Posted on 05/19/2011 6:28:25 PM PDT by Red Steel
Re: Legal proof that President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I have irrefutably proven that the Certificate of Live Birth that President Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011 is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple violations under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense. When this comes to the public’s attention, it will be the greatest scandal in the country’s history—nothing comes even close. This will surpass the all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration.
My Credentials
I have a unique background for analyzing this document. I owned a typesetting company for 11 years so I know type and form design very well. I currently own Archive Index Systems since 1993, which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imaging software (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser. Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging systems and everything about the design of such programs. This will be important in understanding what has happened with Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth.
What President Obama Presented to the Public is an alleged Certificate of Live Birth.
What President Obama presented is not the hospital birth certificate. The birth certificate would have the imprint of the baby’s footprint, weight, length and other information such as the religion. The Birth Certificate would be the source of the same information that would be typed onto the Certificate of Live Birth (the Long Form). What President Obama released is supposedly the Long Form that the County gets from the hospital, which is typed on a blank form given to the hospitals by the county. That copy is then mailed to the county Board of Health and kept as a legal government document. On Obama’s form (Figure 1) the County Clerk supposedly hand stamped the form on the upper right hand corner with a bates stamp. The number is a sequential number that reflects the sequence of Certificates that come into the County Health Department. The reason I know it was stamped by hand is because the number is crooked. The County Clerk also hand stamps the date of acceptance (box 20 and box 22). Obama’s Long Form was supposedly received on August 8, 1961, four days after his birth.
Continued in SCRIBD document below...
News Release: Legal proof that President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.
Hawaii seems to have the most pitiful security features ever. At least now. They used to have features similar to other states. But they seem to have gone the opposite direction in recent years.
He has presented his arguments elegantly and coherently, with video and photo proof.
Show us proof of your statements or STFU
If he was factually correct on every one of his points, and I am "full of shit," as you eloquently and professionally claim, then you will EASILY be able to factually and convincingly refute every single one of my follow up posts regarding many of his points.
In some of those points, I have indisputably proven that he is factually INCORRECT, and (therefore) so are you.
In others, I have merely demonstrated that his point is less than convincing, and therefore, his "proof" is NOT proof, but a dubious theory.
1) See post #144 for indisputable visual proof that the text on the typed certificate curves downward at left, and is not straight as the author erroneously claims.
Swordmaker attempts to dispute this fact in post 168, and while he makes a couple of excellent observations, he fails to disprove the claim, and my reply, which deals with his objections and further strengthens the claim, is in post # 174. See also 186.
2) For a disproof of the "the fact that it has layers means it's a fraud" theory, see post # 147.
3) For a REFERENCE to the failure of the "to the pixel duplication of characters means that it was edited by a human" theory, see post # 153. William Tell posts a follow-up in 163.
In fact, the evidence supplied by William Tell & Gleon (we now have earlier-posted, known-scanned documents such as "Alice in Wonderland" at Google Books that show the exact same effects in character duplication AND different pixel sizes in the same document) now shows that we have good evidence of the exact opposite: that these effects imply the result of a machine process.
I have not, to this point, typed up the proof of that, but anyone can investigate for themselves and see that it's so.
4) For a disproof of the "kerning" hypothesis popularized by Karl Denninger, see post # 161. For further discussion of the point, see 173 and 184.
5) A disproof of the "certificate number means the document is a fraud" theory begins in post # 165. See also 166, 167, 182, and 190, where I produce visual proof of the point. Unfortunately, I made a couple of mistakes along the way, erroneously reporting Waidelich's birth date as August 6, and the document-filed date as August 6. We now know from the visual and publicly-reported evidence that he was born on the 5th, and the certificate was filed by the Registrar on Tuesday the 8th. I was basically corrected by TheCipher in post 204, and have taken my beating for that in post 254.
As for whether or not the certificate is forgery, I cannot at this point tell you. I am 100% willing to believe that it's a forgery, if anybody can provide proof of the fact. I can also tell you a bit about how a forgery would have been done.
It would have to have been done with the collusion of the Hawaii Department of Health.
It would have to have been done at least at the resolution of the high-resolution document, not at the resolution of the PDF.
The layers in the PDF have nothing to do with any such forgery; it would have to have been done before the layers ever entered into the equation.
It would have to have been done in such a way as to accurately simulate the subtle curving of the text at the left of the page. This is not easy, and would have to have been the work of someone who was careful to the level of being a professional.
It would have to have been done in such a way as to keep the typewritten letters authentic to those on other certificates of the era.
Now, having pinged everybody to where I've basically proven the points I've made, I will heed the advice of my wife that I need to do other things with my time (I am trying to stay off of here for the next day or two), and will let you guys further discuss things as much as you like.
ping to 262.
One thing I think you should look for is whether the people who suggest that the various anomalies are all so common and ordinary in the scanning process, come up with, or can come up with, similar examples of documents posted to the internet prior to April of this year.
ML/NJ
I have done that too. I can only advise you to double check and triple check everything you post. As for your broader point, it is basically correct. The high res PDF (Herbster has it in the middle of his image above) is the origin of the forgery, not layers in the PDF. Those were done later.
As a final comment before I head out here, let me add that I don’t like Obama any more than the rest of you do. But when the supposed “proofs” of forgery that are produced fail to convince even a FRIENDLY skeptic such as myself, we have a problem.
If any proof of forgery were to be actionable against Mr. Obama, it has to be solid. Yes, you can use fake “proof” to influence the gullible, but I personally am not comfortable with a political agenda purposefully built on deception. I believe that we as conservatives have the truth on our side, so what we should do is USE the truth and become known for the fact that whereas the liberals push propaganda, we conservatives push the honest truth.
I know there are others who will disagree, but that’s how I feel about it.
I wish everybody a good day and a great weekend.
Don't you see that in both cases in my little example, that where an 'a' follows a 't' that it is closer to the 't' than would be expected? Kerning is nothing more than determining the position of a letter based upon the letter it follows. That's what seems to be happening here, but I assure it is not.
ML/NJ
oops, forgot to include you in ping to 262. I also incorrectly referred to you as “Gleon” and not “Kleon.”
There is a notarized affidavit.
ML/NJ
You’re doing excellent work here, but there’s just one thing I want to add to your points. People keep referring to the “layers” in the document. But from what I’ve seen in the videos, and what I got when I opened the PDF in Illustrator myself, there aren’t layers; there is one layer with multiple “groups.” Now, from what I read, it’s possible to import a layered Photoshop document into Illustrator and turn the layers into groups on a single layer, but it’s a deliberate choice and a manual action, not something that just happens. Also, if the PDF reveals that when opened in Illustrator, it should reveal the “layers” when opened in Acrobat—which it didn’t when I tried it, and I haven’t seen anyone demonstrating that it does.
So to consider the “layers” as evidence of forgery, we have to believe that
1. the forger assembled the document in Illustrator, cutting and pasting letter by letter (in some cases) into multiple groups on one layer, a process that no one would use—no one would use Illustrator to assemble a document the way people say this one was assembled, that’s just not what it’s good for; or
2. the forger assembled the document in Photoshop, imported it into Illustrator while making the conscious choice to turn the layers into groups, and then saved the PDF from Illustrator.
Neither of those options make sense to me.
No one commented in my idea of doing an overlay of the Nordyke doc on the Obama doc ....It looks to me as if the comparison of type style spacing etc. between these 2 would be useful .
If both were typed with the same typewriter it should be immediately evident,
If there is any difference in type within the docs .....then I would say its a fraud,
Perhaps you could also do overlays of all the same letters in the Obama doc.
you could possibly then determine if the doc was manipulated or if it was typed or created by computer
Check out # 205 and # 207. - Did everyone see the article by Red Steel? Good research, there.
[Thanks for the pings.]
Team Obama obviously has someone high up within the HDOH to be able to search through the files to put this thing together. I’d bet there is a match with another bc filed on Aug 8 but in 1971.
Team Obama obviously has someone high up within the HDOH to be able to search through the files to put this thing together. I’d bet there is a match with another bc filed on Aug 8 but in 1971.
Here it is:
Note that I am not the creator of this morph. When I saw it, I saved a copy for myself. I tried to find the place on the internet from where I obtained it but was unable to do so.
Also note that this morph utilizes the AP image of Bamie BC II, rather than the one we usually discuss here which come from whitehouse.gov.
ML/NJ
It is very noticeable that the Nordyke BC is ‘left justified’ and Obama’s COLB is ‘centered justified’ like it was made by a computer.
Check out graphics at # 269 and # 271.
Should have mentioned earlier, - SP Alert.
One would think that the typist would be so used to typing the hospital and checking that it is within the city limits that it would be rote. It’s not likely that she’d need to take the form out of the machine and go look on a map and then return the form to the typewriter to check the box.
Yawn maybe, but the curved letters appear to me at least to be fairly convincing.
Yawn maybe, but the curved letters appear to me at least to be fairly convincing.
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.
