oh, and to the best of my knowledge, no other POTUS utilized a multitude of names on legal documents or a variety of social security numbers.

aside from that, the Constitution doesn't have to, a higher authority already has.

Originally posted by Honor93
no other POTUS had a high ranking member of the Muslim Brotherhood for a father.

Neither was Obama's father..

no other sitting POTUS had a questionable origin.

who says - the only people questioning Obama's origin are rabid birthers. Care to show where all previous presidents proved their origin...

and no other POTUS refused when asked.

So please show all previous presidents birth certificates.... and Obama has shown his!

no other POTUS utilized a multitude of names on legal documents or a variety of social security numbers.

Neither has Obama - any proof at all Obama has used a variety of SSN's.... or Obama has used another name on a legal document....

a higher authority already has.

True, which is why Obama is the current legal President, and will be the legal President for 4 more years. And there is nothing birthers can do about that. They have been whining for 4 years about Obama, and every time they have gone to court their case was thrown out. Thet have no facts, only people like Orly Taitz making money from birthers.

reply to post by hellobruce

yeah, according to more than one source, he was.

Care to show where all previous presidents proved their origin...

you might want to read a biography or two ... however, i do notice that you seem limited to wiki

hmmmm, reading is your friend.
you might want to give it try.

Obama hasn't shown any such thing but you're free to think so.

yep, all kinds and apparently the Supreme Court may be interested as well.
i suppose we'll see.

you are welcome to your opinion.
i know better and i don't need the USSC to recognize it either ... although, they certainly have made a few Big mistakes over the years and they may be due for another.

Originally posted by Honor93
however, i do notice that you seem limited to wiki

You seem limited to silly conspiracy theory blogs, not based on any fact.

obama will be the legal President for the next 4 years, and all the whining birthers go on with will not change that fact.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by hellobruce

 

hmmmm, where do any of those provide evidence that BHO (any of them), posted or provided that image ??

yes, you are ... got anything substantial ?

you'll be waiting awhile as i don't participate in fence matches

- besides, this isn't about any other POTUS.

no other POTUS had a high ranking member of the Muslim Brotherhood for a father.
no other sitting POTUS had a questionable origin.
and no other POTUS refused when asked.
oh, and to the best of my knowledge, no other POTUS utilized a multitude of names on legal documents or a variety of social security numbers.

aside from that, the Constitution doesn't have to, a higher authority already has.

None of your statements are correct. Where on Earth did you get that collection of baseless rubbish?

reply to post by AngryCymraeg

you two really should do some reading.
i certainly have and nothing you can say at this point will change my mind.

Obama and his family members have said plenty.
here, i'll even share a tidbit of info readily available.
link 1
or ... link 2
or ... link 3
or ... if need be, in Obama's own words ... link 4

In announcing Mr. Hussein’s appointment as his deputy associate counsel, Mr. Obama proudly announced that Hussain is a Hafiz, someone who has completely memorized the Qur’an. The news that Mr. Obama regularly prays with Mr. Hussein verifies reports that the President prays to Allah.

or ... link 5
or ... link 6
or ... link 7
or ... link 8
or maybe an actual book or two like these ... link 9

when you actually acquire some knowledge about the subject, then perhaps we can discuss it at greater length. until then, you've got some studying to do ... y'all ought to get busy.
and don't reply without sources ... you will be ignored.

Someone just presented a line of links that instead of proving anything, just showed the sort of sites they trawl and how low a standard they accept as evidence of anything.

They should create a rule here, that when it comes to proving anything, that official studies from impartial or as close to impartial bodies must be used. This site is going downhill with a plethora of people misunderstanding the most basic procedures in obtaining evidence.

Most so-called arguments presented on this site regretfully, wouldn't meet the standards required for a high school essay. A link leading to a webpage which is turn has linked another webpage is no good. Neither is a page which only seeks to examine evidence. A truly objective source, is a link to the source itself, with no opinion, no break down just the evidence for people here to draw their own opinions from.

As a conspiracy site, objective evidence should be the foundation of any argument. That makes the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a crackpot.

reply to post by Honor93


Please try to reply with meaningful cites and not a list of dingbat accusations that seem to have been written by people wearing tinfoil hats.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes


Can you read? I said, clearly, more than once, that Obama demanded McCain verify his eligibility, which is what Obama states that he himself should not have to do. When you figure that out, get back to me.

The one thing you're forgetting about is that, due to a technicality John McCain WAS NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. When the constitution was written, the idea of military members serving in foreign countries and having families (i'm sure the founding fathers would have passed out from laughter if women in the military was mentioned) wasn't considered and therefore provisions weren't included. Since there was a very grey area in McCain's situation he was granted natural born status. You're asking for mountains of evidence for someone who was born in the USA and has provided proof of such but you somehow think it's weird that clarification was asked for someone who was 100% definitely born in a foreign country?

P.S. If the birthers have such a strong case, why is 90% of their "evidence" bold faced lies? We're living in a time where a citizen of the soviet union is actually given credibility (by the more delusional members of the population) while attacking the democratically elected POTUS. McCarthy must be spinning in his grave.

reply to post by spacedog1973

and, your 'sources' are where in this thread exactly ??
please share.

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by Honor93

 

Please try to reply with meaningful cites and not a list of dingbat accusations that seem to have been written by people wearing tinfoil hats.

sure, sure, you first.
2nd

reply to post by captainpudding

you are mistaken.
McCain was born in US territory to 2 US citizen parents.
Obama, not so much.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by captainpudding

 

you are mistaken.
McCain was born in US territory to 2 US citizen parents.
Obama, not so much.

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. Its status as US territory was something of a fuzzy area. Barack Obama was both in Hawaii (US territory the last time I checked) and his mother was a US citizen. He is, therefore, perfectly eligible. Good grief, do you think that he could have become a US Senator and then stood for the presidency twice is he wasn't eligible?

reply to post by AngryCymraeg

something fuzzy ???
only in your mind.

source for the rest ???
you know, a verifiable and original one ... not the image you keep floating around.

could he become Senator ??
sure ... provisions exist for that.

could he become President ??
sure, he did ... still doesn't mean he qualified.

good grief, don't you have any substantial facts to offer ?

ah yes, Obama has only one citizen parent, indeed ... at least we've reached that much of an agreement. thank you very much

and, based on the citizenship of his father (who conveys citizenship to the child) what would that make Obama ?
and since he never renounced that British citizenship, rather chose, as an adult, to travel abroad under it ... that creates a bit of a quandry, doesn't it ?

of course, we already know his father was educated via a 'foreign scholarship program' and since Obama refuses to release his 'education funding information' (which should be public record since the public paid for it) ... therein lies a whole new set of questions.

however, since none of them have specific answers at this time, who are you to speak to the contrary ?

Originally posted by Honor93
and, based on the citizenship of his father (who conveys citizenship to the child)

No it does not - care to show us where that is stated in US law, or the US constitution...

what would that make Obama ?

A natural born US citizen!

and since he never renounced that British citizenship, rather chose, as an adult, to travel abroad under it ...

He did? care to show when he got a UK passport, and traveled with it? Or are you going to say when he travelled to Pakistan... except he travelled to Pakistan on a US passport.

that creates a bit of a quandry, doesn't it ?

No.

and since Obama refuses to release his 'education funding information' (which should be public record since the public paid for it)

Since when has any previous President released that info.... so why should obama?

therein lies a whole new set of questions.

Like WTF has that got to do with anything?

however, since none of them have specific answers at this time, who are you to speak to the contrary

They have specific answers, just birthers do not like the answers as they destroy their silly conspiracy, and makes Obama the legal President!

reply to post by hellobruce

why would you ask for an answer to a question that has never been resolved in US law ??
that basis/designation originates in Common Law of which US law is based.

hardly.
he may be a citizen but he'll never equate to 'natural born' status, sorry.
and besides, in this moment in time, that's a decision neither of us will make, anyway.

so why should Obama ?

because he's been asked and asked and asked some more.
do you ignore your employer or tell him/her to F-off when you are asked to produce yours ?

if they have specific answers, then why aren't you 'sourcing' them?

Originally posted by Honor93
why would you ask for an answer to a question that has never been resolved in US law ??

What question are you talking about? Please learn to quote here, so people know what you are on about.

that basis/designation originates in Common Law of which US law is based.

Again, what are you on about? you make no sense.

he may be a citizen but he'll never equate to 'natural born' status, sorry
and besides, in this moment in time, that's a decision neither of us will make, anyway.

The courts have already declared Obama a natural born citizen, but birthers tend to ignore facts like that as the conspiracy sites they get their information dont like it.

because he's been asked and asked and asked some more.
do you ignore your employer or tell him/her to F-off when you are asked to produce yours ?

If some random nutter asks for no reason, then yes. You are not Obama's employer.

if they have specific answers, then why aren't you 'sourcing' them?

Again, specific answers to what exactly? You are making no sense. Please learn to quote.

reply to post by Honor93


You will still need to provide proof that Obama was born elsewhere than Hawaii for that statement to have any validity. Unfortunately there's a fair amount of overwhelming evidence against you.