On May 1, 7:29*pm, John Smith wrote:
http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS
..
..
Why in the name of sanity would you place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

RO

Reply at the very bottom

"Ron" wrote in message
...
On May 1, 7:29 pm, John Smith wrote:
http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS
..
..
Why in the name of sanity would you place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

========== Reply below ==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky

On May 1, 8:35*pm, "Rocky" wrote:
Reply at the very bottom

"Ron" wrote in message

...
On May 1, 7:29 pm, John Smith wrote:http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS

.
.
Why in the name of sanity would you place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? *From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. *So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

* * *========== *Reply below *==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky
..
..
But don't ignore the bottom line of the link:

"If that’s true, why was this fake put online? Once again, more
questions than answers."

The author of this baloney has branded the document a fake, but as I
stated in my first post, the author's analysis is filled with
ADMISSIONS OF HIS IGNORANCE concerning his assessment of the BC.

Conclusion: He is full of Dookie.

RO

On May 2, 11:29*am, Ron wrote:
On May 1, 7:29*pm, John Smith wrote:http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS

.
.
Why in the name of sanity would you


Sanity and Smithy divorced several years ago due to "irreconcilable
differences".


place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? *From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. *So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

Oh... Smithy will Believe anything, printed or not. The stupider the
better.

Shill #2

On 5/1/2011 6:35 PM, Rocky wrote:

...
========== Reply below ==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky



Yeah. The guy is so embarrassed for obama he is careful in his wording
.... hates to call the imbecile stupid for such a shoddy fraud ...

Regards,
JS

On 5/1/2011 7:01 PM, Ron wrote:
On May 1, 8:35 pm, wrote:
Reply at the very bottom

wrote in message

...
On May 1, 7:29 pm, John wrote:http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS

.
.
Why in the name of sanity would you place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don’t know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

========== Reply below ==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky
.
.
But don't ignore the bottom line of the link:

"If that’s true, why was this fake put online? Once again, more
questions than answers."

The author of this baloney has branded the document a fake, but as I
stated in my first post, the author's analysis is filled with
ADMISSIONS OF HIS IGNORANCE concerning his assessment of the BC.

Conclusion: He is full of Dookie.

RO


Since you offer no graphics evidence, you are just a moron making stupid
statements. What a damn fool, as if anyone is going to pay attention to
your opinion and ignore evidence and facts!

ROFLOL ... What a moron!

Regards,
JS

On 5/1/2011 10:34 PM, John Smith wrote:

Yeah. The guy is so embarrassed for obama he is careful in his wording
... hates to call the imbecile stupid for such a shoddy fraud ...

Regards,
JS

STILL waiting for you to tell us why you claim Obama "spent millions" to
cover up his past, but can only afford "a shoddy fraud".

reply at bottom

"Ron" wrote in message
...
On May 1, 8:35 pm, "Rocky" wrote:
Reply at the very bottom

"Ron" wrote in message

...
On May 1, 7:29 pm, John Smith
wrote:http://incontextreport.com/2011/04/2...ficate-was-cre...

This should cut though some of the obfuscation cr*p that some are
attempting to "disinform" with ...

Regards,
JS

.
.
Why in the name of sanity would you place trust in the "analysis" of
the Obama BC when the author repeatedly says "I don't know"? From
your cite we read:

1. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don't know why.

2. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don't know why.

3. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for
the R which looks pixelated. I don't know why.

4. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and
black lines of this document, again I don't know why.

5. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not
understand this or know the purpose of it.

But....on the other hand, so many of your previous posts make
reference to Jones' PrisonPlanet and InfoWars. So in a left handed
way, you are consistent: You'll believe ANYTHING in print.

========== Reply below ==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It's almost as if someone from inside
the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky
..
..
But don't ignore the bottom line of the link:

"If that's true, why was this fake put online? Once again, more
questions than answers."

The author of this baloney has branded the document a fake, but as I
stated in my first post, the author's analysis is filled with
ADMISSIONS OF HIS IGNORANCE concerning his assessment of the BC.

Conclusion: He is full of Dookie.

RO

========== Reply below ==========

Then what about the other people that have used Adobe Illustrator to find
the 4 layers of a BC in what should have been a simple scan?
http://www.infowars.com/new-obama-bi...-is-a-forgery/

Rocky

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/1/2011 6:35 PM, Rocky wrote:

...
========== Reply below ==========

Don't forget this was also stated in the link:
"I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are
major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside
the
White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a
fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem."

Rocky


Yeah. The guy is so embarrassed for obama he is careful in his wording
... hates to call the imbecile stupid for such a shoddy fraud ...

Regards,
JS

So 9/11 and 8/4 are two dates that the government has told a lot of lies
about.

I wonder if the people that believe that Adobe Illustrator project also
believe Clinton did not have sex with that woman Monica. :-D

Rocky

"Joe from Kokomo" wrote in message
...
On 5/1/2011 10:34 PM, John Smith wrote:

Yeah. The guy is so embarrassed for obama he is careful in his wording
... hates to call the imbecile stupid for such a shoddy fraud ...

Regards,
JS

STILL waiting for you to tell us why you claim Obama "spent millions" to
cover up his past, but can only afford "a shoddy fraud".

I don't know about "millions" but I know he spent at least one million and
he even hired the attorneys to work for him that were working against him.

Barry is cunning but he has idiots working for him that made it too easy to
find out that the BC was an Adobe Illustrator creation.