Posted on 07/03/2013 9:04:28 AM PDT by FreedomOutpost
We know that John Brennan got the head job of the Central Intelligence Agency. However, as we stated in a previous article, by obtaining the records of Barack Obama he may well show that Obama is not eligible to be President.
Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/07/does-the-cia-director-have-barack-obamas-records-that-prove-he-is-ineligible-to-be-president/#ixzz2XzxgGS3K
One pdf is worth a thousand walls of text. No need to talk of layers or halos or OCR, compression algorithms, etc.
Just post their scanned output along with a high resolution photo of the original document.
I only want to see the BC number, showing an anomaly similar to the “1” in Obama’s alleged BC number.
No trick documents. The original must be representative of a BC from that era.
State what program, and the settings used to achieve that result.
So easy a 5th grader could do it.
I just gave you the links to more information.
The example files were obtained by scanning in an imperfect printout of the Obama PDF (which has already lost some of its original information).
The resulting PDFs show the same stuff Obama’s PDF does.
On the other hand, no one has ever been able to duplicate that stuff by hand. You just don’t get those kind of effects in hand-created files.
Sorry but you are wasting your time with this one. Points for the active imagination though. Of course, there is something very wrong with the Obama story but if anyone had any information it would have come out by now.
Everything official has been destroyed, imho.
Well, you’ve finally convinced me of something.
You are either not very smart or paid off to post the things you post. You selected things and ignored things from my post to respond to. Your choices are very telling.
I think it is time to end the conversation with you.
I enjoy delving deep and learning....not being beat in the head by a someone’s liberal opinion.
You are dishonest, and it is a waste of time to attempt quoting anything to you.
You are a fool, a liar and an idiot, and rebutting you further is pointless.
The only value of the Obama Presidency is to serve as a negative example.
In simple terms, the position of a fool.
Nothing in History lends this interpretation credibility, and virtually all of American History disputes it. (Loyalists, Slaves and Indians constitute MILLIONS of exceptions.Exceptions so numerous that it renders your rule ridiculous. )
You yourself have proclaimed the creation of "Anchor Babies" nonsensical, yet that is the naturally following consequence of believing your stupid theory.
The Nation is ill served by your theory, yet still you push it. Again, a fool.
Jeff Writes:
The stakes are bigger than you think. Letting this issue "run" is not good for conservatives.
And there it is. Jeff admits his motives right there. He is more concerned about what is POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT than what is actual truth.
An Objective man will admit something is true even if it is detrimental to his circumstance, while a subjective man always looks to how his pronouncements will benefit his interests.
The Republican Party apparatus is thrilled to death with having people such as Marco Rubio, Niki Haley, Bobby Jindal, And to a much lesser extent, Ted Cruz. They represent Minorities in the party, and the GOP is DESPERATE to close the "minority gap" with the Democrats.
That all of these people have eligibility problems (As did John McCain and George Romney) under a STRICT interpretation of "natural born citizen" requirement, is a condition that the GOP party mainstream finds intolerable. Therefore, Various GOP party officials and supporters do not wish to believe that there is a strict standard, so they rationalize that there isn't one. It is too damaging to their political aspirations to accept that there *IS* a strict standard, so they don't.
People like Jeff, come along with the Official party line, and push every piece of blather he can find in an effort to convince others that what the party WANTS to be true, is in fact true.
They are simply lying to themselves for the benefits of political expediency, and not for any other reason. Jeff is so ADAMANT because he NEEDS his weak interpretation to be true... because he anticipates a future political Bonanza if it is.
Jeff's absolute certainty that he is correct and everyone who disagrees is absolutely wrong, is the tell tale of a biased, subjective opinion.
From my research I have determined that some people of the salient time period believed we followed English Law, and others believed we followed Vattel. In other words, opinions of the time were split. *
That Jeff insists everyone believed exactly the same thing marks him as a biased, foolish, and unserious researcher.
.
*I personally think those most in a position to know the truth (Delegates and Ratifiers) based the meaning on Vattel, while subsequent non-involved lawyers and Judiciary believed we kept following English Common law.
