• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to speak on birth certificate

I post that Panetta said so. You do know he is Obama's head of the CIA? What more can I say. You will never give Bush credit and you will be happy to hear Obama take credit for what the military did.
Greg Sargent has obtained a letter sent from CIA Director Leon Panetta to Sen. John McCain, reiterating that the path to bin Laden did not begin with the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Here are the operative three paragraphs from the letter, which represents a response from Panetta to McCain’s earler request for information about torture and Bin Laden’s death:

Nearly 10 years of intensive intelligence work led the CIA to conclude that Bin Ladin was likely hiding at the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. there was no one “essential and indispensible” key piece of information that led us to this conclusion. Rather, the intelligence picture was developed via painstaking collection and analysis. Multiple streams of intelligence — including from detainees, but also from multiple other sources — led CIA analysts to conclude that Bin Ladin was at this compound.
Some of the detainees who provided useful information about the facilitator/courier’s role had been subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. Whether those techniques were the “only timely and effective way” to obtain such information is a matter of debate and cannot be established definitively
. What is definitive is that that information was only a part of multiple streams of intelligence that led us to Bin Ladin.

Let me further point out that we first learned about the facilitator/courier’s nom de guerre from a detainee not in CIA custody in 2002. It is also important to note that some detainees who were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques attempted to provide false or misleading information about the facilitator/courier.
These attempts to falsify the facilitator/courier’s role were alerting.

In the end, no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.

Emphasis mine. Panetta’s account contradicts Mukasey’s claim that the trail to Bin Laden “began” with disclosures from Khalid Sheikh Muhammed that were achieved through the “pressure" of torture.

Panetta’s account also represents public, on-the-record confirmation from the CIA of — and adds new detail to — a careful and thorough investigation by Scott Shane and Charlie Savage of the New York Times, which was based on anonymous sources and concluded that torture “played a small role at most in identifying Bin Laden’s trusted courier and exposing his hide-out.” Shane and Savage also quoted unnamed sources claiming torture resulted in bad information — also confirmed in Panetta’s letter.
.........................

Information was obtained from detainees. Some of them were tortured. Does not mean the information was obtained by torture. Bush's policies wasted a lot of time andt Bin laden was thankful for that.
 
Last edited:
.........................

Information was obtained from detainees. Some of them were tortured. Does not mean the information was obtained by torture. Bush's policies wasted a lot of time andt Bin laden was thankful for that.



I so believe the Times. Nice try but Panetta said it on NBC. Where has Panetta publicly said that was a misstatement?
 

ROTFLOL... was fun while it lasted, the "is Trump going to run?" thing. To think a private citizen got Obama to finally prove he is a citizen...ROTFLOL. He might have won the nomination, but at a minimum would have beaten Obama like a drum during debates and his campaign.

Would love to see Obama and Trump debate though. A theorist of the failed school of goop vs. a guy in the trenches of Capitalism. Wonder who'd win? Not.

.
 
Last edited:
ROTFLOL... was fun while it lasted, the "is Trump going to run?" thing. To think a private citizen got Obama to finally prove he is a citizen...ROTFLOL. He might have won the nomination, but at a minimum would have beaten Obama like a drum during debates and his campaign.

Would love to see Obama and Trump debate though. A theorist of the failed school of goop vs. a guy in the trenches of Capitalism. Wonder who'd win? Not.

.

Keep trying to beat that drum....the reality is the Trump was made to look like a fool and went from a front runner to a complete and utter joke in a week's time. Probably a record that will remain for quite some time...don't even think Newt is going to beat that record...but he's trying awfully hard.
 
Keep trying to beat that drum....the reality is the Trump was made to look like a fool and went from a front runner to a complete and utter joke in a week's time. Probably a record that will remain for quite some time...don't even think Newt is going to beat that record...but he's trying awfully hard.

Not so much... he "forced" Obama's hand into releasing this pathetically fraudulent birth certificate.

It's too bad that people just take the word of Fox, CNN and friends that "experts agree it's legit"... well, those people didn't try to hard, as an amateur I was able to spot problems, and still MORE experts (on top of the dozens that came out days after this release) are coming out and pointing out the various ways that PROVE that this document was created from MULTIPLE legitimate birth certificates.

