DeletedUser
Not to mention the fact that the links that he provided don't even back up his case...
- Status
DeletedUser
And yet you fail to disprove my points, claiming that they are nothing more then "ignorance".
In any debate there must be a Yang for the Ying to have an actual debate. So far I've seen nothing but an I agree thread and have stepped forward to offer that opposition and see how well people can debate and prove their points.
My points stand. Prove them wrong.
And before any one tries labeling me a Birther look back to my initial post.
So lets see a good debate, prove me wrong. And not just "Ignorance" or "Right wing loon" excuses.
DeletedUser
Ok - in the interest of a good debate, why not address my original response to your post? Obviously, if you've got a load of people responding to you it's tough to take in everyone's points so perhaps you missed it. It's possible, though, that other respondants didn't want to repeat what I'd already said in refuting your points.
Here you go - here's a handy link to it.
Here you go - here's a handy link to it.
DeletedUser
So, let me get this straight --- you want me to prove a negative?
When anyone presents an argument, they must provide evidence to support their argument. You failed to do just that. Your counter-argument is to insist I provide evidence to dispute your unsupported argument.
You made the claim Maya Soetoro has a certificate of live birth from Hawaii, thus you must provide the evidence to support your claim. Stated in contest, Maya openly admits to being born in Jakarta, Indonesia.
Gib, the Birthers made it up, and I'll explain why they made it up: During the time they were attempting to claim the Certificate of Live Birth was forged, a rumor started that the original certificate, prior to being forged, belonged to his younger sister. Later, when it was found that his younger sister was born in Indonesia, the Birther stories changed to accommodate the original allegations. Do I have evidence? No, but I don't have to prove my speculation as to why a lie domino-ed into a bigger lie. The fact they have no evidence to support their allegations stands as evidence, de-facto. The burden of proof is with those who made the claims, not with me to dispute those claims.
Moving on, to the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. I cannot provide court documents proving there were no court proceedings. That's the "proving a negative" I indicated earlier. Court documents are publicly accessible and thus, if such ever occurred, a Birther would have been able to obtain a copy. They have not been able to do so, which logically indicates there was never a hearing. Without a hearing, without court proceedings, without documents to substantiate this allegation, we can safely conclude it is false. Why? Because a certificate of Hawaiian Birth is a court-authorized document. The burden of proof lays with those making the claims.
Let's put it this way: If I were to say you were a three-time felon, a convicted murderer and arsonist, I should be able to provide evidence in support of this claim, because documentation of this is readily available, publicly accessible. If you were to sue me for slander, and I cannot provide evidence in support of this claim, I would be found guilty of slander. The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not the person defending himself against the claim.
You made the claim that Ann Durham perjured herself in obtaining Certificates of Hawaiian Birth for both her children, and that Obama perjured himself for claiming to be born in the U.S. in order to obtain a government position (federal offense). Let's get this clear here: You are claiming that Ann Durham and Barack Obama both committed a felony.
Obama, and Ann Durham's (deceased) other relatives, have all legal rights to sue you for libel (written lie). The burden of proof would be on you, for having made the allegation. You would be subject to a tort of defamation and possible criminal charges.
So, there it is -- prove it. Prove in defense of your allegations or be deemed guilty, by public opinion, of libel.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
and it took Obama 6 months to build it up and destroy it better.
(but let's just remember its bush's fault.) LOL
DeletedUser
and it took Obama 6 months to build it up and destroy it better.
(but let's just remember its bush's fault.) LOL
How so?
DeletedUser
1) He doesn't think constitutional requirements matters or he would have provided the long form. He was raised by marxists every step of the way. He runs around the world apologizing and bowing to tyrants, no word on whether Michelle is proud yet. His chief of staff loves a good depression. There is a lotta room for concern.
2) Factcheck is owned by the same people who mentored, paid for and produced Obama as a viable candidate. They cannot be counted on as a disinterested referee.
3) If the constitution no longer matters and we now live in an Orwellian world in which factoids pose as truth and truth is impossible to verify we are close enuff to be living in Orwell's '1984' to be very very concerned.
2) Factcheck is owned by the same people who mentored, paid for and produced Obama as a viable candidate. They cannot be counted on as a disinterested referee.
3) If the constitution no longer matters and we now live in an Orwellian world in which factoids pose as truth and truth is impossible to verify we are close enuff to be living in Orwell's '1984' to be very very concerned.
DeletedUser
I also think the birthers should give it a rest ,
Requirements for the office of the President of the United States as Elmyr stated in the very first page of the thread.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-requirements-to-run-for-president-in-the-united-states.htm
Very plainly states ,
The terms of citizenship are interpreted very strictly. A President must be a natural born citizen, meaning that immigrants are not eligible to run for President, no matter how long they have lived in the United States. If a child of American citizens is born abroad, he or she is technically considered a natural born citizen, and can therefore hold Presidential office. In addition, a Presidential candidate must have actually lived in the United States for at least 14 years, presumably so that he or she is aware of general issues which impact the American populace
The original announcement of his birth was found on the microfilm of 2 different libraries in Hawaii.
All this is just a conspiracy. I mean come on , how long has this guy been a Senator and no one has bothered to check on anything about him until he is elected President?
As much as I don't agree with some of the things he is trying to accomplish , he got elected within the guidelines of law in America. The birthers need to just be quiet and come to terms with the fact that he got elected period and is our President.
Requirements for the office of the President of the United States as Elmyr stated in the very first page of the thread.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-requirements-to-run-for-president-in-the-united-states.htm
Very plainly states ,
The terms of citizenship are interpreted very strictly. A President must be a natural born citizen, meaning that immigrants are not eligible to run for President, no matter how long they have lived in the United States. If a child of American citizens is born abroad, he or she is technically considered a natural born citizen, and can therefore hold Presidential office. In addition, a Presidential candidate must have actually lived in the United States for at least 14 years, presumably so that he or she is aware of general issues which impact the American populace
The original announcement of his birth was found on the microfilm of 2 different libraries in Hawaii.
All this is just a conspiracy. I mean come on , how long has this guy been a Senator and no one has bothered to check on anything about him until he is elected President?
As much as I don't agree with some of the things he is trying to accomplish , he got elected within the guidelines of law in America. The birthers need to just be quiet and come to terms with the fact that he got elected period and is our President.
DeletedUser10480
Can we morph this thread into the 9/11 Truthers threads? You know....G.W. Bush and the C.I.A. and the eeeeevil oil companies.
Let's keep all the chicken in the same bucket. Cuts down on the grease stains....
Let's keep all the chicken in the same bucket. Cuts down on the grease stains....
DeletedUser
Obama's daddy wasn't an American citizen, even though his mother was.
DeletedUser21656
so what?.... Bush's has a French ancestor.. We human all come from Africa... hence have "black's" blood.
Come on. You think Hillary and John would let Obama off lightly if he's really from Kenya? He's still a president, and that's iron evidence.
DeletedUser
I know, I don't agree with the birthers. I was just throwing out some information.
DeletedUser
Can we just put a bullet in this poor things head already? It's suffered endless repetition of good and bad points long enough. (Close-thread)
DeletedUser
Agreed, sufficient evidence to debunk these conspiracy nuts was provided. No need to resurrect this thread once again. Closing thread.
- Status