Birthers: We Were Right. The BC is a FRAUD!!! Obama Lovers: Debunk THIS!

A birther is some one who believes Obama is a kenyan plant who secretively is taking control of the country is some kind of conspiratorial reindeergame.

Respectfully, I disagree. I would define a "Birther" as someone who questions the authenticity of the documents provided by the Obama campaign and the State of Hawaii to prove the legitimate birth of Obama in Hawaii and/or, the interpretation of our U.S. Constitution of the requirement to be a "natural born citizen" vs. a "U.S. citizen" to be eligible for presidency.

Originally posted by Laokin
You aren't me. You didn't go to my school. They didn't teach you what they taught me. Quite simply as I mentioned above, there are tools that scientifically calculate the pixel difference between objects in a scene, and can tell which ones were manipulated, and then spits back a filtered image, to show you the results.

Bull#!

One point - - - do you know what kind of scanner was used? Scanning itself creates anomalies.

Living real life and having to deal with "kids from school" - - - is so annoying.

Anyone claiming they have this kind of expertise because they went to school is very naive. It takes years of real practice and experience to even come close to calling yourself expert in such a field.

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by mrsoul2009
Yawn.....some people just have absolutely nothing else to do with their time. Maybe you're time would be better well spent by working for a candidate that can run against BO next year..just sayin

Why are you taking your time to follow this thread if you aren't interested in the arguments? I don't understand your comment.

Perhaps to see if the birthers can actually construct a coherent argument?

Originally posted by userid1

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by mrsoul2009
Yawn.....some people just have absolutely nothing else to do with their time. Maybe you're time would be better well spent by working for a candidate that can run against BO next year..just sayin

Why are you taking your time to follow this thread if you aren't interested in the arguments? I don't understand your comment.

Perhaps to see if the birthers can actually construct a coherent argument?

Please see my posts on pg. 9 and 10 on this topic here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by blackrain17
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Well should I take Obama's words since they are so "transparent"?

No, you can take words of Hawaiian health officials who manage and deal with Hawaiian birth certificates. Not some political opportunist who has proven track record of being partisan. Simple.

But isn't it weird that the alleged place of his birth is so hostile and top secret towards people that just want to know the truth? They should welcome and greet them with integrity if they have nothing to hide.

And that's exactly what he did. Birthers demanded he release proof, Obama provided a short form birth certificate verified by Hawaiian authorities. Birthers did not accept this and demanded Obama release his long form birth certificate. This is exactly what he did, and birthers are still not satisfied.

The only way Obama is going to make people like you happy is if leaves office, this has nothing to do with what he presents as evidence or what "truths" you seek.

No, I'm a truth seeker. Whether it's Obama, Bush, Clinton, I'm really sick of being lied to and deceived over and over. It gets old after awhile and sick of people like you defending them, over and over.

Originally posted by blackrain17


No, I'm a truth seeker. Whether it's Obama, Bush, Clinton, I'm really sick of being lied to and deceived over and over. It gets old after awhile and sick of people like you defending them, over and over.

Are you kidding me or what?

What do you believe? That there is a grand conspiracy in which your shadow group has a sit-down and they say "that blackrain is at it AGAIN, wanting the friggin truth! Time to ramp up some more disinformation." ?

Have you requested GWB's Birth Certificate? Or Clintons? Or Eisenhower's for that matter? No? Why not? Was it maybe, ummmm the lack of YOUTUBE nonsense that permeates our life these days? Everyone with a webcam and a microphone who thinks they've just turned into little Ted Koppels?

If you're going to accuse Obama of being illegitimate then you had best accuse them all and force your "citizenship rights" playcard for them all... I mean, you don't want to miss out on a possible alternate conspiracy do you?

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by blackrain17


No, I'm a truth seeker. Whether it's Obama, Bush, Clinton, I'm really sick of being lied to and deceived over and over. It gets old after awhile and sick of people like you defending them, over and over.

Are you kidding me or what?

What do you believe? That there is a grand conspiracy in which your shadow group has a sit-down and they say "that blackrain is at it AGAIN, wanting the friggin truth! Time to ramp up some more disinformation." ?

