KrustyKidd

No. Unlike McCain, Obama did not make the original available other than on an internet site of hhis and, verified by one which like the organization that helped propel him to politics, was on the recieving end of grants from the same entity. If this were the norm, anybody who could produce a birth certificate on the internet could run for President. It was legal and it was known as enhanced interrogation techniques, not torture. Stalin and Hitler were carrying out heinous acts however, completely legal within their own countries at the time until Hitler decided to invade other countries that were not in violation of various treaties. In the real world, what is wrong is often right at the time and always, in the real world, a lie is not a lie when it is the truth or, the person uttering it has every reason to believe it is true.

Sure you corrected yourself however, that is not why i mentioned it rather, it is your continual assumptions based on what you wisah to believe rather than hard evidence. Nobody has produced a document which is an origional to prove his birth to an impartial examination. As for me being a conspiracy nut, simply because i don't assume everything like you does not make me that. In fact, your err on two planes with this comment; 1. In order to have a conspiracy, there must have beenn action by at least two people. My contention was that no action has taken place to cover anything upby Obama or his people. My comment Sounds quite nutty doesn't it to have me thinking that Obama is not involved in a coverup of some kind and that there is nop conspiracy. 2. As for beig a nut, I believe Obama was born in the US. My comment 3. I even agree with Obama for not producing the original. My comment I also understand why people wish to see the original. You don't seem to understand the severity and repercussions if something blows out. The possibility exists so don't discount it by being absolute in your conviction as the original has never been produced. Everybody is just working wi9th assumptions. Actually, in the US, at that time, those techniques were legal and not considered torture by the US government. You know, the real government of the US, not the fantasy one you imagined. They wouldn't try Obama for fraud. He is a lawyer and knows that his safest bet is to continue to obfuscate this process so that the original never comes to light. It's more than likely good, but, however remote the possibility is, it may contain something unknown to him that is bad. To not have his staff or himself ever see the document absolves him from all responsibility so that there will never be a possibility of there being a case for fraud or conspiracy. As for chaos, I believe he is past that point and agree with you. The time to show this document was prior to the democratic primaries and in fact, in light of this problem, there are some Congress Members drafting a bill to make showing an original BC to an elections board compulsory prior to beng considered for the race.

And ..........? We don't have to argue to have something to post. I threw this out as an impartial idea, you have no thoughts?

JPG Whenever I read the word 'clearly' in an argument, I always know it is not so clear. So please, now is your opportunity to show how clear it is by showing the original document to me or, an agent whom I would accept an impartial examination of that document. Him, being where he is, without ever showing this document to a hostile or impartial body is not so clear.

Oh I see. The foundation is totally impartial towards people they have given fifty million dollars to. How about the cases that are still open and request that given the circumstances, ask for proof in a court of law rather than on an internet site funded by the same people that funded Obama? A piece of paper is all it takes to shut this down. Instead, millions of dollars are being spent to prosecute and defend so please, spare me the friviality argument. Is it? To you, it was a well known fact that Obama's mother would give birth to a citizen if born outside the US yet you were wrong. She had to be a year older for this to occur. To you, it is a well known fact that you assume so many things yet have no proof such as what hospital Obama was born at, comparing his lack of hospital and attending doctor to Palin which I provided all the details in a moment. Even McCain provided his original birth certificate. You also said that Obama provided his birth certificate as evidence but he did not, instead simply placing it on his website. You assume he provided a valid birth certificate to become a senator and a residential candidate yet, I have found no evidence of this. See, you assume all and when somebody actually wants to see it, they are refused. That is my entire point. Everybody assumes yet there is no solid proof save an internet site run by the same people that handed Obama and Ayers millions. An organization very unlikely to wish the embarrassment that they were handing that kind of money out to a terrorist and an illegal hence are very unlikely to be impartial in a worst case scenario and, more than likely bending over backwards to be positive in Obama's favor. Actually, I don't claim that rather, threw that out to show that this is so muddled that any concrete proof rather than simple assumptions would clear it up a bit. And, the people of the US would be a little better off knowing that their president holds no dual citizenship, or, draw attention to it and the actions or assurances he is providing to quell any concerns. So, in a trade negotiation or the ludicrous scenario of war, when he is called upon to bomb Kenya or Indonesia what side of the fence is he going to land on? There you go again, assuming. What they would have, or, not would have is not relevent to seeing the President's birth certificate. Possibly (if we are assuming like you often do) they felt they had him beat and that any action to discredit his being an American (when everybody just assumed he was) would create a backlash that would hurt them more. He must be a natural born citizen and, has not proven it. Everybody just assumes and these people want proof. Surely, it is not too much to ask the leader of the free world to prove he was born in the US? Actually, as I said, I believe he is American however, there is a possibility he is not, given all the moves his mother made, the different nationalities his father and adopted father had. These people have every right to ask him to clear it up. He wants to see a piece of paper. You are happy in your assume world. Who is crazy? And it is not enough that you didn't read my response from before which is that the actions were legal interrogation techniques at the time this statement occurred hence your quote is crap proof. Come to think of it, you haven't proved anything except that you assume a lot of things.

