Sheriff's investigators release initial findings on Obama eligibility

[Hawker]

...snip...
I'm curious.  Has anyone downloaded the PDF and tried this themselves? I don't have acrobat pro available to me and don't know of any freeware that can see the "links".  Photoshop only shows layers and there is just one.  Although the white glow around all the text is there like the video says.

Anyone trashing the video, please watch it first and then you can say that it's just a bunch of conspiracy.

Why bother?

Those that believe Obama is a Kenyan Muslim will not be convinced by anyone who disagrees with them.  That's the nature of conspiracy theories.

Wow.

Red Emerald, yes, I did, even though I initially thought that the birthers were crazy. That may still be true, but the posted document is a joke as far as I can tell. No one has posted a reasonable explanation as to why it looks so obviously forged. Instead we have clearly biased individuals that are so vested in their position that they refuse to look at objective evidence and respond with ad hominem attacks instead.

Its not ad hominem to point out that something is futile.  Whether its the Kennedy assassination, Roswell, 9/11 truthers, Princess Di assassination nuts or Obama birthers, nothing will ever change their minds.

Its just a waste of time.

EDIT to add classic example from wikipedia: http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/18/1948550611434786.full.pdf+html

The study found that people who believe Osama Bin Laden was captured alive by Americans are likely to also believe that Bin Laden was actually killed prior to the 2011 raid.

[1713904888]

1713904888

[jwzguy]

It absolutely is ad hominem to say that it's pointless to examine someone's evidence because you think there is something wrong with the person rather than the evidence.

It's also ridiculous, because as I've said many times, I would like to see an explanation for this evidence, as it contradicts my earlier view. But you clearly don't have one.

[Hawker]

It absolutely is ad hominem to say that it's pointless to examine someone's evidence because you think there is something wrong with the person rather than the evidence.

It's also ridiculous, because as I've said many times, I would like to see an explanation for this evidence, as it contradicts my earlier view. But you clearly don't have one.

My view is that it doesn't matter.  He passed the eligibility test when he was born in Hawaii.  His birth was advertised in the local newspapers.  Why waste your time fretting over his birth certificate when your mind could be more usefully employed?

[jwzguy]

It absolutely is ad hominem to say that it's pointless to examine someone's evidence because you think there is something wrong with the person rather than the evidence.

It's also ridiculous, because as I've said many times, I would like to see an explanation for this evidence, as it contradicts my earlier view. But you clearly don't have one.

My view is that it doesn't matter.  He passed the eligibility test when he was born in Hawaii.  His birth was advertised in the local newspapers.  Why waste your time fretting over his birth certificate when your mind could be more usefully employed?

Why did you waste your time posting in this thread if you truly feel that way? You took more time posting than I took "fretting."

You're not concerned when the government posts fraudulent documents in order to manipulate public opinion?

[Hawker]

It absolutely is ad hominem to say that it's pointless to examine someone's evidence because you think there is something wrong with the person rather than the evidence.

It's also ridiculous, because as I've said many times, I would like to see an explanation for this evidence, as it contradicts my earlier view. But you clearly don't have one.

My view is that it doesn't matter.  He passed the eligibility test when he was born in Hawaii.  His birth was advertised in the local newspapers.  Why waste your time fretting over his birth certificate when your mind could be more usefully employed?

Why did you waste your time posting in this thread if you truly feel that way? You took more time posting than I took "fretting."

You're not concerned when the government posts fraudulent documents in order to manipulate public opinion?

As I said, Obama passed the eligibility test when he was born in Hawaii.  The quality of the copy of the document is irrelevant.  Lets assume it is fake - who cares?  The important question is whether he is eligible and that isn't disputed.

[jwzguy]

Apparently it IS disputed. And fraud perpetrated by a governing body should be a concern to everyone. I would have thought that was a given. 

[Hawker]

Apparently it IS disputed. And fraud perpetrated by a governing body should be a concern to everyone. I would have thought that was a given. 

It really isn't.  There is a guy at WND that insists people like Obama and Rubio are not "natural born" as they have a parent who was born outside the US.  Its a fair agrument but even he accepts that Obama was born in the US.

There are people who say that, even if he was born in Hawaii, the published document must be a fake.  They take that a step further to say that unless a better document is found, they won't accept that he is eligible.  That's the Sheriff Joe line.  Its a waste of time because the Hawaii says they have a record of his birth and his birth was advertised.  There is no eligibility question.

[jwzguy]

It's hilarious that you keep saying "There is no eligibility question." Clearly with all these people questioning his eligibility, there is a question.

I've never been one of those people, so I don't know the facts. But from your statements alone, your stance seems unsupported: Hawaii "says" they have proof, and the proof provided is forged. An advertisement is only proof that someone thought it was important to make it look like he was born in Hawaii. It's not proof of eligibility.

I completely agree that there are much worse things going on in our government and have never given this issue much attention. But refusing to acknowledge this poor forgery is looking sillier than the birther people ever looked.

[Hawker]

It's hilarious that you keep saying "There is no eligibility question." Clearly with all these people questioning his eligibility, there is a question.

I've never been one of those people, so I don't know the facts. But from your statements alone, your stance seems unsupported: Hawaii "says" they have proof, and the proof provided is forged. An advertisement is only proof that someone thought it was important to make it look like he was born in Hawaii. It's not proof of eligibility.

I completely agree that there are much worse things going on in our government and have never given this issue much attention. But refusing to acknowledge this poor forgery is looking sillier than the birther people ever looked.

Hawaii doesn't have better birth records for anyone else.  And within days of his birth in Kenya, his family said "This little black baby is the ideal Manchurian candidate.  Lets fly to Hawaii and advertise his birth."