According to Jeff’s Logic, assuming for the moment Obama was born in the year 1745 and as present, to a father who was a British subject, our founders would happily accept him as a natural born citizen and thus qualified to assume the office of president.
Kind of warps the mind.... doesn’t it.
Wow... I like the way you put this into words You nailed it. A very good analysis..... I agree.
This argument is straight from Dr. Conspiracy. I won't bore you with the details, but suffice it to say, they want to believe that a person can be "natural born" twice.
Kind of warps the mind.... doesn’t it.
Only if you let it. I've become long accustomed to dealing with people who believe nonsensical things. On other subjects they can be reasonable, but if you get on one of their pet kooky beliefs, you are simply arguing with a delusion.
Thanks. I pondered it quite a bit in an effort to make what I see, as clearly articulated as I could.
If I respond to everything, birthers complain my posts are too long and use that as an excuse to avoid the points.
If I don't, they say, "Aha! You didn't respond to everything!"
It's all disingenuous. It's all BS.
I responded to the only points that were worth responding to.
You said the White House's actions gave you reason to be suspicious. Fine. I don't disagree.
You said you thought he was born in Canada. That was an opinion on your part that there's no real evidence for. Every Hawaiian official who has ever spoken on the matter, Democrat or Republican, has certified that he was born in Hawaii, and he also has a Hawaiian birth certificate, in hard-copy paper format, that we have PHOTOGRAPHS of.
The comment wasn't even worth commenting on.
I'm not a fan of anchor babies, either.
And as far as I can tell, I answered every other damn point you made.
Except for your idiotic false accusations that I am a "liberal," that I'm "not very smart," or that I'm "paid."
Your dishonesty has been demonstrated in this thread by the two complete lies that I pointed out just a little while ago.
As for your new accusation, it's a lie as well, and you know it. I had previously included in that very thread a quote from the same speaker practically identical to the one you complained about, so it's clear I wasn't trying to hide anything.
You are dishonest, and it is a waste of time to attempt quoting anything to you.
Jim, this person continues to make false accusations of "lying" that are known and verified to be false, while simultaneously repeating false claims of his own.
If you want me to be polite and civil, would you require that of this individual as well?
And there it is. Jeff admits his motives right there. He is more concerned about what is POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT than what is actual truth.
No. I am mostly concerned with the truth. But the promotion of this false narrative is bad for conservatives, and yes, I am concerned about what's good for conservatives as well.
And that's a good thing. It takes someone like DL to portray that as some kind of crime.
An Objective man will admit something is true even if it is detrimental to his circumstance, while a subjective man always looks to how his pronouncements will benefit his interests.
I didn't pick my position based on what was detrimental to me. If I had, I sure as hell wouldn't have picked this one.
If the birther claims had been true, I would've gone with that. They aren't. I've gone with the truth.
The Republican Party apparatus is thrilled to death with having people such as Marco Rubio, Niki Haley, Bobby Jindal, And to a much lesser extent, Ted Cruz. They represent Minorities in the party, and the GOP is DESPERATE to close the "minority gap" with the Democrats.
Well, if conservatives only get votes from white men, we're done. If that's our strategy, we will never see another conservative President again.
It is too damaging to their political aspirations to accept that there *IS* a strict standard, so they don't.
No. The question is: What is the historical and legal standard. Is it what birthers claim, or is it not?
It isn't. The evidence is OVERWHELMING that it isn't.
People like Jeff, come along with the Official party line, and push every piece of blather he can find in an effort to convince others that what the party WANTS to be true, is in fact true.
No. As shown by the earlier examples (see posts 205, 216), I pick the best authorities the best evidence, and sound legal doctrine, and go by that. DL, on the other hand, picks whatever weak or invalid sources he can come up with to support what he wants the law to be.
And Jim, pretty much everything this poster posts is a false accusation, a misrepresentation, or a false claim. And I can and am happy to prove that to you.
Do we really have to put up with this ongoing troll behavior at FR? It is because of having to put up with this that I decided I had to fight back.
If you pointed out anything previously, I did not notice it. Your claims have always been so often overblown to the point they are not even worthy of considerations. I no longer feel any need to pay attention to what you say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.