Why Obama Does Not Have A Birth Certificate

reply to post by phroziac


You are an idiot if you believe I think he was born in Kenya...

reply to post by MmmPie


Actually it started just around the time that the Banking sector was taken over due to the government being forced to declare bankruptcy.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by phroziac

 

You are an idiot if you believe I think he was born in Kenya...

Ok...you can agree to disagree with another member...but calling someone an idiot is not right.

You have a different spin on the President's birth issue; which is interesting; but when you start name calling; that really is a way to lose some respect here. I'm just saying.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


Your attention to detail is commendable.

Too bad the Government doesn't share your convictions.

reply to post by caladonea


It is not about him having a different view than I. He is outright accusing me of advocating a stance that I am not, and that I have denounced in my post. If he can not read and understand that; then my remark stands. His intelligence is lacking.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


That is how the trolls roll here.

Barry's internet task force joins in on these threads and they simply repeat the same tired talking points that make no sense.

Veritas and I have been going at it with a bunch in another thread that is up to like 50 pages.

We have talked them into the ground.
We have provided so much freaking evidence.
And yet they still do the same thing.

They talk in circles and repeat lies.

That is their MO..

I eventually got so fed up that I started copy and pasting the same answer to all their senseless arguments.

Every successive copy was eventually deleted by a mod, and I don't blame them for doing it, but my point was made.

It's not even that transparent, their disinfo techniques. I dissected the birth certificate myself. I've been using photoshop since version ONE. Illustrator since version ONE. I have all the evidence I need to determine that it is as fake as a Kardashian wedding.

reply to post by kyviecaldges


Yeah, we had it out with them last night and today. We provided links, videos, evidence, etc, and when some of it was too convenient they completely ignored it when questioned about it, and would mention something else. There is absolutely no way they are going to get around this one.

Drats, when I read the title I thought it was going to be “one of those threads” claiming he is a reptilian or something similar…….

Oh well, no joke here….. so I might as well state that the POTUS BC is as fake as my boob inspector licence (which has never worked once BTW)

Mickierocksman

Word of warning to the members of the board

The author of this thread has been repeatedly asked to provide the law defining capitalization as a persons status. He has not been able to do so and only can site old roman laws. I asked several times for him to quote this law. The only responses I got was links to wikipedia pages about old laws that are not in effect anymore and never were in US. Therefore the whole idea only excists in imagination.
I didn't know he had started a new thread with this info untill now so I'm here to warn you not to be fooled. If the law cannot be quoted it does not excist. Period.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Word of warning to the members of the board

The author of this thread has been repeatedly asked to provide the law defining capitalization as a persons status. He has not been able to do so and only can site old roman laws. I asked several times for him to quote this law. The only responses I got was links to wikipedia pages about old laws that are not in effect anymore and never were in US. Therefore the whole idea only excists in imagination.
I didn't know he had started a new thread with this info untill now so I'm here to warn you not to be fooled. If the law cannot be quoted it does not excist. Period.

This is ridiculous.

How about this.

Word of warning for members of the board.

This psycho poster is from Finland and thinks that he understands US law, when in reality, he has no idea what he is talking about. Period.

I am embarrassed for you.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Word of warning to the members of the board
The author of this thread has been repeatedly asked to provide the law defining capitalization as a persons status. He has not been able to do so and only can site old roman laws. I asked several times for him to quote this law. The only responses I got was links to wikipedia pages about old laws that are not in effect anymore and never were in US. Therefore the whole idea only excists in imagination.I didn't know he had started a new thread with this info untill now so I'm here to warn you not to be fooled. If the law cannot be quoted it does not excist. Period.

You do not know of what you speak....period. You are ignorant of the law!
You should go and do some research on the concept of a "Legal Fiction" then come back and apologize for your untoward behavior against fellow members of this Forum.

There is an old adage: 'Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.'”

This is an EXERPT from Part 2 of a three part series of articles on the notion of "Are we flesh and blood or a legal fiction?"

From the June 2003 Idaho Observer:
Are we flesh and blood or a legal fiction?
Part 2: Legal Fiction

A debate regarding the relevance of our names as spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS on government documents has been ongoing for some time. Does the ALL CAPS name indicate a citizenship status not described in the Constitution, or does government use an ALL CAPS representation of our names merely as a matter of style? In Part 1 of this three-part article (The IO, May, 2003) we discovered that there is no grammatical rule or style manual anywhere on Earth explaining government use of ALL CAP names. This month we will continue exploring this controversial topic by discussing whether or not the ALL CAP name government uses for us infers our status as a “legal fiction.”

The authors of The Real Life Dictionary of the Law, Gerald and Kathleen Hill, describe the term legal fiction:

“Legal fiction. n. A presumption of fact assumed by a court for convenience, consistency or to achieve justice. There is an old adage: 'Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.'”
From Oran's Dictionary of the Law, 1999, this definition of legal fiction is found:

“A legal fiction is an assumption that something that is (or may be) false or nonexistent is true or real. Legal fictions are assumed or invented to help do justice. For example, bringing a lawsuit to throw a nonexistent “John Doe” off your property used to be the only way to establish a clear right to the property when legal title was uncertain.”

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, 1996, states:

“legal fiction: something assumed in law to be fact irrespective of the truth or accuracy of that assumption.”

Is this the reason behind the use of full caps when writing a proper name? Are the U.S. and state governments deliberately using a legal fiction to “address” people? We say deliberate because their own official publications state that proper names are not to be written in full caps.
In the same respect, by identifying their own government entity in full caps, they are legally stating that they are also a legal fiction.

SOURCE - and the article is contnued here--->
FOR FURTHER READING GO HERE

Are we flesh and blood or a legal fiction? (Part 1)
Are we flesh and blood or a legal fiction? (Part 3)

reply to post by Vitruvian

reply to post by kyviecaldges


Feel free to prove me wrong. Quote the law. It's just that simple. I dare you. I double dare you.

[Edit to add] I do not care about anyones opinion on the law. I want the statue. You know the one that has § and all.

reply to post by PsykoOps


I have already shown this to you in a different thread.

Just like evidence has been shown to refute every argument you have.

And yet you continue to evade and ignore this evidence by asking to see evidence.

Maybe English isn't your first language.

It's cool. I can forgive that.

QUOTING PsykoOps - "Feel free to prove me wrong. Quote the law. It's just that simple. I dare you. I double dare you. [Edit to add] I do not care about anyones opinion on the law. I want the statue. You know the one that has § and all"


PsykoOps
You have already been proven wrong twice, and so now I shall prove you wrong again - not for my own satisfaction but for the edification of the other members here on ATS, because we do not want them - or our readers - to go away with a wrong conclusion based on a faulty premise put forth by a person (poster) here who is ignorant of basic rules of logic and the law.

Your demand for "a law" indicates a use of a 'non sequitur' on your part. SO - Not only are you ignorant of the law you are equally ill informed as to the rules of logic as shown by your use of a 'non sequitur' – which is defined as “it does not follow” with respect to your asinine request FOR A LAW. I am sure you are unaware of what I am proposing to you here so I will explain/define it for you.

In formal logic, a Non sequitur is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises. In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All formal fallacies are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.
The powers that be have covered all bases with respect to their free use of “illegalities –and you should know that.
There are no rules in either law or grammar to which you would spell a name in all upper-case letters. Proper names are always capitalized, i.e. John Smith, and are not spelled in all upper-case, i.e. JOHN SMITH. These are “legal fictions” as opposed to “lawful names”. Thus we can assume that this practice is done with the intent in mind of undertaking some sort of fraud.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by phroziac

 

You are an idiot if you believe I think he was born in Kenya...

Oh, thats an intelligent post. In fact, i did not say you thought he was born in kenya. Whose the idiot?

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by kyviecaldges

 

It was put up on the Website to debunk the myth that he didn't have one, doubters started saying it was fake then an adobe certified expert said it was legit.

Do you want him to mail his birth certificate to your house so you can verify it?

you are somehow under the impression that the birthers would believe some type of proof if presented to them...this is a false way of thinking. they do not care, they will continue to bring it up again and again, always insisting that any proof is wrong or faked...that is just the way their mind works.

reply to post by PsykoOps


Oh but I have quoted the law.. It is not my fault you fall into the fallacy of believing lawmakers would put everything in such direct manners.

reply to post by phroziac


Did you not call me a Birther? What is a Birther but somebody who is arguing Obama's eligibility via being born in Kenya? I stated before that was not the stance I was advocating. Forgive me if I don't take corrupted government officials who investigate themselves, for their word.