Without speculating who, how, why or when... it's simple and verifiable fact that the document presented was AT THE LEAST NOT a valid birth certificate and at worst is a deliberate case for fraud against the american people.
 
Not so much... he "forced" Obama's hand into releasing this pathetically fraudulent birth certificate.

It's too bad that people just take the word of Fox, CNN and friends that "experts agree it's legit"... well, those people didn't try to hard, as an amateur I was able to spot problems, and still MORE experts (on top of the dozens that came out days after this release) are coming out and pointing out the various ways that PROVE that this document was created from MULTIPLE legitimate birth certificates.

Without speculating who, how, why or when... it's simple and verifiable fact that the document presented was AT THE LEAST NOT a valid birth certificate and at worst is a deliberate case for fraud against the american people.

And that just goes to show no matter what document the President presents as per the Constitution (Art 4, Sect 1) or Hawaii state law that supports his U.S. and, thus, his natural-born citizenship status per said Constitution (Art 2, Sect 1, clause 4), some people will always find reason not to believe the truth.

The birther conspiracy lives on...(so stupid :doh: )
 
And that just goes to show no matter what document the President presents as per the Constitution (Art 4, Sect 1) or Hawaii state law that supports his U.S. and, thus, his natural-born citizenship status per said Constitution (Art 2, Sect 1, clause 4), some people will always find reason not to believe the truth.

The birther conspiracy lives on...(so stupid :doh: )

No, I said nothing about his birthplace, just that what was passed off as his new BC has about 50 reasons why it's faked / manipulated / forged / not created through the process that was described.

Do you actually want to address the issues wrong with this document? Or is this going to be another exercise in futility attempting to get you to look at the document and the sections that PROVE that this document CANNOT be simply the result of a scan of a document and OCR software???
 
If someone dug up a placenta in Hawaii, did DNA testing, and proved that the chances that it was not the very placenta that was cut from baby Barack back in '64 was a trillion to one, then would the absurd "birther" nonsense die?

No, I suppose not, There still would be that one chance in a trillion.
 
It is comical how far offsides the left continues to be drawn by this stuff. LOL

It's even funnier that the left actually thought conservatives would support a nutcase and closet lefty like Donald Trump.
 
If someone dug up a placenta in Hawaii, did DNA testing, and proved that the chances that it was not the very placenta that was cut from baby Barack back in '64 was a trillion to one, then would the absurd "birther" nonsense die?

No, I suppose not, There still would be that one chance in a trillion.

Ok, let's agree for the sake of argument that Obama WAS born in Hawaii.

The most recently released document is a fake document that's been confirmed by numerous graphics experts, even debunking the debunkers claiming that 'layering' is normal with scanned documents.

So, this is not an issue of where Obama was born any longer, but rather an issue of fraud against the American people.
 
Ok, let's agree for the sake of argument that Obama WAS born in Hawaii.

The most recently released document is a fake document that's been confirmed by numerous graphics experts, even debunking the debunkers claiming that 'layering' is normal with scanned documents.

So, this is not an issue of where Obama was born any longer, but rather an issue of fraud against the American people.

To what end?? Seriously. I never in my entire life thought there was a snowball's chance in hell a black man would get elected to the highest office in the land. Or was that all fraud too, in your world. He wasn't actually elected, either. Right?

Don't you THINK that if all this were true, the GOP would be getting him impeached?
 
To what end??

If I had to speculate; a distraction.

Seriously. I never in my entire life thought there was a snowball's chance in hell a black man would get elected to the highest office in the land. Or was that all fraud too, in your world. He wasn't actually elected, either. Right?

LOL, no, unlike Bush, Obama had a cult of personality thing going on and he managed to get a landslide victory.

SO MANY PEOPLE even decided to give Obama a chance merely on the basis that they were fed up with the Republicans and Bush and joined in Obama's "hope / change" platform.

The major banks supported Obama 4:1 over McCain... that was announced about 1-2 months prior to the election and that was actually the point where I predicted Obama to win (not that it was all that hard with the way he was portrayed, almost as though he was the second coming).


Don't you THINK that if all this were true, the GOP would be getting him impeached?

