CNN verifies Obama's legal birth documents in Hawaii

reply to post by Granite


Do you have a link? All the results I see are from yesterday. Thanks!

reply to post by antinwo101


Sure any document can be fabricated, but can Newspaper archives from decades ago be altered without detection? Or has this conspiracy been running since well before Obama was born?

There is nothing logical or educated about the birther conspiracies. The motivation for these conspiracies is a dissatisfaction with the direction America is headed, and somehow that manifests in hysterical notions of the president's citizenship. He was born here, deal with it. Time to focus on shifting the institutions that are ruining this country. The government is broken, and thats a fact I can prove.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


That would be interesting if the birther issue divided republicans enough such that Obama got reelected That would be the ultimate irony.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


In terms of elections 25% of Americans is huge if they vote. In 2008, 56.8% of registered voters turned out for elections. Obama was elected with a little over half of that, over 28%.

So don't dismiss it out of hand. We are entering uncharted territory politically, one the nation's wealthiest men is directly challenging the President and 25% of the people are following him.

Well maybe if we stopped voting for one dude and vote for who gets power other then the leader and have a chance to vote for every law...well I could go farther with this because I have ideas to make this work and all, but not now lol

nice catch OP a bump n flag from me

and ya this and the the fox one i posted are obviously timed...

imo time to give up on the birther issue and focus on what puppet obama and wall street are doing in the white house and abroad.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Thats a lengthy insinuation, I find it hard to believe that Trump would capture all of the birther votes. Rove and the GOP are probably scared of Trump's candidacy, it will ruin any chance of defeating Obama.

Originally posted by Vipassana
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

There is simply no legitimacy in any of the birther arguments.

I disagree. Until the documents are public and independently tested, there will always be questions. The biggest question being, "why aren't the documents public?" It's our right as citizens to question the government, and it's their burden to produce the proof.

Sure, if Trump keeps saying he's not legit, and they produce a B.C. (real or conveniently created), he's toast. The MSM will have him for lunch.

reply to post by Vipassana


And if it happens, I'll be able to say "I Told You So". Not that I would ever say that, of course!

reply to post by Vipassana


Unless there is a viable alternative, I don't know who will be able to stand up to Trump. Romney may have the ego to do it, but he doesn't have the support of the base. The rest I just don't know about. I think Trump has a good chance of catching the nomination if he seeks it and I dare say even get elected, especially if gas is $6 a gallon and the country is insolvent.

We need someone who can motivate the base and stand up to Trump. The horrible thing is I can't think of anyone, popular enough nationally or with a big enough ego, except some guy not born in the US and I don't mean Obama.

The POTUS has an OBLIGATION to demonstrate his elligability to hold that office - he has not done so to the satisfaction of a large % of the American people - he still refuses to do so, despite the damage it is doing to his electoral prospects.

Only an idiot would not draw the obvious conclusion!

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
The POTUS has an OBLIGATION to demonstrate his elligability to hold that office

And he has.

he still refuses to do so, despite the damage it is doing to his electoral prospects.

What "damage?? Are you one who thinks that birthers would vote for Obama if ONLY he'd show his long form? Are you serious? Would YOU vote for him if he showed his long form? Do you know of ANYONE (birther) who would? Neither do I.

That 'reason' carries no weight whatsoever because most birthers HATE Obama. Why would they vote for him regardless where he was born! Think!

I would believe FOX news over CNN. CNN is the White House propaganda wing. At least FOX is critical of the president. But it doesn't matter if someone said they saw his long form BC, how do we know this person isn't lying? Untill the LFBC is shown, it will always be under suspicion.

reply to post by tom502


I think your confused with MSNBC. CNN is critical, maybe not as much as FOX, but they are critical.

Hawaii doesn't have long or short forms. They have pre 2001 Certificates of Live Birth and post 2001 Certifications of Live Birth. After 2001 the old form became mostly obsolete. People born in 2001 and later only have Certfications and no Certificates.

lmao,

the idiots on the airwaves trying to quell
this dispute is just plain wrong.

Notice he was asked if he seen the
vault version and he said no but he
said somebody else did. So why didn't
this other somebody who saw it do the
interview?

Now my question is this:
They say the vault version of the BC
is no longer a valid and legal document,
so where does the information on the short
form come from when it is requested ???
answer: that version in the vault.

what a crock of chit.

Just show the damn thing and let's
see the pudding.

reply to post by Vipassana
Seems like they're trying to clear this mess up before Jerome Corsi's book comes out ....damage control,and until he presents the long form people are not going to be satisfied.Should be interesting to say the least.

reply to post by Vipassana


Until we see Obama's long-form birth certificate there is nothing more to say that has not already been said a at least two dozen times over on ATS alone. The only way to verify now is if an independent party ever is allowed to access the birth certificate. And even then after all is said and done we'd never know if it was an elaborate fake. Obama has had YEARS now to fake a long-form birth certificate. Therefore Obama's birthplace can never be verified as a definite fact and can only be disproven at this point.

it doesn't really matter anyway
seeing the long form. It is fake as well.

In 1995, the CIA did a DNA analysis of
of Obama's DNA and matched it against
his supposed birth grandparents (Dunham).
They did not match. Obama is not even related
by blood to them or his birth certificate mother.
Which later in 1997 led to the CIA director
destroying all files concerning Obama's
maternal grandfather Stanley Dunham
so no future tests would reveal the absence
of the DNA link. This legitimizes the vault
version of the Obama BC.

Guess who was CIA Director in 1997?
George Tenent. Who was also CIA Director
during 9/11 and helped produce fake intel
for the invasion of Afghan and Iraq.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Actually it comes from a computer database established in 2001 that replaced the Certificate system, hence the issuing of Certifications after 2001. No one in Hawaii was issued a certificate after 2001. The information in the database is provided by hospitals and the Dept of Health.

Sure Obama's Certificate was the basis of his Certification in the 2001 database, but all of the old certificates prior to 2001 would no longer have to be accessed after the data was uploaded. Hence they sit in the vault with almost no access and require a FOIA by the holder to acquire it.

reply to post by MikeboydUS

but still, the original content in the database
came from the vault version.