No, I understand as you said not one post ago; Submitted to an internet site owned by the Annenberg Foundation which is the group he used to head along with the terrorist Ayers. So, no court of law has seen it nor, has heard the case in it's entirety as it has never been submitted. No. As this is only the first of a few showing the origional would be a start. As his father was Kenyan he held dual citizenship, and later, he became an Indonesian citizen and there is no nullification docs he has a lot of catching up to do in order to clarify who he is and what countries he belongs to. As there is a verified visit of Kenya by his mother around the time of his birth, three separate hospitals in two countries that he and his relatives say he was born in and no record of him changing his nationality from Kenyan to US, US to Indonesian and then back to US you can understand some people wish to clarify this matter to be sure that he is even a US citizen rather than Indonesian or Kenyan. That there is criticism of those who have a question or two of his US citizenship when his Kenyan and Indonesian citizenship is undisputed strikes me strange. Then again, Bush lied yet you cannot quote one of them so, not so strange.

Snopes was given access to the secondary 2007 BC. They are not a court BTW no matter what you think. CANADIEN Please explain what 'beyond' means. And, I gave you the logical reason which is that everything he does between now and if an when a photo comes up that pl;aces his mother with a black bably in her arms with anything other than Hawaii in the background can possibly trash the entire USA for that period of time. He didn't submit squat to any court. A thing was posted on an internet site which is not a court of law as I explained earlier. Now, why do you suppose he does not put this all to rest by confronting this in a court?

Oh I understand that many of them will never be happy however, this cooperation is quite easy to comply with and, is reasonable in my mind. Given all the evidence, these people would have no leg to satnd on as far as myself and, the majority of normal people. Myself, I believe he is a natural born American however, given the ease with which he can provide all the evidence yet refuses to do so is bullshit. And, rather than closing a door, it leaves it open for his entire term. Sort of like the Bush Florida election thing with the possibility of a photo or witness appearing rather than a court verdict waiting to nullify every decision and action he accomplishes between Jan 20 and whenever. And he does not provide the document to show the world he does not have to or, he is afraid, or it is incriminating or, he is just being a bitch? It costs more to defend and propagandize than it does to fly the damm thing out for examination.

Simpler still, why not just produce the document and put the entire matter in Obama's favor for good beyond a reasonable doubt. Why the obfuscation? It is only a piece of paper that will cease all credible detractors.

No, the new theory is, that given the ramifications and the decades old document involved, a two year old certification from a state employee does not satisfy those who wish the President of the US to prove he is natural born. So, it looks like we have a new court system known as the internet discussion board of law. No document has been produced legally to support or refute the case as it has not yet come to a complete trial where the documents have been examined. That's the point. Some people want proof and, they don't accept a virtual copy given the gravity of the repercussions. That you don't understand their concern and, the ramifications if this is not 100% certain given the ease of which the unrefutable proof can be attained is strange. As I said, if anything comes up, every action, decision, dollar spent is out the window. And, it can go on for years. Appeal after appeal, African certificates may show up, a photo, a few witnesses. Even if they're out to lunch why not just show the origional and put it to bed.

And through all this you don't for one second wonder why he won't release the origional document for examination. Incredible. All it would take is for two years from now some picture of his mother at a hospital in Kenya with a baby in her arms to send the entire free world into turmoil. And that possibility is better than asking Obama to produce the original. Talk about setting one's self up for a far right wing backlash.

A real Judge is a lawyer and lawyers never state a certainty unless they are willing to lay their reputation, carrear and, everything they have on that determination. As the Judge was not at Obama's birth and, he is only going by a document submitted by a state employee 45 years later, he can only strongly believe as there is no way that he knows. In order to be certan beyond a reasonable doubt, one must see all the evidence, not take a side prior to based on a simple and possibly flawed belief. Edit: In addition, given the gravity of the issue, the best document avialable should be posed for examination rather than the most easily produced. After all, if somehow, some proof is later produced that shows he is not natural born, then everything he has done up until that time can be challenged, even the election itself. To me, that is certainly worth a better than lame examination of everything don't you? After all, Palin has the doctor, time of her birth and the hospital as well as those in attendfence, we have only a piece of paper produced 45 years after the fact for Obama.

Which people would that be? I doubt any of them even saw the document he is being asked to produce. And now, a small group of people wish to make sure the constitution is being adhered to by seeing a simple document an, it seems the entire US government, legal system and, people such as yourself are against that little piece of paper being looked at closely, Unless of course, you can name a document expert who has verified this certificate. After all, this isn't a certification for running a moped, it's the President of the USA and everybody is just assuming?

