Some Cases Against Some Cases Against Obama's "Birth Certificate"

[Red Steel]

Extraneous... Arrg! ;-)

Explain the that the

[Don Corleone]

The press WILL HIDE EVERY OBAMA LIE AND CRIME until after the election. We have to do better.

What happens if an ineligible person is elected to the presidency? Anybody know?

[Parley Baer]

I agree. This is part of the vetting process. Obama needs to show us that he is indeed qualified to be President Of The United States. I have seen no evidence except the fake birth certificate. McCain showed his documentation.

[pissant]

I’m all for leaving it up. Koyaan may or may not be associated with Obama or an Obama fan, but he put some effort into this, so let’s see where it goes.

It is good to be challenged on this stuff

[Red Steel]

Polarik writing about "FactCheck's" COLB : I did not talk about "strange halos" around the letters, but well-known and well-defined white and gray pixel halos BETWEEN the letters,

Basically everything inside the borders were far superior in quality to the borders themselves. Proof-positive that they were added post-hoc to a forged image.

So finding "well-known and well-defined white and gray pixel halos BETWEEN the letters" is a tell-tale sign of forgery? Correct?

[Cyber Liberty]

I like toys. I get the greatest pics for my profile page from these threads...

[Cyber Liberty]

You answered a post. You passed the first test!

[Red Steel]

You said on Polarik's thread: I assume he meant left side and right side instead of left side and left side. However in any case, this is absolutely incorrect. The two vertical sides of the border in the FactCheck image are not divergent.

They only appear at first glance to be divergent due to the underlying border of the "new 2007 COLB" being skewed counterclockwise. The width of the border in the FactCheck image is the same at the bottom as it is at the top. There is no divergence.

If Polarik properly overlaid the two COLBs, which I believe he did, than there is a divergence of the border lines.

[surely_you_jest]

I yield to the Honorable Pissant. He’s done the work. If he wants to let this play out, I’m in favor of that approach as well. Have at it Koyaan.

[chris_bdba]

You beat me to it! Got to be fast here!

[PLMerite]

At the end of the day, forged or not, this COLB was created in 2007.

His mother should have been given a Hawaii State Birth Certificate in 1961. I’m sure Barack Hussein Obama has had to produce it more than once in his life. This should be another instance.

[Red Steel]

Can you tell me what the difference written on Hawaiian COLBs “Date Accepted By State Registrar” vs. “Date Filed By Registrar”?

Since I have not heard nothing but crickets about the statements above, I'll give them my plausible answer.

The "Date Accepted By State Registrar" says that the Hawaiian Health Department has received birth information from local doctors and hospitals that the baby was born in Hawaii.

The "Date Filed by Registrar" acknowledges a newborn but the information about the baby came outside of normal channels. Meaning that the Hawaiian Department of Health does not know about the baby's origin.

Be back later to see any comments....

[henbane]

Why all the fussing around with digital images in cyberspace?

What is required to lay this whole issue to rest is the presentation of a REAL foldable, crinkleable 3-D Certificate of Birth--and not some ambiguous green, blacked-out, laser-generated, endlessly examined abomination of a virtual document.

Why can't the Obama people come up with an actual legit certificate that can be handed around and slapped down on the table?

Like these plain ordinary people can:

[Polarik]

Is that all you got?

Maybe you can tell us why the top fold in the photo is slanted while the top fold in the image is horizontal and parallel to the border?

OR tell us why the the seal on the photo shows up about 3000% better than the scan?

Maybe you'd like to show us an image of these "scanner artifacts," which you will not find anywhere on the Internet

Perhaps you will show us how these mysterious "scanner artifacts" appeared on the Kos COLB by recreating one?

Or, that second fold. Where did it go?

Or, put your money where your mouth is, and bet me that the Kos image is a real scan. Go ahead, make my day.

[JerseyHighlander]

Thank you for expounding on our objections here Koyaan.

As is often the case, the loudest more annoying jackasses end up setting the tone of debate on online forums, and though I’m certain a large majority of Freepers with a particular interest in this will agree with you, they have, just as you will do soon, given up on this nutcase conspiracy and abandon the debate floor and let the lunatics take over the rotunda.

This COLB bullshit has been one of the lowest points in FR’s history. FR’s owners have in the past banned Bauer, Keyes, Guiliani, Steve Forbes, and Ron Paul supporters, but this crew of gutter trash conspiracy theorists roam free on this forum to this day.

And quite frankly, there is no reason for you to stay, because the interested parties whom you have exposed are a vindictive bunch, and will hound you here. If you stay, more power to you.

So, thank you, and I hope you find another conservative online forum to participate in, and best of luck with your audio venture.

Regards,
JH

[mkjessup]

I’m all for leaving it up. Koyaan may or may not be associated with Obama or an Obama fan, but he put some effort into this, so let’s see where it goes. It is good to be challenged on this stuff.

You're a better Freeper than I, pissant. When I see this kind of stuff spurting forth from a n00b, I want to respond like Indiana Jones responded to the insane bearded swordsman in the market square swinging that curved scimitar around like a ginsu knife, Indy just pulled out a pistol and basically 'zotted' him, LOL

[Polarik]

So finding "well-known and well-defined white and gray pixel halos BETWEEN the letters" is a tell-tale sign of forgery? Correct?

150% correct. They are well-known and well-defined at the pixel level to me, and if you made a million scans of a real 2007 COLB, you would never find them.

[Polarik]

Which part of "check back for updates" did you NOT understand?

You could have saved yourself all this work because I no longer have them listed as possible direct comparisons.

I kept only the things that I could demonstrate, such as no second fold (said that, what..two months ago), diagonal top fold, prominent embossed seal on photo, not on scan etc.

[21stCenturyFreeThinker]

Is that all you got?

Maybe you can tell us why the top fold in the photo is slanted while the top fold in the image is horizontal and parallel to the border?

OR tell us why the the seal on the photo shows up about 3000% better than the scan?

Maybe you'd like to show us an image of these "scanner artifacts," which you will not find anywhere on the Internet

Perhaps you will show us how these mysterious "scanner artifacts" appeared on the Kos COLB by recreating one?

Or, that second fold. Where did it go?

Or, put your money where your mouth is, and bet me that the Kos image is a real scan. Go ahead, make my day.

All rhetorical questions since he was banned before you asked them.

I'd like to hear his answers. Can he be unbanned?

[newzer1]

"Both the Obama COLB and the Michele COLB were printed on newer, thicker paper than the older COLBS such as the DeCosta COLB and the embossed seal being barely visible or not visible at all as in the original Michele COLB scan is not unusual at all."

That may be true of the Michelle COLB. But look at photo #1 at FactCheck. That seal shows up distinctly on the front side. It's heavily embossed and very detailed. If KOS and the first FactCheck image was a scan of this same paper document, shouldn't that seal have been clearly visible?

I also think the folds would have shown up better in a scan. The heavier paper is cracked at the top fold, yet on the scan it's barely visible.

I don't think the scan that has been online since June was a scan of this document at all.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html