Berg back in!

bob · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:07 pm

Quote:

Bob T. Freeman wrote:

I won’t speak for Thayne Doak, but there are letters to the editor signed by her that say Obama used Ludwig’s SSN.

[...]

Taitz wrote:

signed by whom? We know that Obots twisted the story to make it sound like Obama is using Ludwig’s social. The only thing is left to do, is to trace the IP addresses of the obots in question. Don’t go there obots, you will burn and crash

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28754&cpage=1#comment-115331

ZekeB · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:10 pm

Mizz Mallyprop wrote:

signed by whom? We know that Obots twisted the story to make it sound like Obama is using Ludwig’s social. The only thing is left to do, is to trace the IP addresses of the obots in question. Don’t go there obots, you will burn and crash

mimi · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:36 pm

bob wrote:

Quote:

Bob T. Freeman wrote:

I won’t speak for Thayne Doak, but there are letters to the editor signed by her that say Obama used Ludwig’s SSN.

[...]

Taitz wrote:

signed by whom? We know that Obots twisted the story to make it sound like Obama is using Ludwig’s social. The only thing is left to do, is to trace the IP addresses of the obots in question. Don’t go there obots, you will burn and crash

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28754&cpage=1#comment-115331

Is she high again? She's been saying that forever.

Quote:

Please, check upcoming meetings with the Supreme court justices and other high ranking officials. We have to confront them in public and demand an answer re Obama’s use of a forged BC and a stolen CT SSN ID.

Posted on | May 17, 2011 | 2 Comments

and a gazillion other times.

bob · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:50 pm

mimi wrote:

Is she high again? She's been saying that forever.

Berg's original article, in addition to saying Obama's SSN is valid, says that Obama has never used Ludwig's SSN.

Although Taitz is not mentioned by name, Taitz assumed Berg was accusing her of authoring the Ludwig claim.

I don't think Taitz has expressly said that Obama used Ludwig's SSN.

Instead, Taitz has published a letter from one her minions who did say that Obama used Ludwig's SSN. And now Taitz is claiming some obot wrote that letter.

raicha · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:00 pm

If she didn't believe Doak said it, why did she publish it as if were really Doak's letter? The title that she added to the post xxxhttp://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21306 is

Quote:

A LETTER FROM MR. DOAK, GREELY CO TO LOS ANGELES TIMES

lyssandri · **Posted:** Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:52 am

bob wrote:

Berg!: Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent Social Security Number. “xxx-xx-4425” is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number.

Quote:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama on August 21, 2008 challenging Obama’s lack of “Constitutionally Eligibility” to serve as President of the United States stated that Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not using a fraudulent or stolen Social Security Number. Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was legally assigned Social Security Number xxx-xx-4425.

At least he understands the concept of redacting SSNs before posting them. That's a step up on Orly....

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:16 am

raicha wrote:

If she didn't believe Doak said it, why did she publish it as if were really Doak's letter? The title that she added to the post xxxhttp://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21306 is

Quote:

A LETTER FROM MR. DOAK, GREELY CO TO LOS ANGELES TIMES

Ahem...

It's like when Ed Hale put up a disclaimer that said he knew he was posting crap and he didn't care. It's all about keeping the idjiots riled up by throwing red meat at them every day.

raicha · **Posted:** Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:56 am

GreatGrey wrote:

raicha wrote:

If she didn't believe Doak said it, why did she publish it as if were really Doak's letter? The title that she added to the post xxxhttp://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21306 is

Quote:

A LETTER FROM MR. DOAK, GREELY CO TO LOS ANGELES TIMES

Ahem...

It's like when Ed Hale put up a disclaimer that said he knew he was posting crap and he didn't care. It's all about keeping the idjiots riled up by throwing red meat at them every day.

If she didn't believe Doak said it, the headline should have been "A LETTER ALLEGEDLY FROM MR. DOAK, WRITTEN BY TREASONOUS OBOTS TO MAKE ME LOOK BAD".

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23526

The birfer wars heat up... :lol:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28872 :evil:

from Licensed investigator Susan Daniels: “Berg is a liar”

Posted on | December 11, 2011 | No Comments

Quote:

Berg is a liar
Inboxx
Susandanielspi susandanielspi@aol.com
7:00 AM (9 minutes ago)
to philjberg
Mr. Berg:
I read part of your article regarding Obama’s CT SSN. You out-right lied in it:
According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

I am the private investigator who discovered he was using a fraudulent number. I looked up a number of those you had listed in your article and found that ALL were issued between 1935 and 1951. Yet, you blatantly lied. You need to get your facts straight.
Susan Daniels
Susan Daniels & Associates

I love it. Daniels telling anyone they need to get their facts straight.