There you go assuming things. What is required is the original birth certificate signed and made up at or about the time of his birth in Hawaii, not some 2007 document that says there is one there in a vault somewhere. Really, is that so much to ask one guy who is going to lead a public life for the next four to eight years in the most powerful position on the planet?

He may yet have to as the case is still very much alive. It's interesting that Judge Robertson refers to Obama as being 'Native Born.' I mean, he has seen the documentation? If he has then possibly he might wish to explain what all is in it that allows him to make a determination without listening to the case and seeing the evidence. Unless of course, like everybody else, he has not, and, like some here, just bases what he wishes to be fact on assumption, a dangerous thing to do when one is in a position of power.

Evidently, those who have brought this matter forward in a court of law have no knowledge of any such examination. And, if you have proof, then let's see it. Dealing in assumptions is not proof of anything and, that is what the entire issue is all about.

When would they have done the vetting? When he was in charge of various charities? None of them reuired him to be natural born. When he became a senator? That also did not require that he be natural born. When he became a Presidential nominee? Didn't happen then either as nobody has come forward to say they released the document to anybody so, who and when was the original released to an examiner?

Nope but I also don't believe anybody actually looked and instead, just assumed he met that particular one. That is why some people are wanting the verification from a qualified and impartial historical document examiner. If the document is found lacking then that means little except it is not an actual legitimate birth certificate. If it is found in order then it would finish any argument these people have so, it is, if all things are equal, in Mr Obama's favor to release it to somebody all parties deem qualified to examine it.

Sure it would be. If the signature is the same as all the ones from that era, the number is close to those of those born at approximately the same time and year, the paper is the same, the print is the same and so on and forth I can't see there being any problem as there would be, with as much certainty as possible - proven. As for best to be ignoring it, if I were an American I would be hopping mad that the constitution was just trampled on, even though it really doesn't matter as I'm sure Obama's loyalties are to the US rather than another country.But considering he is a public figure and has not produced the necessary document to those whom question it's authenticity, I believe that this goes beyond an individual's rights to privacy as he is required by the constitution to be a natural born American Citizen. IOn any case, he certainly does like to publicize classified information so this really isn't that big of a leap. Do you believe that the constitution of the US should be trampled on whenever somebody doesn't feel like producing documents to prove they are who they say they are to people who question it?

I'm not a disgrutled right winger and I also see no proof. A 2007 document sayng he was born in Hawaii m9ight cut it for you but certainly does not satisfy me 100%. But not proven to the satisfaction of anybody who questions it. I doubt the Obama campaign have dealt with this directly to any degree. And, I'm willing to bet Obama has not even seen the origional which is in the vault having relied al his life on people who do not question his place of birth. I'm sure there is but, what does it say and what is the date of it? And, is it a document that is 47 years old? Not a lot to ask for is it?

Which could have been phoned into the courtesy office by the idiot clerk after he did Obama's mother the favor. Funny. Palin had a whole family and tons of friends who know that on Black men and white women were very uncommon in those days and, even more so in Hawaii as there was very few black people. A mixed couple would stand out anywhere in the US and, even more so in an area where there are few blacks. I also believe he probably was however, cannot say for certain as the proof that he actually was is not available for examination. That, is what some people wish to make sure of but, they are not permitted to ascertain that their president is qualified to be president and that, is wrong.

I agree but some people wish proof and, are entitled to have it via an accredited examiner as they are the people who are spoken about in the US constitution. While I find it highly unlikely they will find anything nefarious, the refusal to provide the proof is certainly bullshit on Obama's part as he is required to be a natural born citizen. Why won't he prove it to the people?. Myself, I'd like to even have proof or some sort of evidence that she left the country around that particular time which seems to be the centerpiece around which this theory is sprung from.

No it does not as his father is non American and, his mother is not 19. Remember I quoted the naturalization criteria and the age of the parent along with history of residency dictated that they had to have spent five years in the US while over the age of 14 in order for him to inherit US citizenship if born abroad. He is not and she knows this which is why she rushes back. Or she says that the child was born at home with her mother helping her two days ago and she was resting+ or recovering. Funny, people have contacted neighbors at the time and nobody remembers the Obamas living at the house they gave as their address in the announcement nor, can anybody verify the hospital he was born at, nor has anybody come forward to say they or their mother or father or wife delivered the president of the USA 47 yars ago. Given the small numbers of black people living in Hawaii at the time, a negro father and son would certainly stand out somewhat in the memories of people. Or, since no doctor delivered the baby, there is no birth certificate signed by a doctor and, nothing is in the hospital until years later, when this discrepancy is addressed by either Obama himself, or, a routine check by the hospital administrator who then rectify it with say ............. a 1978 live birth certificate and, something like that may well be what is in the vault rather than an origional circ 1961 document signed by the doctor who delivered him or whatever.

Yes. Sorry for the mistake. Source Now you can all say that you told me a million times not to exaggerate.

And where in this article does it state that Israel intends on removing the blemish of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank?