Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
Nothing new here. The paper copies are not the original and the only way to tell if they are valid is for the hospital and/or Obama to allow the original to be viewed.
Click to expand...

What can this mean? (And the hospital has nothing to do with it.) Do you think anyone should be able to physically handle original state documents that are securely stored in bound ledgers under lock and key? And if that were possible, and you or Sheriff Joe didn't like what you found, wouldn't you then claim that anyone could easily have tampered with them? After all, everybody has access, right? The fact is that senior, named officials of the state of Hawaii have certified that they provided true copies of the original on file. Are they lying? Maybe more compelling, the information from the original was entered into the state database to generate the standard computer-printed short form before 2001, before anybody ever heard of B. Obama. Or do you claim that the database was tampered with too?

You have refused to state your alternate theory of where you think President Obama was born and present your evidence that all official records, all newspaper accounts and all personal recollections attesting that Obama was born in Hawaii are fraudulent. Seems like it's your turn to start providing proof.
 
Last edited:
Well, it just so happens that I had to get a copy of my HI birth certificate to replace my lost copy, here's a redacted scan, looks just like the one the president posted & it's the only type you can get from the state, So I'm not sure why people think this is a fake...It's exactly what the state issues...
 

Attachments

  • birth cert 001r.jpg
    birth cert 001r.jpg
    55.4 KB · Views: 38
mr Prey Jay Utah and others have totally demolished your claims about the PDF document

or techno giiberish as you call it, which explains vrey clearly how pdfs work and shows you do not have a clue how they work.

It has aslo been established that no one has forged this document.

Admit defeat your birther position was tenuous to begin with and has now completly been sunk
 
Robert Prey said:
A Simple theoretical question posed to all deep thinkers who raise the question of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution:

Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause give license to state officials to create a fake, fraudulent or altered birth certificate??????

Yes???

No???

or

Fifth Amendment Plea??
Click to expand...
Robert, it means that the certified records of state "X" are to be treated as accurate by all other states.

No more, no less.
 
Ravenwood said:
Well, it just so happens that I had to get a copy of my HI birth certificate to replace my lost copy, here's a redacted scan, looks just like the one the president posted & it's the only type you can get from the state, So I'm not sure why people think this is a fake...It's exactly what the state issues...
Click to expand...

Funny how your BC looks exactly like Obama's yet the Birther nuts claimed for years Obama's was fake.

Either they're crazy or you're Kenyan. Can't decide which... :rolleyes:
 
Ravenwood said:
Well, it just so happens that I had to get a copy of my HI birth certificate to replace my lost copy, here's a redacted scan, looks just like the one the president posted & it's the only type you can get from the state, So I'm not sure why people think this is a fake...It's exactly what the state issues...
Click to expand...

Look at those black bars! Clearly NASA is hiding something on your birth certificate! :eek:
 
Ravenwood said:
Well, it just so happens that I had to get a copy of my HI birth certificate to replace my lost copy, here's a redacted scan, looks just like the one the president posted & it's the only type you can get from the state, So I'm not sure why people think this is a fake...It's exactly what the state issues...
Click to expand...

You must be hiding something, hey you da kine moke?
 
Robert Prey said:
Sorry, Jay. But it is you have has failed to demonstrate a scintilla of evidence for the authenticity of the document...
Click to expand...

Maintaining that we have something to prove to you makes it look like you don't understand where the burden of proof lies...and I KNOW it's been explained to you.

Do you really think demonstrating your willful ignorance "helps" your argument?
 
Speaking of birth certificates and speaking of goofing around.

The [unimaginally] unscientific and very limited poll of the RNC delegates showed that 6% (3 out of 50) believe that Romney was born in Mexico. Those guys are just joking around when they say that. right?

As were the 10% who said that Obama was born in Kenya?

ANd they were clowning when they replied that the greatest threat facing America today is

55% Barack Obama
18% Iran
14% terrorism
07% China
the U.N.
fiscal and moral decline
economic collapse

..........................

So is birtherism just a punch line these days or does Comrade Prey have his finger on the pulse of America's Soul.
 
Last edited:
Border Reiver said:
Robert, it means that the certified records of state "X" are to be treated as accurate by all other states.

No more, no less.
Click to expand...

Another dodge which means you will not say the clause gives the states license to commit fraud because you know very well it does not.
 
twinstead said:
If the Federal government and the state of Hawaii certify it, why on Earth would anybody be required to prove the document is authentic?
Click to expand...

Because there is a prima facie case of fraud in the COLB that indictates probable digital creation, plus the fact that there are no available hospital admission records.
 
JayUtah said:
What a stupid question. The Full Faith and Credit clause means that when a state has certified a vital record as authentic, there is no further legal standing in any other State to challenge its authenticity.

You simply don't understand this. At all. And would it be possible for you to make one single post without name-calling?
Click to expand...

Another predictable dodge.
 
R.A.F. said:
Maintaining that we have something to prove to you makes it look like you don't understand where the burden of proof lies...and I KNOW it's been explained to you.

Do you really think demonstrating your willful ignorance "helps" your argument?
Click to expand...
\

If it is your claim that it's a copy, then it's your burden to prove it.
 
Dcdrac said:
mr Prey Jay Utah and others have totally demolished your claims about the PDF document

or techno giiberish as you call it, which explains vrey clearly how pdfs work and shows you do not have a clue how they work.

It has aslo been established that no one has forged this document.

Admit defeat your birther position was tenuous to begin with and has now completly been sunk
Click to expand...


Sheriff Joe'ss team of computer experts made 1200 attempts to produce a document that has the properties of the COLB and claims no pdf compression process even comes close. That's persuasive prima facie evidence of digital fraud, Jay Utah's untested, un-replicated, un-peer reviewed gibberish notwithstanding.
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
\

If it is your claim that it's a copy, then it's your burden to prove it.
Click to expand...

The state of Hawaii already proved it to be genuine.
That you refuse to accept it does not shift the burden of proof.
That you do not understand the technical process of pdf generation does not shift the burden of proof.
That you insist there has to be fraud despite all evidence to the contrary does not shift the burden of proof.
In your heart you know you are wrong.
 
Robert Prey said:
Another dodge which means you will not say the clause gives the states license to commit fraud because you know very well it does not.
Click to expand...
Fail. It would help if you actually understood the things over which you are blathering.
 
Robert Prey said:
Sheriff Joe'ss team of computer experts made 1200 attempts to produce a document that has the properties of the COLB and claims no pdf compression process even comes close. That's persuasive prima facie evidence of digital fraud, Jay Utah's untested, un-peer reviewed gibberish notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

Oh Airpaio's work was replicated and peer-reviewed? That changes things. I'd be interested in seeing those links, if you could post them. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom