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.

 

Ariz. sheriff's Obama investigator is making money off this birth certificate investigation

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by Sharpenmycleats
 


All this is really moot; its a sham. A money making plot taking advantage of the last few people will buy this nonsense.




So you say as a paid troll! O'Bama, our self proclaimed "most transparent" administration sure is working hard to keep secrets. Plus it appears he has hired a small army of people like yourself to cloud any issue. Why not just come forward with the document and bury this long running issue!




posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by Sharpenmycleats

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
This happens all the time. Capitalism at it's finest. How does this make it any less true?

Steve Jobs Movie



It doesn't.

The fact that it is based on a false rumor generated by some Tea Party factions factions is what makes it LESS TRUE.

And "less true" is no different from a lie.

If he wasn't born here he could not be President.

The GOP did not make a incredible mistake judging the authenticity of his B/C prior to the elections.

If they did mistake a forged document for the real thing and allowed their opposition, though he was born in Kenya to win - can you imagine how STUPID THIS WOULD MAKE THEM?

CERTAINLY NOT RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO RUN A COUNTRY. PERIOD


This is a sham argument and conspiracy put out their for the ignorant and the trigger happy.

People are trying to flavor already mushy minds.
Trying to get vigilantes to equate Obama with an outlaw - who has no RIGHT to the Presidency.
Hoping to inspire another wacko to take the "law" into their own hands like Jared Loughtner thought he was.

They think everyone is as stupid as they are and can't see through this?
Doesn't surprise me at all the whole thing is so some guy can make money on a book.
There are people who will buy it.




Don't you love guys like this. That actually believe that the responsibity to protect the constitution is a Republican responsibility. That if Mr. Obama's public record is a fraud it would be the fault of the Republicans for not "outing" him.

Is anything ever Barak's fault. I guess if we can't ask Barak to take responsibility, before we blame the Repblicans, how about democrats asking a vew questions? How about the media? How about the aiding and abetting from those Democrats down in Hawaii? Or since this cold case posse is not saying he is an illegal (yet), how about the person that forged it and let the white house administration post it? Is that person responsible?...nope...just the Republicans.

Oh, and don't forget those lunatic tea baggers. Even though they are tax paying citizens of the USA they have no right to make a formal request of their county sheriff to investigate something. Anything affiliated to the tea baggers is obviously a lie.

Are you for real? Good grief!




What are you trying to say exactly?

I cannot find the truth through the sarcasm.



Wait...I'll come back with my boots on and try to wade through this again...






Let me help you out here,

You quoted,
"The GOP did not make a incredible mistake judging the authenticity of his B/C prior to the elections.

If they did mistake a forged document for the real thing and allowed their opposition, though he was born in Kenya to win - can you imagine how STUPID THIS WOULD MAKE THEM?

CERTAINLY NOT RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO RUN A COUNTRY. PERIOD"

So I guess what you are stating is Democrats have no responsibility to confirm their fearless leader is qualified to be president. That just because he is a democrat, that responsibility falls on the republicans. You better put on some boots because the wading begins through your own post!



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
It goes even deeper than that. Word goes around some of these people might be drawing a salary.

Seriously though, what returns do you expect from a book, that is only interesting to Americans to begin with? Its hardly going to be the next girl with the dragon tatoo.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by seenavv
reply to post by bknapple32
 
John Locke was one of my fav characters in lost... you should be ashamed as a hypocrite to take on such a title
edit on 6-3-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)


Well luckily reality agreed with me. Alwaki was not a triple agent. That was jargon spit out on the Alex Jones show. If thats where you get your facts, it explains a lot. He presented an imminent threat to the united states. He was already behind the foiled Christmas day attack. He couldnt be captured and those two things constitute a legal right to take him out. Its the law, look it up. Nothing hypocritical there.

And again you bring up 9/11. I already said I think it may have been an inside job, you need to actually read what I write before calling me names. I said Bin laden was behind the attack on the uss cole and bombing of the embassy in egypt. He represented the same immanent threat alwaki did. And do you know what happened when seal team 6 got to bin ladin? The orders were capture if possible, kill if necessary. So ill trust seal team 6 that they had to shoot at him.

Again nothing hypocritical...

On a lighter note, Im glad you love lost. WE should have a fun talk about it. WE can disagree but dont have to be hostile. Would love to know some theories you had about the show.
edit on 6-3-2012 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


I don't understand how Obama's lawyers opinions trump the Constitution which clearly gives every American the right to a trial by jury. An American citizen was executed by his government without a trial of any sort and I do not see how any American can stand behind that.

They had a book deal before the investigation so be it. If they had found a document which proved Obama was ineligible for office would that book deal somehow change that document? Would the fact of them having a book deal change the text on that document? Would the book deal mean the document wasn't valid just because those that discovered it could potentially profit from that discovery?



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by bknapple32
 


I don't understand how Obama's lawyers opinions trump the Constitution which clearly gives every American the right to a trial by jury. An American citizen was executed by his government without a trial of any sort and I do not see how any American can stand behind that.

They had a book deal before the investigation so be it. If they had found a document which proved Obama was ineligible for office would that book deal somehow change that document? Would the fact of them having a book deal change the text on that document? Would the book deal mean the document wasn't valid just because those that discovered it could potentially profit from that discovery?


Having a book deal before you conduct your investigation automatically means there is a very good chance for bias. The fact that your first priority was a book deal means you first priority is money. Thus it isnt a stretch for one to think they could sway their results to reach an outcome that will make the most money for said bookdeal.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
It is kinda obvious the guy was doing it for the money.... but who doesn't do stuff for the money



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


You are not answering my question and to be honest I find it frustrating.

