Hospital Won't Back Obama Birth Claim

i've posted links and cases regarding standing....and YES, scotus would take the case to declare citizens do not have standing....

your arguments as to why anyone else doesn't bring the claim is a red herring, we are talking about citizens having the right to demand proof.
Yurt,
Where does it say that in our constitution? Can you point me in the right direction?

Care

say what in the constitution?
 
There is no lie. His BC was posted, is posted, you can find it anywhere.

The case has been rejected for being frivilous.

Your claims are frivilous. It is not reasonable to suspect that the Hawaiian BC, the same BC that is acceptable as proof of US birth for any purpose, is not adequate to prove his place of birth.

The Health Department in Hawaii has repeatedly verified that the BC is a true reflection of the original.

You Fail.

why is it called a birth certifiCATION....it is NOT a certifiCATE...and youre lying that they said it was a "true reflection of the original" flat out lying....they never said that, a true relfection would be a copy moron

why bother, you're lying outright

yurt, it is not called a Birth Certification either... It is called:

State of Hawaii
Certification of Live Birth

Why not sue the State of Hawaii, If you do not accept what they deem their legal Certification of Birth?

yeah, you see how much i am distracted by this....

thank you for setting willy straight that it is not a birth certificate....

um, people have sued to get a copy and they have all lost due to standing...the law is clear on who has a right to see a copy of the original, a court of law could order it say in a paternity suit, will dispute etc....but so far every judge has denied standing or some apparently have simply thrown it out as frivolous which is absurd, because without a copy of the original, how can any judge say it is frivolous. to get frivolous you have to look at ALL the evidence and then determine that with ALL the evidence the claim lacks any merit.

since no judge has produced a copy of the original, denial is wholly improper.
 
Another question Yurt,

Do you believe our present Immigration and Naturalization Laws in place today are in place for everyone alive today?

I guess what I am asking is, are these laws in place today, retroactive? So a baby born one day before the law that made those in his category citizens, would be a citizen, as a child born one day after the law came in to effect?

For example, Mccain, according to our laws at the time, was not a citizen of the United States at Birth, but one year after he was born, a law was created by Congress that made those born in Panama to an American citizen, an american citizen....?

Or let's say, on November 1, 1950 a law was created and passed that made those born to an American citizen while they are overseas, an american citizen at birth....

Would those born to American citizens on October 31, 1950 overseas not be a Citizen at birth and let's say another child born to them 10 months later would be? Or does the law make those born to American citizens, citizens at birth no matter when they were born, before or after the new law?

Care
 
Last edited:
i've posted links and cases regarding standing....and YES, scotus would take the case to declare citizens do not have standing....

your arguments as to why anyone else doesn't bring the claim is a red herring, we are talking about citizens having the right to demand proof.
Yurt,
Where does it say that in our constitution? Can you point me in the right direction?

Care

say what in the constitution?

Where does it say in the constitution that "citizens have the 'right' to demand proof''?
 
Another question Yurt,

Do you believe our present Immigration and Naturalization Laws in place today are in place for everyone alive today?

I guess what I am asking is, are these laws in place today, retroactive? So a baby born one day before the law that made those in his category citizens, would be a citizen, as a child born one day after the law came in to effect?

For example, Mccain, according to our laws at the time, was not a citizen of the United States at Birth, but one year after he was born, a law was created by Congress that made those born in Panama to an American citizen, an american citizen....?

Or let's say, in on November 1, 1950 a law was created and passed that made those born to an American citizen while they are overseas, an american citizen at birth....

Would those born to American citizens on October 31 overseas not be a Citizen at birth and let's say another child born to them 10 months later would be? Or does the law make those born to American citizens, citizens at birth no matter when they were born?

Care

Isn't it interesting, my brother was born on an american Air Force base in Japan and was told he wasn't an American citizen, I was born on an American Air Force Base in England...we both have naturalization papers. Oh, and my brother had even voted and served in the military before they told him he wasn't a citizen. Yet McCain, who was born earlier than either of us, in Panama, is a native born citizen and can run for president? More proof this country is run by the wealthy and they don't give a hill of beans about our country, just about how much money they can get out of her before she fails.
 
"Obama Birth Mystery: More Than 1 Hospital, This is NOT a CONSPIRACY, it's FACT! "

The FACT is that this thread is in the CONSPIRACY THEORIES FORUM.

Therefore, this is a CONSPIRACY.

The only FACTS present in THIS thread are the ones I presented with PROOF, and there is NO CONSPIRACY ABOUT IT.

Just because a liberal, obama loving moderator that can't STAND to see this subject perpetuated, ESPECIALLY when PROOF arises, so they move it where THEY want it because they have the power to do so acting simply on their own bias, even though this is NOT where it belongs, does NOT TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the FACTS PRESENTED as they are, FACTS not a CONSPIRACY.

Fact: Obama has NOT provided his real birth certificate, only a "certificate of live birth" which proves exactly NOTHING!
Fact: Obama now has a team of lawyers he's spent over a million dollars on to make sure his BC and many other documents STAY hidden.
Fact: Obama has now been caught in a LIE about which hospital he was born in, in Hawaii.
Fact: Obama calls indonesia his "home."
Fact: Obama's grandmother claims she was present at his birth in Mombasa, Kenya.

Now I ask anyone of you obama ass kissing liberals to tell me what part about ANY of the above FACTS is a CONSPIRACY? I'd ESPECIALLY like to hear from CrimsonWhite who moved this thread into here... explain what it is about the above facts I listed that you think is a conspiracy...
 
Last edited:
"Obama Birth Mystery: More Than 1 Hospital, This is NOT a CONSPIRACY, it's FACT! "

The FACT is that this thread is in the CONSPIRACY THEORIES FORUM.

Therefore, this is a CONSPIRACY.

The only FACTS present in THIS thread are the ones I presented with PROOF, and there is NO CONSPIRACY ABOUT IT.

Just because a liberal, obama loving moderator that can't STAND to see this subject perpetuated, ESPECIALLY when PROOF arises, so they move it where THEY want it because they have the power to do so acting simply on their own bias, even though this is NOT where it belongs, does NOT TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the FACTS PRESENTED as they are, FACTS not a CONSPIRACY.

Fact: Obama has NOT provided his real birth certificate.
Fact: Obama now has a team of lawyers he's spent over a million dollars on to make sure his BC and many other documents STAY hidden.
Fact: Obama has now been caught in a LIE about which hospital he was born in, in Hawaii.
Fact: Obama calls indonesia his "home."
Fact: Obama's grandmother claims she was present at obama's birth in Mombasa, Kenya.

Now I ask anyone of you obama ass kissing liberals to tell me what part about ANY of the above FACTS is a CONSPIRACY. I'd ESPECIALLY like to hear from CrimsonWhite who moved this thread into here... explain what about this all is a conspiracy...

Terral also presents a lot of "facts" in his Conspiracy theories.
 
why is it called a birth certifiCATION....it is NOT a certifiCATE...and youre lying that they said it was a "true reflection of the original" flat out lying....they never said that, a true relfection would be a copy moron

why bother, you're lying outright

yurt, it is not called a Birth Certification either... It is called:

State of Hawaii
Certification of Live Birth

Why not sue the State of Hawaii, If you do not accept what they deem their legal Certification of Birth?

yeah, you see how much i am distracted by this....

thank you for setting willy straight that it is not a birth certificate....

um, people have sued to get a copy and they have all lost due to standing...the law is clear on who has a right to see a copy of the original, a court of law could order it say in a paternity suit, will dispute etc....but so far every judge has denied standing or some apparently have simply thrown it out as frivolous which is absurd, because without a copy of the original, how can any judge say it is frivolous. to get frivolous you have to look at ALL the evidence and then determine that with ALL the evidence the claim lacks any merit.

since no judge has produced a copy of the original, denial is wholly improper.

It is what Hawaii deems as their legal birth certification, equal to a birth certificate for most all cases, where one is legally needed.

Does the constitution say anything at all about whether a State uses a Certification of Live Birth or a Birth Certification as the legal proof of citizenship for the presidency?

Care
 
Yurt, do you think the State Department did not do their duty, and did not vet the Presidential candidates for their eligibility?
 
Same topic. Same discussion. Same lame ass arguments.

Threads Merged.

And you can't DISPUTE or prove a damn thing DIFFERENT about anything presented here as a conspiracy.

Nice liberal, ass kissing job and EPIC FAIL jack ass. What a tool.
 
Last edited:
Yurt, the Birth Certificate. the one that the state issues to everyone, has been released long ago. If you are trying to distinguish the document by the word certificate or certification, you fail. "Birth Certificate" is not the official notation on either form. In fact, they are both birth certificates. Both certify the birth of Barak Obama and where it took place.
 
Same topic. Same discussion. Same lame ass arguments.

Threads Merged.

And you can't dispute or prove a damn thing DIFFERENT about anything presented here as a conspiracy.

Nice liberal, ass kissing job and EPIC FAIL jack ass. What a tool.

I could give two shits whether or not you believe that you have found the truth. The fact is, Barack Obama is President. He was certifed as eligible. He is President. Anything that says otherwise is a conspiracy theory.

Furthermore. The mod staff decides where things go. If you have a problem with something that I have done, then you can take it up with me via PM. Otherwise, don't comment on mod decisons. You know it isn't allowed here.
 
Oh, World Net Daily is reliable and unbiased ... NOT.

Find proof to the contrary or shut the fuck up. You just look like a piss warm, obama mouth piece.

I'm sure it would be easy to find another BLOG that disguises itself as a news organization that would contradict your ridiculous claims.

Then again, we could probably find several hundred LEGITIMATE news organizations that contradict your ridiculous claims.
 
why is it called a birth certifiCATION....it is NOT a certifiCATE...and youre lying that they said it was a "true reflection of the original" flat out lying....they never said that, a true relfection would be a copy moron

why bother, you're lying outright

yurt, it is not called a Birth Certification either... It is called:

State of Hawaii
Certification of Live Birth

Why not sue the State of Hawaii, If you do not accept what they deem their legal Certification of Birth?

yeah, you see how much i am distracted by this....

thank you for setting willy straight that it is not a birth certificate....

um, people have sued to get a copy and they have all lost due to standing...the law is clear on who has a right to see a copy of the original, a court of law could order it say in a paternity suit, will dispute etc....but so far every judge has denied standing or some apparently have simply thrown it out as frivolous which is absurd, because without a copy of the original, how can any judge say it is frivolous. to get frivolous you have to look at ALL the evidence and then determine that with ALL the evidence the claim lacks any merit. since no judge has produced a copy of the original, denial is wholly improper.



That is complete poppycock. That's going to be my word to replace "bullshit" for a while. Poppycock.

It's frivilous, the courts have said so, accept it, move on. Or don't. I've nearly decided that's it better to keep you numb nuts chasing poppycock than have you actually participating in important issues.

In fact, best of luck to ya! Continue.
 
If I was Obama I wouldn't produce SHIT for your dumbasses!

AND........

I'd tell you to KISS my ENTIRE Black Ass!

Can't BELIEVE this shit is STILL going on!

WHAT other fucking president has EVER had to go thru this?

You HAVE to wonder why.......
 

Forum List

Back
Top