Have you requested GWB's Birth Certificate? Or Clintons? Or Eisenhower's for that matter? No? Why not? Was it maybe, ummmm the lack of YOUTUBE nonsense that permeates our life these days? Everyone with a webcam and a microphone who thinks they've just turned into little Ted Koppels?

If you're going to accuse Obama of being illegitimate then you had best accuse them all and force your "citizenship rights" playcard for them all... I mean, you don't want to miss out on a possible alternate conspiracy do you?

Why are you attacking this person for seeking the truth? You are free to believe in whatever you like. There are some people who want to know the truth based on empirical evidence and not lies, misunderstanding, opinion or myth. There should be no question that ALL of our past/present elected officials were/are legit. You Tube gives all of us another means to express ourself and be heard.

Personally, I am a skeptic and need convincing evidence before I simply believe anything anyone says. Some people believe everything that is fed to them by the MSM. They are not educated to use critical thinking to find fallacy in information. This ATS website is another place to debate ambiguous topics intellectually as informed adults. The "Deny Ignorance" theme should prevail. There are arguments for everything. Some people would argue that 2+2 does not equal 4. While I would try to understand their reasoning, mathematics would ultimately prevail.

Originally posted by ontarff

Why are you attacking this person for seeking the truth? You are free to believe in whatever you like. There are some people who want to know the truth based on empirical evidence and not lies, misunderstanding, opinion or myth. There should be no question that ALL of our past/present elected officials were/are legit. You Tube gives all of us another means to express ourself and be heard.

Personally, I am a skeptic and need convincing evidence before I simply believe anything anyone says. Some people believe everything that is fed to them by the MSM. They are not educated to use critical thinking to find fallacy in information. This ATS website is another place to debate ambiguous topics intellectually as informed adults. The "Deny Ignorance" theme should prevail. There are arguments for everything. Some people would argue that 2+2 does not equal 4. While I would try to understand their reasoning, mathematics would ultimately prevail.

What is "attack" on internet forums the new power phrase or something? Seriously, enough with the "attack" paradigm...if I wanted to attack anyone, I assure you I wouldn't need a digital medium to stage the event.

Thanks for the reassurance of being able to believe what I like, I already knew that. But THIS is a thread about IRREFUTABLE proof that a fraud has been committed.....check the title again, then get back to me about skepticism versus irrefutable ok?

In summation, when someone comes on here and makes a definitive statement such that "im TIRED of people lying to me! And Im not gonna take it anymoreeee!", is not debating fallacy, it's stating as fact that a fraud has been committed. Period. This is also NOT a thread about disingenuous MSM either, so why even bring that up?

So let's drop the pseudo concern about someone elses digital well-being shall we?

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by ontarff

Why are you attacking this person for seeking the truth? You are free to believe in whatever you like. There are some people who want to know the truth based on empirical evidence and not lies, misunderstanding, opinion or myth. There should be no question that ALL of our past/present elected officials were/are legit. You Tube gives all of us another means to express ourself and be heard.

Personally, I am a skeptic and need convincing evidence before I simply believe anything anyone says. Some people believe everything that is fed to them by the MSM. They are not educated to use critical thinking to find fallacy in information. This ATS website is another place to debate ambiguous topics intellectually as informed adults. The "Deny Ignorance" theme should prevail. There are arguments for everything. Some people would argue that 2+2 does not equal 4. While I would try to understand their reasoning, mathematics would ultimately prevail.

What is "attack" on internet forums the new power phrase or something? Seriously, enough with the "attack" paradigm...if I wanted to attack anyone, I assure you I wouldn't need a digital medium to stage the event.

Thanks for the reassurance of being able to believe what I like, I already knew that. But THIS is a thread about IRREFUTABLE proof that a fraud has been committed.....check the title again, then get back to me about skepticism versus irrefutable ok?

In summation, when someone comes on here and makes a definitive statement such that "im TIRED of people lying to me! And Im not gonna take it anymoreeee!", is not debating fallacy, it's stating as fact that a fraud has been committed. Period. This is also NOT a thread about disingenuous MSM either, so why even bring that up?

So let's drop the pseudo concern about someone elses digital well-being shall we?

I agree with you that in a perfect thread, to eliminate a lot of the rhetoric our debate would be limited to comments backed by facts. However, on this ATS website, many simply post their opinion to share ideas. I appreciate your cynicism.

In the first place, I am a birther, and make not apologys.
So you debunkers say that the facts say Obama was born in Hawaii. Then the white house posts the 'facts', namely the birth certificate. And I say, that it would seem nice if they would at least put a raised seal on it.
Then, the answer for that is: 'If you saw the real birth certificate, you'd see the raised seal.'
Great, if the arguments were reversed, does anyone here believe that the debunkers would allow such a shoddy argument out of a birther?
I think this whole thread only proves one thing which seems to be nearly true about the human condition,
to wit:
'Anything can be rationalized.'

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by blackrain17


No, I'm a truth seeker. Whether it's Obama, Bush, Clinton, I'm really sick of being lied to and deceived over and over. It gets old after awhile and sick of people like you defending them, over and over.

Are you kidding me or what?

What do you believe? That there is a grand conspiracy in which your shadow group has a sit-down and they say "that blackrain is at it AGAIN, wanting the friggin truth! Time to ramp up some more disinformation." ?

Have you requested GWB's Birth Certificate? Or Clintons? Or Eisenhower's for that matter? No? Why not? Was it maybe, ummmm the lack of YOUTUBE nonsense that permeates our life these days? Everyone with a webcam and a microphone who thinks they've just turned into little Ted Koppels?

If you're going to accuse Obama of being illegitimate then you had best accuse them all and force your "citizenship rights" playcard for them all... I mean, you don't want to miss out on a possible alternate conspiracy do you?

Wow, just wow. One thing I've learned in life is not to get too emotional, especially on internet forums. Why can I seek the truth? Isn't that the reason why you are on Above Top Secret or am I missing something? I must have struck a nerve with you though, or else why would anyone get so angry at someone that you've never even met?

I know it's hard to get the truth in politics nowadays it seems as though every word that comes out of any politician's mouth possesses 85% lies and 15% truth. But can one still want to know the truth or has that right been taken away from us, the citizens of the "Free World"? Anyway, have a nice day and enjoy your cool-aid...

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by ontarff

Why are you attacking this person for seeking the truth? You are free to believe in whatever you like. There are some people who want to know the truth based on empirical evidence and not lies, misunderstanding, opinion or myth. There should be no question that ALL of our past/present elected officials were/are legit. You Tube gives all of us another means to express ourself and be heard.

Personally, I am a skeptic and need convincing evidence before I simply believe anything anyone says. Some people believe everything that is fed to them by the MSM. They are not educated to use critical thinking to find fallacy in information. This ATS website is another place to debate ambiguous topics intellectually as informed adults. The "Deny Ignorance" theme should prevail. There are arguments for everything. Some people would argue that 2+2 does not equal 4. While I would try to understand their reasoning, mathematics would ultimately prevail.

What is "attack" on internet forums the new power phrase or something? Seriously, enough with the "attack" paradigm...if I wanted to attack anyone, I assure you I wouldn't need a digital medium to stage the event.

Thanks for the reassurance of being able to believe what I like, I already knew that. But THIS is a thread about IRREFUTABLE proof that a fraud has been committed.....check the title again, then get back to me about skepticism versus irrefutable ok?

In summation, when someone comes on here and makes a definitive statement such that "im TIRED of people lying to me! And Im not gonna take it anymoreeee!", is not debating fallacy, it's stating as fact that a fraud has been committed. Period. This is also NOT a thread about disingenuous MSM either, so why even bring that up?

So let's drop the pseudo concern about someone elses digital well-being shall we?

When I said I'm tired of being lied to... This is referred to all the recent Presidents, that is the reason why I question them, not just Obama. If they were truthful most of the time, we wouldn't even have these issues. I just don't like the fact that people categorize people with names such as "Birthers" or what not. It's like me categorizing people like you as the "Yes We Canners" or the "Change But Not Realliers". Obviously, you are not gonna change my mind and I'm not gonna change yours so just let it be.

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by userid1

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by mrsoul2009
Yawn.....some people just have absolutely nothing else to do with their time. Maybe you're time would be better well spent by working for a candidate that can run against BO next year..just sayin

Why are you taking your time to follow this thread if you aren't interested in the arguments? I don't understand your comment.

Perhaps to see if the birthers can actually construct a coherent argument?

Please see my posts on pg. 9 and 10 on this topic here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read them. Here's a sample quote:

Yes there are privacy laws to protect most of us on a very limited basis, but there are transparency requirements for all elected officials. Transparency is required to avoid these kinds of problems.

And how did Obama manage to sidestep these transparency laws? Did he? Or did he receive the same type of review that every other president has? Why should Obama have to provide information *not* asked (ever) of any other president?

Sorry, I don't believe you do have the right to demand to see or have examined legally private information - particularly as the majority of the US population no longer believes this to be an an issue. I also wouldn't support your request to have an "impartial" panel scrutinize a private personal document for several reasons:

1 - Explain to me how exactly you'd be able to to create a panel that would satisfy everyone? There would ALWAYS be a group of one size or another that would cry "foul" and claim the (not yet determined) outcome to be null and void. This is a guaranteed recipe for a never-ending soap opera.
2 - Why do you think that setting this precedent would be a good idea? Does it not tend to further extend the intrusions created by things like the Patriot Act into our private lives?
3 - Investigations cost money - who's going to pay for them? Ultimately, it would almost by default *have* to be the taxpayer as any other entity (which would be a private entity) would be subject to some claim of bias or the desire to see a predetermined outcome. So, if it *is* going on the taxpayer's bill, why should I have to foot it when I'm already satisfied? In short, why should I be burdened with an expense that only an underwhelming minority of US citizens have any real questions about?

And as for accepting the review of experts, I find it telling that you choose to use as an example "some guy" who *tells* us that he's done typesetting for 11 years (?) and is willing to provide his "services" to a website which is unabashedly "pro-birther" (if not outright anti-obama) and on today's home page includes the following title article:
Dedicated to the Obots: Actor Peter Fonda Encourages His Grandchildren To Take Up Arms Against The 'Traitor' Obama...

Believe I'll take a pass on this selection of yours...

I have looked and looked at the PDF. I have heard the 8 bit argument. There are really some things in there, despite this, that raise questions. And, they have been gone over, I'm sure, plenty of times in this thread. I have a hard time calling this an authentic document. It's too hard to rationalize it as being real. Too many areas raise questions. This feels like the 9/11 towers all over again, with people insisting the "official story" is real, but here we are with evidence that raises questions. Areas that appear to be tampered with in the PDF, end up being layers. We've got color differences, graphical signature oddities, the rubber stamp differences in the date, the drop down from the A in the word "Accepted." I don't think there is any way anyone can prove this to be a real document with this PDF, the one our government puts out there as being real. It looks far more tampered with than real.

I had a friend call me a birther yesterday. Something like, "Don't tell me you're one of those birthers." I'm like, what? I wasn't aware that there was a label needed? I'm just looking for truth. Birther is a convenient way to classify people along with the "conspiracy nuts." So, we can be boxed into a class of things, that people think are stupid. Easier to ridicule by those mainstream media jackasses. That way, we can't be examined for anything deeper than a label. Nevermind, that we actually are smart and observant people, you know, because we are "birthers" now, and birthers are idiots. The quest continues.

Troy

Originally posted by userid1

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by userid1

Originally posted by ontarff

Originally posted by mrsoul2009
Yawn.....some people just have absolutely nothing else to do with their time. Maybe you're time would be better well spent by working for a candidate that can run against BO next year..just sayin

Why are you taking your time to follow this thread if you aren't interested in the arguments? I don't understand your comment.

Perhaps to see if the birthers can actually construct a coherent argument?

Please see my posts on pg. 9 and 10 on this topic here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read them. Here's a sample quote:

Yes there are privacy laws to protect most of us on a very limited basis, but there are transparency requirements for all elected officials. Transparency is required to avoid these kinds of problems.