Does the mindset of the person doing the research change a documented indisputable fact discovered during that research?
edit on 10-3-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
You know who else is making money off the fraudulent birth certificate? Obama, making billions if not trillions through all the back door bailouts. But you dont care about that do you, just some guy selling a book for twenty bucks while you can get it free from the library.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by bknapple32
 


You are not answering my question and to be honest I find it frustrating.

Does the mindset of the person doing the research change a documented indisputable fact discovered during that research?
edit on 10-3-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


Yes it does. It causes them to claim something is an indisputable fact when it is not because otherwise they are operating at a complete loss. How is this too complicated for you.

You write a book. You want to make money off of that book. You do research and find out that your book is going to be full of # and there goes all your money. How do you investigate now and still make money?
Well take a lesson from Arpaio and do NO RESEARCH AT ALL and claim you did and get suckers like you to believe that a lying sheriif and his friend with a book deal are really looking out for you.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


It isn't complicated at all. The misdirected and indirect answers are getting a little complicated though!

I am asking a simple question to the OP. If a document is uncovered which is a clear, indisputable, unalterable, absolute proof of something does that researchers mindset somehow negate what the document says?

I will give an example:

What if this investigation had uncovered a genuine, verifiable, indisputably authentic birth certificate showing O'Bama was born in China, Russia, England, or any other country on this planet? Would this discovery be void and invalid because the person searching for it was searching to prove O'Bama wasn't born in the U.S.?



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by LErickson
 


It isn't complicated at all. The misdirected and indirect answers are getting a little complicated though!

I am asking a simple question to the OP. If a document is uncovered which is a clear, indisputable, unalterable, absolute proof of something does that researchers mindset somehow negate what the document says?

I will give an example:

What if this investigation had uncovered a genuine, verifiable, indisputably authentic birth certificate showing O'Bama was born in China, Russia, England, or any other country on this planet? Would this discovery be void and invalid because the person searching for it was searching to prove O'Bama wasn't born in the U.S.?


Who makes it indisputable? Certainly not you. Nor I. But the point here is, someone who is trying to make money off the results is the LAST one who can claim something is absolute proof. No third party that has nothing to gain has verified their findings.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by LErickson
 


It isn't complicated at all. The misdirected and indirect answers are getting a little complicated though!

Yet you go on to do just that.


I am asking a simple question to the OP. If a document is uncovered which is a clear, indisputable, unalterable, absolute proof of something does that researchers mindset somehow negate what the document says?


Of course not but that is not the case here so why even ask about that about this?


I will give an example:

What if this investigation had uncovered a genuine, verifiable, indisputably authentic birth certificate showing O'Bama was born in China, Russia, England, or any other country on this planet? Would this discovery be void and invalid because the person searching for it was searching to prove O'Bama wasn't born in the U.S.?


Too bad you have to give a far fetched example in order to make your case. I guess that means that the good Sheriff uncovered absolutely nothing or else you would have just used that.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
How the hell else is the thing going to get viral???
I ask you? Isnt this a way to get this message out to americans,?
So he gets paid for two thousand hours of free investigative work...is the workman not worthy of his hire?
This is a brilliaant ploy to get this out there where the people will have to take notice....
I just hope it is true....The entertainment factor is huge!
peace



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by stirling
How the hell else is the thing going to get viral???
I ask you? Isnt this a way to get this message out to americans,?
So he gets paid for two thousand hours of free investigative work...is the workman not worthy of his hire?
This is a brilliaant ploy to get this out there where the people will have to take notice....
I just hope it is true....The entertainment factor is huge!
peace


What did he do that he deserves to get paid for?
All they did was rehash the same crap that Alex Jones already said and the same crap that has been posted on ATS a million times. From what I can tell the research consisted completely of reading ATS for about 2 hours. How much is that worth exactly?



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 





It isn't complicated at all. The misdirected and indirect answers are getting a little complicated though!

I am asking a simple question to the OP. If a document is uncovered which is a clear, indisputable, unalterable, absolute proof of something does that researchers mindset somehow negate what the document says?


The simple reason is that your strawman argument has no basis in reality and there is simply no reason to respond to your attempt to sidetrack the discussion into irrelevant point scoring 'gotcha' trash talking.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 




From what I can tell the research consisted completely of reading ATS for about 2 hours.


Actually, it is something like 90% cut and paste from Jerome Corsi's blatherings on WorldNetDaily. Here is an analysis on the actual document:

Chapter One

Chapter Two

There is apparently even greater overlap than is documented here as many of the arguments are identical although the wording has been changed.

The CCP didn't 'investigate' anything. They just agreed to let Corsi publish his bovine feces under their name.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Why shouldnt he make a living exposing corruption.

Isnt he paid anyway for this, he is a sheriff, lol, we pay him to catch criminals anyways!

If yoir going to make money, then its far better to do it exposing corruption than being corrupt!



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


The term "straw man" get bantered about so much by so many whom have no idea the proper definition of the word. I am stating a simple fact that mindset cannot change a physical document or object. I used an example, as in a fictitious but approximate set of circumstances to be utilized to more clearly understand something.

Site my straw man.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


I am going to explain the relevancy:

The OP has postulated that since there was a book deal before the investigation began that the investigations findings are biased. I am asking the OP to explain how a mindset can negate something that is discovered which turns out to be indisputable fact.

I am not now nor have I claimed that the sherif has found anything. I just want the OP to explain how the book deal could somehow negate a physically tangible evidentiary discovery if one were made. I can understand the concept that eyewitness testimony could be corrupted or misinterpreted due to a mindset but if a birth certificate was uncovered that showed O'Bama wasn't born in the U.S. how could the mindset of the researchers negate that document?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join