Obama to Show Birth Certificate

[bigrebnc1775]

Hawaii did accept "African" as a racial identifier at the time, it's on his birth certificate.

Produce the list that allows "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" - should be on the same list if on exists.



Why yes I did, it didn't include "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" either. Since those were racial identifiers used on a birth document that YOU provided, it shows that birth documents were not restricted to that federal government listing.

Thanks for proving yourself wrong.



>>>>

revised document 11/01 is not 1961 try again chump.

Where is the revision date of 11/01? Don't see it.



>>>>

revised or are you saying this isn't obama's COLB?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

That appears to be his new strategy. Since the layout of the COLB form may have been updated in 2001, all historical data displayed on the form is false.

Of course there is no revision date on the Long Form and it contains the same information.

Silly isn't it.


>>>>

So here is his current logic. Military enlistments are conducted using DD Form 4 (http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/forms/eforms/dd0004.pdf). If you notice the revision date it shows October 2007. Under Big Reb's logic, all military enlistments prior to October 2007 are null and void because DOD changed the contract for new enlistees.


Silly isn't it.


>>>>

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bigrednec, this isn't even an issue any more since Obama 'trumped' all the birther nutcases with the certificate they have claimed didn't exist, or that it showed that he was a member of Al Qaeda or some such nonsense.
You and your fellow cult members should be lining up to apologise to the man, and all the others that you've accused of telling lies.
Where are the websites like www.we_are_very_sorry_mr_president.com ?

The issue? This docuemt has yet to be proven a true copy. Poltican lie all the time. too many holes in this document to allow a free pass.

 

[WorldWatcher]

revised document 11/01 is not 1961 try again chump.

Where is the revision date of 11/01? Don't see it.



>>>>

revised or are you saying this isn't obama's COLB?

Long Form many were demanding, no revision date, same information.



>>>>

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

on a fraudulent document you can write anything.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

That appears to be his new strategy. Since the layout of the COLB form may have been updated in 2001, all historical data displayed on the form is false.

Of course there is no revision date on the Long Form and it contains the same information.

Silly isn't it.


>>>>

So here is his current logic. Military enlistments are conducted using DD Form 4 (http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/forms/eforms/dd0004.pdf). If you notice the revision date it shows October 2007. Under Big Reb's logic, all military enlistments prior to October 2007 are null and void because DOD changed the contract for new enlistees.


Silly isn't it.


>>>>

fuck wit show me a document other than obama's colb that has African as a Raical Identifer in 1961?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

That appears to be his new strategy. Since the layout of the COLB form may have been updated in 2001, all historical data displayed on the form is false.

Of course there is no revision date on the Long Form and it contains the same information.

Silly isn't it.


>>>>

Silly? It's illogical.

If 'they' were going to fake a COLB or long-form or whatever, wouldn't 'they' have put 'negro' in for race? So a big plot to fake Obama's b.c. gets destroyed because 'they' mistakenly put 'African' instead of 'negro' for race? This whole thing is just ridiculous.

Why did he wait so long to release the long form? I don't know but for most folks this is the end of the discussion. He's a U.S. citizen.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That appears to be his new strategy. Since the layout of the COLB form may have been updated in 2001, all historical data displayed on the form is false.

Of course there is no revision date on the Long Form and it contains the same information.

Silly isn't it.


>>>>

So here is his current logic. Military enlistments are conducted using DD Form 4 (http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/forms/eforms/dd0004.pdf). If you notice the revision date it shows October 2007. Under Big Reb's logic, all military enlistments prior to October 2007 are null and void because DOD changed the contract for new enlistees.


Silly isn't it.


>>>>

fuck wit show me a document other than obama's colb that has African as a Raical Identifer in 1961?

Show us a list that does not allow a parent to write in "African" but does allow them to write in "Korean", "English", "German", and/or "Portuguese".



>>>>

 

[Zoom-boing]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

on a fraudulent document you can write anything.

So both documents are fake because 'the fakers' were too politically correct? Sorry, I just don't buy that. The documents state what they state because that's what the parent(s) wrote down. He's a U.S. citizen born in Hawaii in 1961.

 

[mudwhistle]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

on a fraudulent document you can write anything.

So both documents are fake because 'the fakers' were too politically correct? Sorry, I just don't buy that. The documents state what they state because that's what the parent(s) wrote down. He's a U.S. citizen born in Hawaii in 1961.

Parents?

I didn't see his father's input on the form.

 

[Zoom-boing]

on a fraudulent document you can write anything.

So both documents are fake because 'the fakers' were too politically correct? Sorry, I just don't buy that. The documents state what they state because that's what the parent(s) wrote down. He's a U.S. citizen born in Hawaii in 1961.

Parents?

I didn't see his father's input on the form.

So because Obama Sr. signature isn't on the forum therefore information on the form is wrong? Please.

Either the mom filled out all the information or they both did and just the mom signed it or he did and just the mom signed it. Either way, there isn't some big conspiracy covering up where he was born or faking birth certificates.

 

[Ravi]

Horseshit nothing more to say, I hate people who post like you. the whole thread you were arguing Hawaii would have accepted African as a racial identifier in 1961, but now it isn't your argument. Fuck off.

Actually that is factually incorrect, my argument has been and is that Hawaii would have accepted "African" as a racial identifier, just like they accepted "English", "German", "Korean" and "Portuguese" based on parent(s) self identification.

Your position has been that "African" was not on a list somewhere and so would not have been accepted. Yet you have failed to provide proof that...

