Trump Uncovers TruthAbout Obama/AKA-(Barry Soetoro)Obama Is Not His Real Name. He's A Fraud

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


You never responded to my response, and thats fine, but I guess I'm curious why you would waste all of your time like this to respond to everyone else when you truely dont know 100 percent that this man is eligible to be a President of the US. What gives? We were also told by these same people that UFOs and Aliens dont exist and I also have a hard time beleiving that; maybe Im crazy.

To follow your logic you deny the credibility of certain sites based on the PAST, why dont you greet the government with the same scrutiny?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

About the digitization, an article can be photocopied then digitized, but in this case it was found that it was not based on a photocopy of an actual document. I know you do not want to hear that because Obama is your savior.
www.wnd.com...

Polarik explained to WND his four months of research on the images, including nearly 1,000 test images using actual scans and photographs of real certificates, indicate there are several "giveaways" on the image itself. For example, the document has gray and white between the lettering, not green pixels as the rest of the background document, suggesting someone cut-and-pasted or typed new information that was embedded on top of the background.

Dan Purdy of Forensic Document Examination Services Inc. told WND that the origins of the Internet images aren't known. He raised questions over whether the "original" was a photocopy, the equipment used to create the digital image and the compression processes of the various formats.

Photocopying would occur from copier to cpu and would have to be digitized to be able to be html enabled.

Originally posted by SlyingFaucers
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

I dated an ob nurse who was 23 and many of the other nurses on her floor were also in their 20s... On top of that, most of them kept a book where they wrote down all of the babies they delivered to look back and see if they delivered anyone famous down the road.

I appreciate the attempt but to speak in absolutes and to say it is a hairbrained idea for any of them to still be alive seems more crazy to me.

Odds are if a book was kept at the hospital would it not remain in the hospital and for some in their 70's (a 25 yr old in 1961 would be 75 now in 2011) now would've long forgotten that aspect. As if you assist in the delivery of say, 500 babies a year how would you remember each and everyone?

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


It was more of a personal thing like a diary...

cheers!

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by SlyingFaucers
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

It was more of a personal thing like a diary...

cheers!

If you aided in the delivery of 500 kids a year over a 30 yr span you would've aided in the birth of approximately 15,000 kids and since every single person younger then say, 40 in 1961 is retired nowadays and the last thing they want to think about is work and just want to live out their golden years not worrying about that.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


I guess this is a battle of what old means. The retirement age in the US is 67 so to say that someone in their 70s is incapable of reflection sounds a bit off. I have two grandmothers in their 80s that are always dying to show me acheivements from their lifetime. If you knew a president of the united states was born in your hospital on a given date, you might crack open the book for a minute to check.

And maybe your right, maybe it's a moot point because the nurses who did deliver him are dead.

I still dont see how holding the barrier for this guy makes any sense. Why wouldnt you like to have more information rather than less? Sounds uneducated to me.

reply to post by aptness


Actually, this website explains something about what Hi officials claimed

www.theobamafile.com...

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

Text

There is nothing in that statement that states the birth certificate Hawaii holds was issued by Hawaii. There is nothing that states Obama was born in the State of Hawaii. That statement simply says that Hawaii has the original birth certificate "on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

The same website has an affidavit from Sandra Ramsey Lines, a forensic document examiner(and I think all those people who claim UFO images are CGI can surely appreciate this one )

. I have reviewed the attached affidavit [.pdf] posted on the internet from "Ron Polarik," who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the "Daily Kos," the Obama Campaign, "Factcheck.org" and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
That statement simply says that Hawaii has the original birth certificate "on record in accordance with state policies and procedures"

This shows how silly birthers can get to avoid the facts. Care to show what "state policies and procedures" would involve the state of Hawaii holding a birth certificate issued by another country - who handed it to them, and why would another country give Hawaii someones birth certificate?

You really should accept the fact that a black man is the legal POTUS!

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
That statement simply says that Hawaii has the original birth certificate "on record in accordance with state policies and procedures"

This shows how silly birthers can get to avoid the facts. Care to show what "state policies and procedures" would involve the state of Hawaii holding a birth certificate issued by another country - who handed it to them, and why would another country give Hawaii someones birth certificate?

You really should accept the fact that a black man is the legal POTUS!

You really should stop with the race baiting and race warfare. I've never seen anything like it all my life. It's a strawman argument anyway, and Obama and his wife have used both race and class warfare this whole time since they campaigned. It's a tool of Marxism, and I would guess Saul Alinsky as well. I liked him in fact till I heard his support for sex ed for kindergartners. Then I started hearing about his being steeped in Marxism, his affiliations with Bill Ayers(ya know former Weatherman), and Rev Wright and so on. Really, it's just not hard to find out what he's about. I oppose Marxism so it's pretty clear cut for me. Also, if Herman Cain or Allen West run in 2012, I will definitely consider them.
That being said, let's get down to business on the BC thing related to what that official said. The Hi State official basically said they have a document on file according to State regulations. Well, let's look at what those regulations are. Fact is that in 1961 a family member could register the birth, even if the baby was born in a foreign country and that is what the Hi State official avoided telling us. Here is what I found on American Thinker
www.americanthinker.com...