And how did Obama manage to sidestep these transparency laws? Did he? Or did he receive the same type of review that every other president has? Why should Obama have to provide information *not* asked (ever) of any other president?

Sorry, I don't believe you do have the right to demand to see or have examined legally private information - particularly as the majority of the US population no longer believes this to be an an issue. I also wouldn't support your request to have an "impartial" panel scrutinize a private personal document for several reasons:

1 - Explain to me how exactly you'd be able to to create a panel that would satisfy everyone? There would ALWAYS be a group of one size or another that would cry "foul" and claim the (not yet determined) outcome to be null and void. This is a guaranteed recipe for a never-ending soap opera.
2 - Why do you think that setting this precedent would be a good idea? Does it not tend to further extend the intrusions created by things like the Patriot Act into our private lives?
3 - Investigations cost money - who's going to pay for them? Ultimately, it would almost by default *have* to be the taxpayer as any other entity (which would be a private entity) would be subject to some claim of bias or the desire to see a predetermined outcome. So, if it *is* going on the taxpayer's bill, why should I have to foot it when I'm already satisfied? In short, why should I be burdened with an expense that only an underwhelming minority of US citizens have any real questions about?

And as for accepting the review of experts, I find it telling that you choose to use as an example "some guy" who *tells* us that he's done typesetting for 11 years (?) and is willing to provide his "services" to a website which is unabashedly "pro-birther" (if not outright anti-obama) and on today's home page includes the following title article:
Dedicated to the Obots: Actor Peter Fonda Encourages His Grandchildren To Take Up Arms Against The 'Traitor' Obama...

Believe I'll take a pass on this selection of yours...

I respect your "opinion". I could argue all of your points but I am not going to waste my time. My arguments stand for critical thinkers to consider.You have not provided a better solution. Ignorance is bliss...

reply to post by Antiquated1


I posted to Road and not directed at you to make sure that what I posted was understood and do back that in pdf no seal can be seen.

No hostility against you, we're cool!

Originally posted by blackrain17
Obviously, you are not gonna change my mind and I'm not gonna change yours so just let it be.

Indeed.

Nor was my post intended to change your mind or sway you to another way of thinking, but merely voicing my disdain with the mindset given the circumstances.

People on ATS like the throw around the term "Deny Ignorance" as though it is intended to represent that everything that is being presented to you is completely false, and if you don't question it ALL, then you are at odds with ever having signed up here. My contention is that, Denying Ignorance also has a latent clause in it that states "...but it IS ok if you glance over that which should be obvious".

Among those items which should be obvious, to me, is:

Digital representation of anything at all can be altered and coerced or "massaged" to show OR hide nefarious intent; as such the results are meaningless.

Birth certificates vary on design from state to state even now, it was more so back in the 60's.

Often, depending on the serving host, images themselves can take on various bytes that were never a part of the original file; this becomes exacerbated tenfold by the number of people handling them.

It is not beyond anyone at all, including the people here, to alter the images with an agenda in mind.

Keeping the obvious at the forefront and refusing to question them based upon what obviates them in the first place is as much a part of denying ignorance as is questioning everything.

Originally posted by Laokin

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Laokin
No. I actually don't hate him.

But the issue didn't go away, so they went ahead and made a fake and are swearing that it's real. (Because it really did exist, but doesn't anymore.)

Then they realize they can strategically use this for a running plank in the next election to attempt to secure his 2nd term.

This makes perfect sense to me. This is probably the truth. This is Occam's Razor. The image fails Forensic Image Analysis.

It's probably fake, but it's a non-issue, because it probably was real at one point. And his short form could of been the only real certificate he ever had.

Am I sitting here stating the short form was fake?

No.

Stop digging for a pit of anger that you will not find.

I am not a birther, you are not a birther detector, stop trying to be one, you want me to be one, so you can go on a tangent about how stupid they are.