1. Such a list existed for the State of Hawaii in regards to birth certificates.

2. That a government employee would reject self identification if a value not on this mythical list were provided by parent(s)

3. That this mythical list DID NOT include "African" but DID INCLUDE "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" since that was on a document you provided and touted as valid.​

>>>>

horseshit stop dancing. Hawaii would not have accepted African because it wasn't the prescribe racial identifier at the time, for blacks. If so produce the government document that says it would?

That this mythical list DID NOT include "African" but DID INCLUDE "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" since that was on a document you provided and touted as valid

You saw the list that was posted because you replied to it.

He wasn't a black, or a negro or a colored or whatever black Americans were called at the time. He was an African, doof!

You are a hoot.

 

[Ravi]

Am I understanding this right? A document is 'revised', therefore all the information on that document also gets 'revised' to fit with current definitions? That doesn't even make any sense.

Is the argument "Because 'African' wasn't an official or unofficial racial identifier in 1961 and when they revised the forms in 2001 (or whenever) someone screwed up, typed in 'African' and therefore the document is fake"?

No, of course it doesn't mean that. Just the format of the document itself was revised.

Apparently birferreb has never worked a job that had anything to do with paperwork.

 

[percysunshine]

So both documents are fake because 'the fakers' were too politically correct? Sorry, I just don't buy that. The documents state what they state because that's what the parent(s) wrote down. He's a U.S. citizen born in Hawaii in 1961.

Parents?

I didn't see his father's input on the form.

So because Obama Sr. signature isn't on the forum therefore information on the form is wrong? Please.

My signature is not on this forum. Only an idiot would do that.

 

[mudwhistle]

So both documents are fake because 'the fakers' were too politically correct? Sorry, I just don't buy that. The documents state what they state because that's what the parent(s) wrote down. He's a U.S. citizen born in Hawaii in 1961.

Parents?

I didn't see his father's input on the form.

So because Obama Sr. signature isn't on the forum therefore information on the form is wrong? Please.

Either the mom filled out all the information or they both did and just the mom signed it or he did and just the mom signed it. Either way, there isn't some big conspiracy covering up where he was born or faking birth certificates.

I didn't say that. I just said his father didn't sign it. He may not have even been there. I heard he was in Seattle when little Barry was born.

My nephew's father, who's from Somalia, took the time to marry his mom, but didn't hang around to help raise him. He has scars from that to this day.

30 years ago being in a family like Obama's would have been a none starter. This guy breezed through for reasons that only the non-politically correct could identify.

 

[Ravi]

Parents?

I didn't see his father's input on the form.

So because Obama Sr. signature isn't on the forum therefore information on the form is wrong? Please.

Either the mom filled out all the information or they both did and just the mom signed it or he did and just the mom signed it. Either way, there isn't some big conspiracy covering up where he was born or faking birth certificates.

I didn't say that. I just said his father didn't sign it. He may not have even been there. I heard he was in Seattle when little Barry was born.

My nephew's father, who's from Somalia, took the time to marry his mom, but didn't hang around to help raise him. He has scars from that to this day.

30 years ago being in a family like Obama's would have been a none starter. This guy breezed through for reasons that only the non-politically correct could identify.

This post doesn't even make sense.

 

[Synthaholic]

Ok, maybe implying you might be lying was out of line, but what does your being a sergeant have to do with whether or not you lie?

Uh...excuse me, but I didn't imply that. I asked him a simple question:

How do you know the nationality of each of those people?

That question was in response to his statement of fact that:

All the people in this Picture are African. Are they all of the same race?

Note that he says "All", and states it as fact. Now tell me if he is in a position to state that as fact by grabbing a photo from a page of photos, using the search term "white africans".

He may not have lied, but that only leaves "incredibly naive" or "just plain stupid".

Let me introduce you to the south african cricket team

Living in SA: Yay for South African cricket

What's your point? That they are all Africans? Yeah, they probably are.

Can you state as a fact that you know that each and every one of them are African? NO.

 

[Synthaholic]

OH so I'm running from his questiuon? and what is he doing to the one I asked him 35 pages ago? Fuck off.

You're a chickenshit! Answer his fucking question.

Or keep running.

fuck you cyndi that shows just how much of a hypocrite you are. Demand that ww answer my question and I might answer his. If not fuck off.

He hasn't claimed what you say he has claimed, so until you provide his quote saying it, he isn't obligated to defend what you THINK he said.

 

[Synthaholic]

Dude I could careless what you post you have been defending the African racial identifier this whole fucking thread, and now you say that hasn't been your claim. fuck you I know exactly what you have been defending and what you have claimed. Either produce a document from 1961 federal or state government that used African as a racial identifier. If not shut the fuck up.

Depends on what you mean by "defending the African racial identifier", your incorrect claim is that because it wasn't on an official government list, that it could not have possibly been used on a Hawaiian birth certificate. It's true I disagree with that position because race on birth certificates is self-identified and is not restricted to some government list.

This position is supported by documents that YOU supplied in multiple threads that show "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" as a racial identifier and they are not on a government list either. To date you have provided no government racial identifier list which has listed those options for use on birth certificates.



So, if birth certificates are restricted to only those items that appear on some government list applicable to birth certificates you need to provide such a list that shows "English", "German", "Korean", and "Portuguese" as restricted values for Hawaii. If you can't supply a list supporting your position, then you have in fact inadvertently supported the position that race is self identified.

I can understand why you are getting so upset, it's kind of embarrassing to supply the information that disproves your own position. Probably why you are resorting to being insulting and using childish profanity.


>>>>

produce a document from 1961 federal or state government that used African as a racial identifier or shut the fuck up.

Here ya go:

 

[Synthaholic]

Big reb is a big zero.

candy corn is of no substance

Candy corn is made primarily from sugar, corn syrup, artificial coloring, flavoring and binders.

She does look pretty sweet!