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 getreadyalready
Your point? Yes, I believe there is something to the Loch Ness monster story.
Are you really denying there is anything to one of the largest religions in the world with the Mohammed example?
Chupacabra? Why not? Something unexplained happens to livestock every so often.
Yes, every persistent story out there probably persists, because it has just enough truth in it.
With Obama, there is surely just enough truth to make sure the story will never go away.
Now, I agree that at this point it is a waste of time to continue beating the dead chariot he was delivered in, and we should just try to hold on for another 2 years without any major damage, but that doesn't mean there is nothing to the story.
As for the newspapers in Hawaii, they never quoted anything that wasn't already known and insufficient.
The governor's opinion and the short-form certificate are not sufficient as evidence.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
I recently had to order a BC from Missouri. It is on current paper with current state seals, etc. However, it is identical in content to my original birth certificate (I still have original, but it wasn't embossed enough for my current job to accept it as an original.)
So, my state job wouldn't even accept my original entire birth certificate because almost 40 years in a file have flattened the embossment, but Obama is ok with a short-form certificate that is a "version" taken from the original?
Even when Hawaii's record keepers have admitted that it is fairly simple for someone not born in Hawaii to get an Hawaiian "short-form" birth certificate?
Originally posted by spiritualgirl
If his real name is Barry Soetoro then why would there be a Birth Certificate for "Barack Obama"?
Originally posted by getreadyalready
Why would anyone need to prove that Obama hasn't proven his Hawaiian birth?
Originally posted by getreadyalready
I did not make a special request for my BC. Missouri only has one type of BC. Florida also only has one type of BC. I had never heard of a short/long form until this whole Obama fiasco.
I would be happy if someone from the State Department stood up and said, "Yes, Mr Obama was cleared by our office and is eligible to serve as the President and we are maintaining his employement file that will eventually be declassified and displayed in his Presidential Library per our standard operating procedure." That would satisfy me without seeing anything.
I would be happy just to know that there is an official protocol and operating procedure for these things.
Originally posted by justinsweatt
I see what you are saying but did you make this same argument whenever the left was clamoring for Bush to release more of his military records during the election cycle of 2004? Just curious.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by cindyremains
Why would anyone need to prove that Obama hasn't proven his Hawaiian birth?
How is that even possible? Does a prosecutor in court have to prove that the defense didn't prove innocence? I think the burden of proof lies with Obama to prove that he was indeed born in Hawaii.
As for Unicorns, I avoided that one, because it is too easy! Unicorns are born all the time. It is a simple birth defect in many species of horned animals, I have seen it with my own eyes.
Santa Claus was real and based off a live person,
a dinosaur with the exact body type and eating habits of Nessie is proven to have existed, who knows when the last one died if ever?
Muslims believe in Jesus, and they believe that Mohammed followed him as the next prophet.
Christians believe in Mohammed as a prophet as well.
Yes, most myths and stories have rational explanation.
They are often still based somewhat in fact, and then the stories evolve from there.
Perhaps the Obama BC is like the Unicorn or the Cyclops or Santa Clause.
Perhaps it was a simple story, a clerical error, and it ballooned into the giant debate that exists today. I can believe that.
Maybe he was born in Hawaii, but why not just produce the original long form, or come clean with a decent story that explains the whole mix-up?
Is it because they don't have an explanation? Or is it because all this stupid debate on the BC is keeping attention off bigger issues? Or is it because us little people just aren't important enough for a big time politician to answer to?
Because no Birther has provided any evidence whatsoever to prove that Obama is not qualified to run for president. In fact, this birther nonsense doesn't even qualify as an actual conspiracy theory, it's a rumor at best; Not to mention the people checking the qualifications, his opponents, and his party would have to all be in on it. And for what? So a black man can become president? Really, they couldn't find a black politician who was a actual U.S. Citizen to run for the Democratic Party? You know what, scratch that, even rumors make some sort of sense. And please, don't go all Conspiracy Theorist on me and claim that "Oh, well you see, the government wants to divide and conquer us and distract us from the other issues that's why none of this makes sense".
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by cindyremains
That is against T&C. Otherwise no problem.
When I went to work for the State, I provided a certified copy of my birth certificate and SS card, along with fingerprints, and a list of my last 15 years worth of addresses and references. They did a thorough background check, and they decided I was legitimate enough to make $30,000 per year and have a little bit of decision making responsibility.
I would assume that to be President, you should have at least the same amount of documentation, and a "short-form" certificate of birth that can be easily obtained by presenting them a document from almost anywhere would not be sufficient for me in my current position.
Many, many positions require more than a short-form birth document. Surely we can require the utmost scrutiny of the most powerful position in the world? Plus, if it exists, then what is the problem with sharing it? He already shared the short form, why not the long form? If it doesn't exist, and there is a good reason, why not admit it doesn't exist and give a decent explanation as to why it doesn't exist?
Originally posted by Alxandro
The fact that this story just won't go away, tells me that something is going on.
Originally posted by abecedarian
reply to post by cindyremains
The media shills you mention are not being vocal about it because "a" they have to maintain a shred of common sense which requires not becoming extremist and "b" there is enough doubt in either direction to render the question a somewhat moot point until someone can in fact come up with the smoking gun for one side or the other... and there may be the issue: there is no smoking gun support for either side.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
I really think he has something to hide, but if he was really born in Kenya, doesn't everyone think Hillary would have discovered it very early on? She did not want to concede the primaries, even after her husband had endorsed Obama. The Clinton's have far more connections and resources than any private investigator. If there was a conspiracy to hide Obama's background, Hillary would have uncovered and exposed it way before he was elected.
I am not convinced that he was born in Hawaii, but I am convinced that we will never prove otherwise!
Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by cindyremains
I think what you need to understand is that much of the information many of us seek to know about Obama is being suppressed.
The information we do receive is at best questionable. A birth certificate, in its original form, is easy for all of us to obtain in the US.
Why is it that Obama's BC was exactly like Hawaii's current BC forms, not like the BC's in the 1960's?
There are many questions that remain unanswered and could be easily cleared up.
That secrecy is why people are still bringing this issue up.
The information the MSM feeds us may be good enough evidence as proof in your eyes, but to a community of skeptics that know better....this issue doesn't have anywhere near the evidence to prove his eligability; or lack thereof.