When I say there is no eligibility question, I mean there is no-one worth taking seriously. Sure you will find lunatics who insist that he was born in Kenya, that the ad was run by Bilderberg activists and the staff in Hawaii is part of the conspiracy.  Are you sure you want to join them?

[jwzguy]

You're making an unsupported leap there. It's perfectly reasonable that someone having a kid outside the US might want to make sure he's considered a natural born citizen without any plans for him to be president. (P.S. - newspapers accept ads over the phone.)

Anyway - I'm not joining anyone. From the view of a non-vested party, people who dismiss this obvious fraud are being just as silly as any conspiracy theorists.

That's really all I have to contribute. As I've said from the beginning, I was hoping you DID have something which could explain this nonsense.

[Hawker]

You're making an unsupported leap there. It's perfectly reasonable that someone having a kid outside the US might want to make sure he's considered a natural born citizen without any plans for him to be president. (P.S. - newspapers accept ads over the phone.)

Anyway - I'm not joining anyone. From the view of a non-vested party, people who dismiss this obvious fraud are being just as silly as any conspiracy theorists.

That's really all I have to contribute. As I've said from the beginning, I was hoping you DID have something which could explain this nonsense.

So in Kenya in 1960, someone thought a black baby could be a future president.  They advertised his birth over the phone from Kenya to Hawaii.  Then the Hawaiian state recorded his birth over the phone as well.  

Can you not see how stupid that idea is?

[jwzguy]

You're making an unsupported leap there. It's perfectly reasonable that someone having a kid outside the US might want to make sure he's considered a natural born citizen without any plans for him to be president.

[Hawker]

You're making an unsupported leap there. It's perfectly reasonable that someone having a kid outside the US might want to make sure he's considered a natural born citizen without any plans for him to be president.

No that is not reasonable.  The family say a child was born in Hawaii, the local government recorded his birth on the same day and his parents advertised it a few days later. 

Can I prove that he wasn't actually born in Kenya?  No - of course not.  But the same is true for you.  I can't prove you weren't born in Kenya either. 

The question is - does it matter?  If the local government, school photos, passport, and the vetting by press and by the GOP that goes with running for office failed to find any evidence that he was born outside the US, why would you or I worry about it ?

[Red Emerald]

You're making an unsupported leap there. It's perfectly reasonable that someone having a kid outside the US might want to make sure he's considered a natural born citizen without any plans for him to be president.

No that is not reasonable.  The family say a child was born in Hawaii, the local government recorded his birth on the same day and his parents advertised it a few days later. 

Can I prove that he wasn't actually born in Kenya?  No - of course not.  But the same is true for you.  I can't prove you weren't born in Kenya either. 

The question is - does it matter?  If the local government, school photos, passport, and the vetting by press and by the GOP that goes with running for office failed to find any evidence that he was born outside the US, why would you or I worry about it ?

Have you watched the video? Until you do, I'm not responding to you or your stubbornness.

[Hawker]

...snip...
Have you watched the video? Until you do, I'm not responding to you or your stubbornness.

No and I won't.  Life is too short to waste on content free videos.  If he found something, he would have it in writing and Obama would be gone. 

[Red Emerald]

...snip...
Have you watched the video? Until you do, I'm not responding to you or your stubbornness.

No and I won't.  Life is too short to waste on content free videos.  If he found something, he would have it in writing and Obama would be gone. 

I'm disappointed that is your outlook... You CAN'T know it is content free without watching it. But whatever, be willfully ignorant of the evidence. I'm moving on now.

[Hawker]

...snip...
Have you watched the video? Until you do, I'm not responding to you or your stubbornness.

No and I won't.  Life is too short to waste on content free videos.  If he found something, he would have it in writing and Obama would be gone. 

I'm disappointed that is your outlook... You CAN'T know it is content free without watching it. But whatever, be willfully ignorant of the evidence. I'm moving on now.

Actually you can.  If a press conference took place over a week ago and there is no news of content, it means that no content has been found. 

The alternative is to watch videos of every press conference that failed to get reported because it lacked content in the hope that a dreadful mistake has been made and this time there was something worth wasting an hour of your life.

There are not enough hours in the day for that...

[jwzguy]

LOL, how hilarious can you get? The press conference was the "news of content." How many faceplants are you going to make in a single thread? You're making the birthers' arguments better than any of them possibly could. 

[Red Emerald]

...snip...
Have you watched the video? Until you do, I'm not responding to you or your stubbornness.

No and I won't.  Life is too short to waste on content free videos.  If he found something, he would have it in writing and Obama would be gone. 

I'm disappointed that is your outlook... You CAN'T know it is content free without watching it. But whatever, be willfully ignorant of the evidence. I'm moving on now.

Actually you can.  If a press conference took place over a week ago and there is no news of content, it means that no content has been found. 

The alternative is to watch videos of every press conference that failed to get reported because it lacked content in the hope that a dreadful mistake has been made and this time there was something worth wasting an hour of your life.

There are not enough hours in the day for that...

Except I watched this one and am saying that there IS content that deserves more investigation. I asked if anyone opened the file in acrobat and then you come in and say its all conspiracy bullshit.

The media only covers stuff that matters? That's why there's so much crap on about celebrities. There's no content there and that shit is prime time

[Hawker]

Obama's birth certificate say he was born in Hawaii and, in the absence of proof he was born somewhere else, what's the point in examining the "evidence" or watching videos where 'The press conference was the "news of content."'

Unless there is positive evidence that he was born outside the US, there is no story here.