Fun times. :lol:

kimba · **Joined:** Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:24 pm **Posts:** 6626

Quote:

the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

Ms Daniels has discovered and admits thousands of "CT SSN's" were issued to Hawaii residents in the same period as Pres. Obama's was issued? Can she or Orly or anybody then still legitimately claim there is something unusual or nefarious about Pres Obama having a "CT SSN"?

This is fucking golden! Somebody get a screen shot of that before one of them wakes up and takes it down.

BFB · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:06 pm

kimba wrote:

Quote:

the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

Ms Daniels has discovered and admits thousands of "CT SSN's" were issued to Hawaii residents in the same period as Pres. Obama's was issued? Can she or Orly or anybody then still legitimately claim there is something unusual or nefarious about Pres Obama having a "CT SSN"?

This is fucking golden! Somebody get a screen shot of that before one of them wakes up and takes it down.

Not certain, but I think she was quoting Berg there.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23526

Quote:

Not certain, but I think she was quoting Berg there.

I agree. That's how I read it also. Too.

kimba · **Joined:** Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:24 pm **Posts:** 6626

+ the "oh drats" smiley!

nbc · **Joined:** Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am **Posts:** 2529

BFB wrote:

Ms Daniels has discovered and admits thousands of "CT SSN's" were issued to Hawaii residents in the same period as Pres. Obama's was issued? Can she or Orly or anybody then still legitimately claim there is something unusual or nefarious about Pres Obama having a "CT SSN"?

She is arguing against Berg's assertion and while there are plenty of SSN's from Hawaii with CT 'numbers' they appear to be early ones (no surprise here as the people have passed away). Berg was asserting that contemporaneous with Obama getting his SSN, others in HI were granted CT SSN's as well.

Now Daniels has her own troubles but she has a valid point here.

jtmunkus · **Joined:** Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm **Posts:** 3491

nbc wrote:

BFB wrote:

Ms Daniels has discovered and admits thousands of "CT SSN's" were issued to Hawaii residents in the same period as Pres. Obama's was issued? Can she or Orly or anybody then still legitimately claim there is something unusual or nefarious about Pres Obama having a "CT SSN"?

She is arguing against Berg's assertion and while there are plenty of SSN's from Hawaii with CT 'numbers' they appear to be early ones (no surprise here as the people have passed away). Berg was asserting that contemporaneous with Obama getting his SSN, others in HI were granted CT SSN's as well.

Now Daniels has her own troubles but she has a valid point here.

Yes, but Daniels also agrees that she looked up several of the 042- numbers, and they were issued to Hawai'ians in the '50's. Makes an outsider think that there could be a likelihood that maybe 042- was the prefix SSA used for Hawai'i for quite some time spanning at least from the early '50's (possibly even mid-'30's) to the mid-'70's.

Mystery solved, courtesy of idiots Phil Berg, Esq. and Susan Daniels.

If only, like the birthers, we had our own unethical private investigator, we could illegally investigate others' SSNs and see for ourselves.

MsDaisy · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:37 pm

So I haz a confuzal in regard to getting facts straight, if Hawaii didn’t become a state until 1959 why would it be issuing Hawaiian residents SSN’s between 1935 and 1951? :-k

jtmunkus · **Joined:** Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm **Posts:** 3491

MsDaisy wrote:

So I haz a confuzal in regard to getting facts straight, if Hawaii didn’t become a state until 1959 why would it be issuing Hawaiian residents SSN’s between 1935 and 1951? :-k

As a US Territory.

Maybe since Hawai'i wasn't even a state, SSA overlapped a state's prefix (since they really never mattered anyway) for Hawai'ians.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23526

Neither Hawaii nor Connecticut were issuing SSNs. The SSA was.

kimba · **Joined:** Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:24 pm **Posts:** 6626

realist wrote:

Neither Hawaii nor Connecticut were issuing SSNs. The SSA was.

Even we forget! :lol:

Hawaii became a territory in 1900. The Social Security Act passed in 1935 and the first social security numbers were issued starting in Nov 1936. The SSA has a website of its history with all kinds of nooks and crannies worth exploring on a snowy day, including the Supreme Court decisions that found SS constitutional. Originally, the first 3 digits were assigned geographically, but they aren't any longer and the SSA even states it's not a problem if your number doesn't match where you lived when your number was issued.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/

esseff44 · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:42 pm

MsDaisy wrote:

So I haz a confuzal in regard to getting facts straight, if Hawaii didn’t become a state until 1959 why would it be issuing Hawaiian residents SSN’s between 1935 and 1951? :-k

I am pretty sure there were a large number of American citizens in Hawaii in those years before statehood who would apply for SS#'s just as other citizens overseas would apply for SS# for their children. It is unclear what the process for assigning those numbers would be.

gimmeabreak · **Joined:** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:36 pm **Posts:** 399

One of the idiots over at Citizen Wells' blog may or may not have happened upon a mistake that Berg made:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/ ... ent-219863

Quote:

Jonah | December 11, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
Omigosh!

I just realized what Berg did to get all those Hawaii residents with SS cards issued from Connecticut.
He’s gonna kick himself when he realizes this.

Go to the Rootsweb website…..
http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi

Do not enter a name.
Now enter HI (for Hawaii) in the “State” box and
Connecticut in the “Issued” By box.
Click on “Submit”

snip

Quote:

Voila! You come up with the eFolks, they all were issued from Connecticut because he evidently had typed Connecticut in the box. Perhaps it was leftover from his previous search of Jean Ludwig. He may have only changed the name and neglected to remove Connecticut when he submitted a new search. An easy mistake to make. I’ve done it myself quite a few times in my years of genealogy searches. Who’s going to tell him?xact same names as Berg’s list. I made a screenshot but can’t post it for you. Maybe I’ll email it to cw.

Now, I haven't tried this myself, but it would be lovely if we have another case of one idiot birfer debunking another...

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23526

Well, let's not be too hard on Berg.

"Obama is not using a fraudulent SS#" is the first thing in birfistan Phil has been right about... albeit apparently for the wrong reason. :lol:

Reality Check · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:23 pm

Berg is wrong when he states:

Quote:

According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.

There are 500 records in the death index for "last residence" Hawaii and issued by "Connecticut". (Even Ancestry.com screws this up. SSN's are not issued by states). However if you enter "last residence" Hawaii and "issued by" California for example you get 13,262 hits. For NY the number of records is 4,435. The only thing Berg proved is that 500 people who applied for a SSN with a Connecticut zip (or was read that way by the data processor) died while living in Hawaii. This continues the long history of shoddy Birther research.

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:28 pm

Taitz wrote:

signed by whom? We know that Obots twisted the story to make it sound like Obama is using Ludwig’s social. The only thing is left to do, is to trace the IP addresses of the obots in question. Don’t go there obots, you will burn and crash

Wait what? So it's our fault that birthers have been making the claim that Obama stole Ludwig's social? I've heard this shit over and over out of birthers saying Obama stole a dead man's social and then when asked to name the dead man Ludwig's name is said. Taitz lies as usual she spread this rumor.

esseff44 · **Posted:** Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:58 pm

Bob Ross wrote:

Taitz wrote:

signed by whom? We know that Obots twisted the story to make it sound like Obama is using Ludwig’s social. The only thing is left to do, is to trace the IP addresses of the obots in question. Don’t go there obots, you will burn and crash

Wait what? So it's our fault that birthers have been making the claim that Obama stole Ludwig's social? I've heard this shit over and over out of birthers saying Obama stole a dead man's social and then when asked to name the dead man Ludwig's name is said. Taitz lies as usual she spread this rumor.

#

I think she gives it a possible explanation for his 'Connecticut' fraudulently obtained SS# along with the dead babies and the hundreds of SS#'s that Bill Ayers wrote about in his memoirs of his Weatherman days. That is what is so strange. She does not stick to one baseless speculation, but incorporates a variety.
For most people, that would indicate she has not one smidgen of evidence to back up any of the claims. She simply excludes any speculation that it was an error on the part of the SSA or that they had other legitimate reasons for issuing him that number with that prefix. Nor does she include the fact that she and other published his SS# across the internet making it impossible for him to use it any longer. This is evident in all her pleadings and exhibits as she continues to broadcast that number at every opportunity. No, for O'rly, the ONLY possibility is FRAUD.

Hey, Birthers, let's have your SS# and birth date and put it out there for everyone on the web to see. What do you think would happen,eh?

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Berg back in!

Who is online