First off, it IS true... If you'd like to get into the details we can so you can see for yourself what's going on, and how easy it is to determine how the new BC is a fabricated document.

Second, I don't get WHY the GOP would want to fight on this issue?? The whole group (with very few exceptions) are a bunch of chicken-hawk people pleasers.They are in bed with the same "special interests" that the democrats are in bed with, and it's those special interests that have a greater influence over political moves then anything the people say or do. The democrats on the same token are a bunch of hippie impersonating limousine liberals that WANT to use things like racial issues to accomplish their own agenda's.

I don't see ANYONE in politics that has any REAL backbone, especially the type of marbles that would be needed to start that kind of battle... especially now that people have been so thoroughly programmed that asking questions and using critical analysis is "kooky" or "crazy" or "fringe" (there are documents that go the step further and say that if you can form a political thought that you are probably a TERRORIST, but that's another thread).

I'll repeat again though, this is without discussing HOW, WHY or WHEN this document has been manipulated, I'm really just getting the point across that it HAS been manipulated, and I'm willing to debate the issue with anyone, because it's so easy to spot (especially having read experts opinions pointing out the 'questionable' areas, and why they are questionable...)
 
If I had to speculate; a distraction.



LOL, no, unlike Bush, Obama had a cult of personality thing going on and he managed to get a landslide victory.

SO MANY PEOPLE even decided to give Obama a chance merely on the basis that they were fed up with the Republicans and Bush and joined in Obama's "hope / change" platform.

The major banks supported Obama 4:1 over McCain... that was announced about 1-2 months prior to the election and that was actually the point where I predicted Obama to win (not that it was all that hard with the way he was portrayed, almost as though he was the second coming).




First off, it IS true... If you'd like to get into the details we can so you can see for yourself what's going on, and how easy it is to determine how the new BC is a fabricated document.

Second, I don't get WHY the GOP would want to fight on this issue?? The whole group (with very few exceptions) are a bunch of chicken-hawk people pleasers.They are in bed with the same "special interests" that the democrats are in bed with, and it's those special interests that have a greater influence over political moves then anything the people say or do. The democrats on the same token are a bunch of hippie impersonating limousine liberals that WANT to use things like racial issues to accomplish their own agenda's.

I don't see ANYONE in politics that has any REAL backbone, especially the type of marbles that would be needed to start that kind of battle... especially now that people have been so thoroughly programmed that asking questions and using critical analysis is "kooky" or "crazy" or "fringe" (there are documents that go the step further and say that if you can form a political thought that you are probably a TERRORIST, but that's another thread).

I'll repeat again though, this is without discussing HOW, WHY or WHEN this document has been manipulated, I'm really just getting the point across that it HAS been manipulated, and I'm willing to debate the issue with anyone, because it's so easy to spot (especially having read experts opinions pointing out the 'questionable' areas, and why they are questionable...)

You don't know how, when, or why it was manipulated, but you know it has to have been as it counters your unsupported opinion.

Now I understand where you're coming from.
 
You don't know how, when, or why it was manipulated, but you know it has to have been as it counters your unsupported opinion.

Now I understand where you're coming from.

No, because I can only speculate on those... but the fact that Obama now has settled on his actual birth certificate... to go into what is wrong :
- "kerning" appears in areas of the document (NOT possible with a 1963 typewriter), this is the effect where each letter takes up it's own space... on Obama's BC there's the computer effect of having letters encroaching on the space of other letters in key areas.
- numbers that haven't been "upgraded through OCR" have a 'digital zoom' effect (chromatic aberrations... the effect created from digitally zooming)
- OCR does not modify signatures in anyway, yet the OCR software somehow managed to "enhance" Obama's mothers signature.
- The date stamp (except in the signature area) is actually a linked graphic object (IE : scanned in, although the final 1 in those dates seems 'original', according to anyone that's seriously looked at the thing)

So, you tell me : Was this modified legitimately (ie : to prevent fraud against Obama)? Or was this fraudulently (Obama perpetrating fraud against the people)?

That's debatable, but what is not debatable is that this document that was presented is NOT original as it was created in 1963.

If you really want we can get into all the minute details... but I'm not going to waste my time sourcing it again if it just gets dismissed out of hand.

I had no idea of the jargon, and am not an expert, but this is what experts have been pointing out.
 
Last edited:
No, because I can only speculate on those... but the fact that Obama now has settled on his actual birth certificate... to go into what is wrong :
- "kerning" appears in areas of the document (NOT possible with a 1963 typewriter), this is the effect where each letter takes up it's own space... on Obama's BC there's the computer effect of having letters encroaching on the space of other letters in key areas.
- numbers that haven't been "upgraded through OCR" have a 'digital zoom' effect (chromatic aberrations... the effect created from digitally zooming)
- OCR does not modify signatures in anyway, yet the OCR software somehow managed to "enhance" Obama's mothers signature.
- The date stamp (except in the signature area) is actually a linked graphic object (IE : scanned in, although the final 1 in those dates seems 'original', according to anyone that's seriously looked at the thing)

So, you tell me : Was this modified legitimately (ie : to prevent fraud against Obama)? Or was this fraudulently (Obama perpetrating fraud against the people)?

That's debatable, but what is not debatable is that this document that was presented is NOT original as it was created in 1963.

If you really want we can get into all the minute details... but I'm not going to waste my time sourcing it again if it just gets dismissed out of hand.

I had no idea of the jargon, and am not an expert, but this is what experts have been pointing out.

Hmm.. do you suppose they keep those old documents in their original form, or are they scanned and kept electronically? I don't know the answer to that, but it would explain the "discrepancies" that the "experts' have found.

Rather than fake a long form BC, why wouldn't Obama continue to allow the birthers to make themselves look silly by claiming that he was born in Kenya? That makes no sense at all.
 
Hmm.. do you suppose they keep those old documents in their original form, or are they scanned and kept electronically? I don't know the answer to that, but it would explain the "discrepancies" that the "experts' have found.

Rather than fake a long form BC, why wouldn't Obama continue to allow the birthers to make themselves look silly by claiming that he was born in Kenya? That makes no sense at all.

Well, to my knowledge, the original is converted to a microfilm, which was then printed as usual, scanned in and the PDF file was presented allegedly "as is" but run through OCR software.

There are MANY different points on the document which are anomalous to this sequence of events...

All that I'm saying is that this document is a manipulation of that original... if you seriously want to dispute that I'll go over all the different points and explanation, but it might as well be called a fact.

The REASONS for that could be anything... at the most innocent as a way to guarantee that this file could not be used so that others will try to steal his identity (foolish as that prospect would be on it's own), to a simple distraction from political troubles, OR at it's worst an attempt to politically discredit the GOP (with Trump the closet liberal claiming to run as a republican only to "force Obama" to release that document)

Even to say that this is a result of 'layering' is somewhat of a joke because scanners work in such a way that it's a 'what you see is what you get', and character recognition software is not THAT sophisticated yet, in the sense that it works, but has limitations.

The best part is that the document is still there untouched on the whitehouse website, so when you doubt me, then you can look for yourself.
 
*applause* way to dodge the issue...

As I said, if you'd like to go over the actual document, we can... if not we can continue to make jokes of this blatant fraud(which MAY have been performed with a legitimate intention, that being the secondary debate)

Wow.

You have 0 credibility on this issue, all you have posted is hack youtube vidoes and blatantly bias sources that are by no means experts.

You yourself are not a forged document expert and that's been established multiple times by multiple people.

Everything to you is a conspiracy, you're a truther, birther and deather all at the same time, and that's far too much conspiracy for one person to handle effectively without giving away that they simply just love conspiracy theories and enjoy propogating them.
 
What's going on here? Who let Mcfly out of CT section?


Nothing to see here, folks... move along.



Let's note about the thread, though: "666 Likes". The rapture begins.
 
Last edited:
Wow.

You have 0 credibility on this issue, all you have posted is hack youtube vidoes and blatantly bias sources that are by no means experts.

No... what I did at first was I sourced the documents, the first dozen people (1-2 actual graphics people) that were pointing out a few things that were wrong... THEN I posted screenshot segments of this document and asking for a LEGITIMATE explanation for these effects... but then MORE AND MORE digital artifacts PROVING that what Obama presented COULD NOT have been created in 1960 started getting pointed out, several MSM articles have now been written by real experts in the area...

The most recent of these was pointing out that much of the text used "kerning" which is NOT POSSIBLE for a typewriter to do...

Now, as I said, I can detail this issue... which has NEVER been addressed in any legitimate way...

"Oh that's this" or "oh that's that" have been offered as justification, but no, that's simply not the case...

And I don't NEED any credibility... had the debunkers actually OPENED the friggin document to see for themselves then they would be asking Obama "wtf man, we can't defend this crap."

You yourself are not a forged document expert and that's been established multiple times by multiple people.

Yes and even the graphics experts are not experts... anything to avoid looking at the document. So, the stronger you attempt the ad hom argument the MORE you bring my focus to the document itself... but I'm not interested in discussion with someone that won't look at facts yet has all the answers.

Everything to you is a conspiracy, you're a truther, birther and deather all at the same time, and that's far too much conspiracy for one person to handle effectively without giving away that they simply just love conspiracy theories and enjoy propogating them.

Not quite...
- 9-11 truth : when the official version is a story that involves necessary violations of laws of physics to make sense... how can you so easily buy into that story?? Oh wait, you never read the documents did you??
- birther issue : This new BC document MADE me a "birther"... prior to that I had a few questions like "why would Obama WANT to allow this to remain an issue?", but I never jumped on the "he's born in Kenya"... I don't know, I wasn't there... but now Obama IS married to this document which is a manifest fake. (AND IT DOES NOT TAKE expertise to point out the majority of this... the "kerning" was brought up by a graphics expert and I'm just repeating it)

- Deather : Osama's been reported dead since 2002 MULTIPLE times from MULTIPLE sources... he was also reportedly a very sick man even back in 2001 where he allegedly had full renal failure, something which I'm led to believe will give someone a 5 year life expectancy as a best case... but most importantly I'm just asking the question "How can you dismiss all the previous deaths of bin laden and accept this ever changing tale of OBL's death instead??" WHAT EVIDENCE was INDEPENDENTLY reviewed?? Oh wait, NOBODY outside a US government official ACTUALLY verified this as OBL??

So, sir, no offense there, but you are calling facts, documents and questions "theories" JUST to be able to maintain your position, and your position DEPENDS on the fallacious arguments involving attacking the PEOPLE as opposed to the facts... classic ad hom argument. When the reality is that if your position was so strong you could actually look at the documents for yourself and come to your own conclusion.

Finally, I'm not talking about any "conspiracy" involving the how, when or where this document was modified... and since many buy into this forgery we can then assume that this was most likely a case of fraud against the american people, but I'm not even saying that is CONCLUSIVE... what IS conclusive is that whatever they pulled from the hawaiian records and posted on the white house website is a document that HAS undergone some modification in between. (with the subtext that Obama IS born in Hawaii, btw)

This can be shown WITHOUT the types of expert document analysis that would be required of a QUALITY forgery... this is literally someone that was too lazy to cover their tracks, and / or so filled with disdain for the american people that whoever was involved probably believed the american people to be SO STUPID that they could be sold a lie with ease.
 
What's going on here? Who let Mcfly out of CT section?


Nothing to see here, folks... move along.



Let's note about the thread, though: "666 Likes". The rapture begins.

To you too.... I'm not talking about any "conspiracies" I'm trying to find someone who can DEFEND THE DOCUMENT!!!!

I don't care how it got that way, who did it, when it was done.... I don't care about that, if someone can actually defend this DOCUMENT that would shut me up on this one...

BUT if any of you actually LOOK CLOSELY at the document and turn on the part of your brain involved in analysis, then you can prove to me how I'm wrong (along with multiple experts, with more coming out weekly), until then I'm just making the blanket claim that it's a fraud that nobody can defend, and leaving the open challenge if someone would like to step up, shut me up and show me otherwise.
 
Oh cool! I just discovered that if a birther types long enough, I literally get nauseated.
 
Oh cool! I just discovered that if a birther types long enough, I literally get nauseated.

Aww someone else that attacks from a position of ignorance... how long did you spend looking at his birth certificate and forming your own opinion on the matter?
 
Back
Top Bottom