I think the man should have just left it alone, and now that he brought it back -- and with a fake... it's alot harder to just ignore. I feel like the man should step up and admit it's fake, but explain why it is. But, the people wouldn't go for it, so he doesn't have a choice, but to stick to the official story that it's real.... Trust and all that jazz... So he got himself into a political hotseat, that he won't ever answer to, but will actually probably in reality gain voters in the polls out of this....

I'm still betting he's gonna win next election.

I think this was an election ploy, and that they told the truth the first time, but now he's doing it to convert sane republicans into Obama supporters.

I think it's brilliant, simple, elegant, but ultimately silly. Politics have come down to presidents creating fake stirs for public opinion... I cannot approve of this mockery.

I feel like it belongs on T.V. right after the jersey shore....

So, now you know.

Oh and, btw -- There is no seal on the one they released from the whitehouse, the long form. What you saw was a compression artifact in a resaved, reedited image. It is indeed present in the original image of the document, but since it's the actual source image, it's completely aparent when looked at under any kind of software that it's an image compression artifact caused by Adobe Destiller.

(That's the program that makes .pdf files by the way, the official release... is a pdf file.)

Ignore real evidence because you think I can't be smart enough to examine it. Awesome logic, you could just... ya know look at it yourself, and see if it makes sense to you, instead -- you simply just ignore it, and discredit.

OOOOOOOOOH.

I get it now. Disinfo agent? That how this game works?

edit on 22-5-2011 by Laokin because: (no reason given)

Thank you for this....this is the point I was attempting to make too some posters.

Their supporting this "birther" movement is only going to help get Obama reelected. The guy is an American, everyone with common sense knows this, and he's going to have the entire sane worls LAUGHING at "birthers" come election time.

On a earlier page, I stated that they put out an altered or faked BC on purpose, my reasoning I gave was to avoid fraud. Your reasoning makes even more sense.

************ATTENTION ALL BIRTHERS!*********** Obama's doing something I would have done and love to do. I love to make people who doubt me seem as fools and have to swallow humble pie. Obama knows and is probably laughing it up with buddies, that you guys think you actually have proof! Everyone in his know, is aware that the document is faked...they just want to expose the birthers as being complete conspiracist fools!!

What Obama is doing, is he's attempting to severely cripple and possibly destroy the Right/Conservative platform as a bunch of racist/conspiracy theorist/looney fools, and you all are playing right into his hands.

Originally posted by ontarff

Respectfully, I disagree. I would define a "Birther" as someone who questions the authenticity of the documents provided by the Obama campaign and the State of Hawaii to prove the legitimate birth of Obama in Hawaii and/or, the interpretation of our U.S. Constitution of the requirement to be a "natural born citizen" vs. a "U.S. citizen" to be eligible for presidency.

edit on 5/22/2011 by ontarff because: correct term

I think I will use this guys statement for all birthers from now on:

"I think the man should have just left it alone, and now that he brought it back -- and with a fake... it's alot harder to just ignore. I feel like the man should step up and admit it's fake, but explain why it is. But, the people wouldn't go for it, so he doesn't have a choice, but to stick to the official story that it's real.... Trust and all that jazz... So he got himself into a political hotseat, that he won't ever answer to, but will actually probably in reality gain voters in the polls out of this....

I'm still betting he's gonna win next election.

I think this was an election ploy, and that they told the truth the first time, but now he's doing it to convert sane republicans into Obama supporters."



Pay attention to the part where he will gain voters and probably win the next election because no one will want to be associated with the crazy birthers.

reply to post by blackrain17


I think I will use this guys statement for all birthers from now on:

"I think the man should have just left it alone, and now that he brought it back -- and with a fake... it's alot harder to just ignore. I feel like the man should step up and admit it's fake, but explain why it is. But, the people wouldn't go for it, so he doesn't have a choice, but to stick to the official story that it's real.... Trust and all that jazz... So he got himself into a political hotseat, that he won't ever answer to, but will actually probably in reality gain voters in the polls out of this....

I'm still betting he's gonna win next election.

I think this was an election ploy, and that they told the truth the first time, but now he's doing it to convert sane republicans into Obama supporters."



Pay attention to the part where he will gain voters and probably win the next election because no one will want to be associated with the crazy birthers.