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.
Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
reply to post by bhornbuckle75
What was debunked from your link ?????
Repeatedly used soc sec # in question -issued in CT (DEBUNKED) issued 1977-1979
Also used SS# 350-60-2302 issued in IL in1975-1976 - Reported 07/2009
651-23-4987 Reported 01/02/2008
675-54-6554 Reported 09/2008
799-89-7090 Reported 08/2007
901-09-8765 Reported 06/2007
423-29-2961 Issued on AL 1988-1989 - Reported 02/2008
485-40-5154 (Deceased) Issued in IA 1954-1955 belonged to Lucille Ballantyne born 12/22/1912
and died 09/13/1998
He should be in jail IMHO.
Thanks for the link.
Originally posted by bhornbuckle75
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
............and debunked
Were you just selectively reading the things that you thought might support your point of view or something?
Originally posted by davolobos
Its already been proven by Jerome Coarsey that Obama's Grandmother had access to Social Security Numbers from the Hawaiian Bank at which she Governed, (yes she was The Boss),
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
Don't waste your time telling me to get over it.
I wont, but when lies like
As she discovered, the “042″ number is reserved for the exclusive use of individuals who register in Connecticut
is posted it shows that she has no clue at all what she is babbling about!
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by flyswatter
As I understand it BLOCKS of SSN are transferred. So if you checked sequential numbers before and after yours they should also read the same state as yours. Obama's does not. That as I understand it is the unexplainable issue. If the BLOCK was given to Hawaii then the 10 before or after should also have Hawaii. They are all CT, this was not a BLOCK transfer, which as I understand it is the only way these are transferred, never as a single number.
Someone else also said this SSN was previously used by someone who lived in the 1800's, SSN are unique, never recycled, so that is a red flag if true.
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by flyswatter
So the number was originally issued to someone else, but they were not born in 1890?
Or what?
I am just wondering if the number was originally issued to someone else. The 1890 number wasn't concerning me so much.
Originally posted by flyswatter
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by flyswatter
So the number was originally issued to someone else, but they were not born in 1890?
Or what?
The number 1890 has nothing to do with a birth date or another person that may have had that SSN. If it was a date of birth or anything along those lines, it would have been shown differently, not simply as "1890".