1. Under Hawaiian law, it is possible (both legally and illegally) for a person to have been born out of state, yet have a birth certificate on file in the Department of Health.

A. From Hawaii's official Department of Health, Vital Records webpage: "Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country" (applies to adopted children).

So let me know if you have a way to refute that.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by aptness

 

Actually, this website explains something about what Hi officials claimed

www.theobamafile.com...

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

Text

There is nothing in that statement that states the birth certificate Hawaii holds was issued by Hawaii. There is nothing that states Obama was born in the State of Hawaii. That statement simply says that Hawaii has the original birth certificate "on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

Seriously?! You're going with that? One can only hope that if you have a shred of self respect you were embarassed to even type it out.

Please read the following and see if it does not directly refute your "assertion": www.msnbc.msn.com...
Please pay particular attention to the line that reads: "The certification that the campaign received back —which shows that Obama was born in Honolulu at 7:24 p.m. on Aug. 4, 1961 — was based on the content of the original document in state files, Fukino said."

As to why Obama hasn't released the long form for all to read...that's answered in the article as well. However, I'm sure the birthers will immediately claim that it is all part of "the coverup".

Come to think of it, I never did trust Hawaii - Utah either, damn Mormons...

Originally posted by DevilJin

All will be revealed after Obama is out of office and safe in South America or somewhere. Americans will shake their fists and shout curses or maybe go online and vent their anger while the president at that time will do more harm.

The next generation will not care.

I think it's comical how US leaders think they can rape the USA and then slip quietly away to live the good life in South America.

There are a *lot* of American patriots whom also happen to be *very* wealthy....any number of them might decide that these rapists should not be able to get away with their treachery, and send a merc squad or so in to remind the bastards that they do not take kindly to being shafted.

Easy peasy...the CIA does it all the time.

reply to post by userid1


So to recap...

You're convinced of your position because of what...the MSM says so?

Blimey.

reply to post by userid1


You are quoting MSNBC and you have the gall to ridicule me and insult my self-esteem? Yah well, people like you are the ones who refuse to see what the guy is really about.
Please see my above post. You have nothing. Why would I even bother to look at an MSNBC mainstream media who is all about protecting him? Just like you bots keep dredging up Politifact and Factchecker and Huffpo and DailyKos ad nauseum. You are the one who should be ashamed. You would allow a fraud like him and you support him even after he has shown his ineptitude.

reply to post by hawaii50th


What a complete waste of ATS space this is. You cry about how people lie and attack but you present NO FACTS, you repeat LIES, you refuse to acknowledge anyone that attempts to actually engage you in discsussion with reality and facts, and then you post nothing but empty attacks.

Originally posted by hawaii50th
Thank goodness for that, we don't need anymore parasites or loonies with a name like vicky we don't need anymore of those types either.

Originally posted by hawaii50th
It's always so amazing to see how many loonies are out there, walking off the path.

Originally posted by hawaii50th
Yes your so right, repeat a lie enough times idiots will eventually believe it.

Originally posted by hawaii50th
Just because he went to a so called Christian church, and notice I said "so called" does not prove anything.
For one, that Wright character is not a real Christian, he is a ranting, hateful, prejudice, judgmental, screaming lunatic.

There is no substance to what you produce and your fear of anyone with any knowledge shines brighter than any "truth" you may think you were spreading with your minimal ad hom posts.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by userid1


Look, the BC Gibbs himself states he put on the Net is fake. Why has Obama spent so much money hiding the real one that is supposedly on file in Hi? Why doesn't he just put the real one out there? Why is he still doing this and fighting these lawsuits? Several million to date. If those State officials recant what they have said, they can be brought to court for perjury, so why would they change their statements now? They have been protecting him. Another thing is that Elena Kagan's name is on the dockets of some of those cases, as she was handling them for him. And that was before she was appointed as a Supreme Court Justice.
dailypaul.com...

www.supremecourt.gov.../docketfiles/09-8857.htm

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
This has not been disproven. Only obamas supporters and the RINOS and CFR claim this because it suits the agenda of the NWO. The BC that was presented online is a digital and not a photocopy of an original.

You must be new here.

Seeing as how they come off computer printers, please explain to me how it could have been analog and not digital before it was printed. That sounds interesting.

It was created digitally to put online to fool the foolish who are entranced by his devious ways and his magician trickery. Also, there is a document online that explains how he uses mass hynosis.
having a high IQ does not trump political aspersions and partisanship.

So the BC was put online to full people but the document online about him being a master hypnotist is probably true?

Originally posted by SlyingFaucers
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

So he was born a day before the twins and registered 3 days earlier, but has a higher registration number? And that makes logical gymnastic sense to you? Ok.

Please explain to me then how you are going to rely on that registration number of his birth in Hawaii to prove he was not born in Hawaii without any gymnastics. I have no idea how they do their numbers but if you believe the number is the number on that registration then you believe that registration which means you believe his birth was regsitered in Hawaii which means you believe he was born in Hawaii.
a
So yes. Claiming his Hawaiin birth registry is both accurate and proves he was not born in Hawaii takes a pretty flexible mind.