Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
If Adams had access to the information, then it would not be an open "secret" but the open truth. Adams admits he heard it from lots of the insiders, in other words "hearsay". But that does not make it untrue. And it certainly would explain the strange machinations of what should be a simple, easily answered question, explained by simply producing the original document.
Click to expand...

Still sounds an awful lot like making crap up because he doesn't like the elected President.

Strange machinations? The fact that this president has gone above and beyond all requirements for office because some conspiracy theorists made up a rumour about him being born in another country (and they can hardly even keep their stories straight) somehow evidence of something? Personally, I think he's pandered to the birthers just to make them look even more foolish.

Really, if you don't like the president you work your butt off to get him replaced the next term. Pushing illogical conspiracies just hurts your position.
 
Robert Prey said:
No. Even the few who suspect birth certificate fraud know very well that to pursue it would be futile in a nation where virtually the entire mainstream media worships at the feet of The Anointed One. And to even talk of it in a political campaign would be political suicide. But... after a favorable result of the Nov.election, that could change.
Click to expand...
That noise in the background? The screech of goalposts moving, again. :rolleyes:
 
Robert Prey said:
No. Even the few who suspect birth certificate fraud know very well that to pursue it would be futile in a nation where virtually the entire mainstream media worships at the feet of The Anointed One. And to even talk of it in a political campaign would be political suicide. But... after a favorable result of the Nov.election, that could change.
Click to expand...

You're right cause Fox, the station with largest viewer base in the "mainstream media," obviously "worships at the feet of" Obama?

And it is political suicide because the (conspiracy) theory has been disproved and is ********.
 
Robert Prey said:
Yeah, well official statements are not proof.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are. An official statement that an official document is authentic is definitive proof if the statement and the document are issued by the same authority.

Robert Prey said:
Fact is, the original has not been produced and can't be found.
Click to expand...

Please provide evidence for this claim, which I assert to be pure fantasy.

Dave
 
cwalner said:
At first I thought this was a typo, but then I realized that the closer you look at Robert's arguments the same patterns of wrongness hold true, so I guess that is the correct term.
Click to expand...

It's not an original usage, but that is indeed what I meant; Robert is a classic example of fractal wrongness. About the only thing he gets right is his spelling.

Dave
 
Robert Prey said:
And it certainly would explain the strange machinations of what should be a simple, easily answered question, explained by simply producing the original document.
Click to expand...

This is perhaps the most ironic post in the history of ever. Barack Obama's birth certificate is perhaps the most widely available and universally promulgated document in the history of official documents. There is literally nobody on the planet who could not, if they wished, view Barack Obama's birth certificate. Barack Obama's birthplace is, at the moment, possibly the best-established personal detail in the world. It takes an extraordinary level of obsession to continue to pretend that this is not the case. And yet the few people capable of this level of denial insist that somehow it's reality that's at fault, and claim that there's some simple way to satisfy their doubts. If the Governor of Hawaii went to visit Robert Prey with the original paper document, said to him "Here is Barack Obama's original birth certificate; I have checked the records and I am absolutely certain that it's genuine," Robert still wouldn't believe him. There is quite literally nothing that would convince him, because it's the foundation stone of his religious faith that Obama was not born in Hawaii. And when he suggests otherwise, he is quite simply lying.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
This is perhaps the most ironic post in the history of ever. Barack Obama's birth certificate is perhaps the most widely available and universally promulgated document in the history of official documents. There is literally nobody on the planet who could not, if they wished, view Barack Obama's birth certificate. Barack Obama's birthplace is, at the moment, possibly the best-established personal detail in the world. It takes an extraordinary level of obsession to continue to pretend that this is not the case. And yet the few people capable of this level of denial insist that somehow it's reality that's at fault, and claim that there's some simple way to satisfy their doubts. If the Governor of Hawaii went to visit Robert Prey with the original paper document, said to him "Here is Barack Obama's original birth certificate; I have checked the records and I am absolutely certain that it's genuine," Robert still wouldn't believe him. There is quite literally nothing that would convince him, because it's the foundation stone of his religious faith that Obama was not born in Hawaii. And when he suggests otherwise, he is quite simply lying.

Dave
Click to expand...

Nope. The original has never been produced.
 
ANTPogo said:
Here's the official verification sent to Ken Bennett, Arizona's Secretary of State. Here's the separate official verification submitted as part of the case Taitz v Astrue (starting on page 8). That case was lost by the birthers, by the way.
Click to expand...

Sorry, AntPogo, but a verification of "information of the copy" is not proof that the document itself is a true replcation of the original.
 
Last edited:
Of course, there's the small matter of just exactly what Robert Prey has deluded himself into thinking "the original" is.
 
Ladewig said:
So, again. I have to make sure I have this straight.

Even the senators that are not up for re-election this cycle are afraid of exposing Obama because a Constitutional crisis before an election is worse than a Constitutional crisis after an election. Do you have a reason that they didn't expose him last year instead of "right before an election"?

Do you understand that if Obama wins the election and is not exposed before the end of January, then Biden will take over as president? Your position seems to be that the Republicans are so afraid of a Constitutional crisis that they are willing to let the Democrats hold the White House for four more years.

And as others have pointed out, your position is that avoiding a Constitutional crisis before an election is more important than A) getting elected, B) following their oath to uphold the Constitution, and C) bringing to justice a treasonous criminal bent on destroying America. Doesn't the idea of preventing Obama from harming America in the next six months seem more important that avoiding a Constitutional crisis.

An analogy. The city police know that the mayor is a serial killer, but he is very popular and the local media really like him. Doesn't it strike you as the very height of irresponsibility and criminal negligence for the police to say, "let's wait until after November to arrest the mayor, because we don't want the city to be upset before the election"?
Click to expand...

So what's the question? Fact is, even most Republican politicians believe the Obama is legit brainwash. But that doesn't make it true.
 
JayUtah said:
Irrelevant hypotheticals. The Hawaii secretary of state has certified that Obama was born there, and that the records to that effect are true and correct. You may choose to disbelieve him, but your choice has no bearing on federal election policy.
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Robert Prey
But if the Birth Certificate were a lie, would an official pronouncement to the contrary make it not a lie?????

So even on that simple direct question you take the "fifth." Why am I not surprised???
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
Nope. The original has never been produced.
Click to expand...

Let's suppose it was. To whom would it be produced? To someone who then photographed it, or videoed the event and broadcast it on television? But then you would say that the photograph was a fake, or that the TV images were of a fake. And suppose, as I suggested, the Governor of Hawaii visited you in person and showed you the original. Would you believe it then? Or would you still claim that he hadn't proven the original was genuine? How would you know it was even the real Governor, and not a lookalike? How would you determine the authenticity of the document, given that you have no relevant knowledge of detecting forged documents?

There is no level of proof that you would accept, and we all know it.

Dave
 
so Mr Prey you are going to present yourself at Hawaii to check the orignal birth certificate are you?
 
Dave Rogers said:
Let's suppose it was. To whom would it be produced? To someone who then photographed it, or videoed the event and broadcast it on television? But then you would say that the photograph was a fake, or that the TV images were of a fake. And suppose, as I suggested, the Governor of Hawaii visited you in person and showed you the original. Would you believe it then? Or would you still claim that he hadn't proven the original was genuine? How would you know it was even the real Governor, and not a lookalike? How would you determine the authenticity of the document, given that you have no relevant knowledge of detecting forged documents?

There is no level of proof that you would accept, and we all know it.

Dave
Click to expand...

If Sheriff Joe's investigators were allowed to take a look and make a copy of the original, that would be persuasive.
 
Robert Prey said:
Sorry, AntPogo, but a verification of "information of the copy" is not proof that the document itself is a true replcation of the original.
Click to expand...

So it was a fake with verified accurate (and therefore true) information?

In what way is verified information not true to the original? And what is the purpose of a fake with verified and therefore true information?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom