Skip to comments.Obama's long-form birth certificate debunked - with illustrations
Posted on 05/01/2011 6:45:48 AM PDT by eastexsteve
Bear with me, as I am rather new to this forum. The following is my unbiased examination of the Obama LFBC without any comment or input from outside sources. I'm sure others have made some of the same observations I have, but I assembled some observations that you can see yourself without using any specialized software whatsoever. I haven't seen some of these observations out on the web by anyone else yet. (Although, I'm sure I haven't looked everywhere.) Please feel free to copy the file from Google Docs and do what you wish with it.
What’s the Global National Review?
Did you manage to get the screenshots? Waiting, waiting, waiting.
I tried printing all the pages out to rescan as a jpg, but the white pages were blank on the printout. Did anyone else try this?
Here is another very simple explanation that any non-expert can easily understand, this should be posted on threads as even *I* can understand it, therefore anyone can.
I have been following this thread since day one. Most of the time I just lurk, but I have made an interesting discovery of some type...
I realize that the current discussion has moved on to daddy O and his life of mendacity, but I have been stuck on the new OB II COLB. Since you guys were hot on this a few days, I thought maybe what I have learned could be valuable.
The defenders of the COLB say that the layers have to do with scanners and OCR software arbitrarily separating things into layers. The newsies seem to be happy with that explanation. But, I have been looking for a reason this happens with this COLB. Here is what I have discovered.
Irrefutable proof of cut and paste assembly.
There are three types of text, pre-printed, typewritten, and ink stamped. And, then there are the pre-printed graphics. One would expect that the pre-printed graphics would be the same color as the preprinted text. One would expect the typewritten text somewhat different. And one would expect the ink stamps to be different again, and different from each other.
I have found that most of the pre-printed text matches the typewritten text, instead of the pre-printed graphics. OOPS! Also, The record number that is inkstamped, matches exactly to the typewritten and pre-printed text, EXCEPT for the last 1 which is a different color. So, we are supposed to believe that an ink stamp, or ink pad would make two different colors in one motion? The date accepted stamps are even stranger. The stamp in box 22 has two colors also, the 19 and the 1 at the end are different from the rest of it. The stamp in box 20 has identical digits to the stamp in box 22, but it has two colors also. But, not the same two as in box 22. So, here we are supposed to believe that one ink stamp can print two colors on a single motion, and two different set of two on the next motion.
Some other findings... Stanleys signature is half one color and half another color. Part of the K in U K L Lee is the wrong color. The check boxes down to 6d are one color and the ones belox are another color. There are at least three different colors of ink in the Doctors check box.
None of the inconstancy is random, not one letter, number or line is partially one color and partially another. Only whole characters are the wrong color.
If you would like to verify what I see, try this. Open the COLB with Photoshop. Select Enhance, Adjust color, replace color. Click on one of the triangles next to the signatures and replace that color with something bright and distinctive. Take a look at what portions of the doc are still black. Repeat this procedure to replace the colors of various parts of the COLB with an assortment of distinctive colors. When you get to a point where there are no more black caricatures, you are ready to analyze the results. What this process does is emphasize the subtle differences in the printed colors.
You will notice that there are numerous. You will see that I have not begun to cover them all here.
1,977 posted on Sunday, May 01, 2011 8:05:16 AM by California VWRC Member
I have no idea........
Would it make it better if they were from the WH?
I doubt if the State of HI stamp actually has an “X” instead of an “H” in one of the words.
Maybe you should stick to your regular forum.
At this point the State of HI, the fedgov and the media are partners in crime.
snip-Perhaps its a good thing that the U.S. Senate didnt take up a resolution on Barack Obamas status as a natural born Citizen in 2008 as members did for GOP candidate Sen. John McCain while both were seeking the U.S. presidency.
The Democrat might not have qualified under the requirements the Senate, including Obama, a co-sponsor and then-senator, put in the resolution, including the demand that the candidate have American citizen parents.
As I posted in another thread, I think that is a plea for help from Onaka. He wants to get off this Kenyan-Russian roulette wheel. Lol
screenshots are here
A plea for help. LOL!
No bother at all, NGZ. I have been distracted a bit today.
lj, do me a favor. try to print out the last page, #5 on the linked docs. see if it prints.
Sorry, MM - I have no printer. :-(
Hub has one but he’s at work.
Suggest you email this to World Net Daily..
That’s not surprising. Google doesn’t want to be called guilty of censorship but things like that have a habit of disappearing over there.
They are a gang of libs, so I am not surprised.
Hopefully, somebody saved the info and has it on their hard drivein anticipation of just such a thing happening.
If you get hold of such a thing, email it to me please (on my contact page)
LJ, I hope before I die I can figure out just what it is about socialists like Hussein that so mesmerizes media people and Beltway types that they are willing to flush their integrity-—and critical thinking-—right down the toilet.
What do they think he will do for them? Unlimited abortion? Unlimited sodomy, Frisco-style? Guarantee imaginary Republican “censorship” and “fascist oppression” will not take place?
It’s hard to understand why they sell themselves out so cheap.
So far, I am leaning toward your “Plain evil and lies” theory. Bad people doing devilish things taking over society.
Ve vill keep after zis until ze case is sol-ved.
Do you have any theory why Obama ordered a copy of his long form birth certificate in the first place?
Did he never have one, and this one was the first one he ever had?
If he had one, did he simply lose it? People lose birth certificates all the time, but it just seems strange to me that the President of the United States lost his. Was he just careless, or did another family member accidentally throw it away?
If he lost his copy, when did he lose it?
June 2007: Date stamped on back of Obama's short form we see at the FactCheck site.
Does the FactCheck short form mean that Obama lost his long form copy in 2007 or earlier, because most people don't go to the trouble of ordering a new copy of their birth certificate unless they lost theirs.
At the April 27, 2011 press conference where Obama showed us his long form birth certificate, I wish reporters would have asked Obama (1) why he needed to order a copy of his long form birth certificate, and (2) did he lose the one he used to have.
Only because most of the freepers have long since learned just to give the conspiracy theorists a wide berth.
Of course, I’m not telling you not to listen to the voices in your head. Just pointing out the questions you should be asking yourself.
When you can’t answer simple questions like “what would prove you wrong”, or “what part of the conspiracy required the name “Barack” to have it’s “R” replaced in the document, you are not thinking seriously.
But Loretta is part of the conspiracy. She’s willing to lose her job and go to jail to falsify records that don’t prove anything and are actually forgeries built by the Obama white house with no actual documents from Hawaii, by high-level members of the administration who are also all ready to go to jail and lose their jobs to fake a document that wasn’t needed and that is nothing we were already told and hadn’t already been accepted by a majority of the people.
There was never a good reason for Obama not to release his certificate, but “making conservatives look stupid” was a pretty good reason.
Those would have been revealing questions. I would guess he had to order the long form for one of three reasons:
1. He wanted to continue the appearance that he thought this was stupid, and that he had to go to extraordinary lengths to provide this stupid evidence to shut up stupid people like Trump.
2. He wanted a form that was signed by current official in Hawaii because he wanted this to conclusively stop any reputable news source from asking questions — he was happy when it was just tea-party people and conspiracy buffs, but when Trump raised it he was getting actual questions from actual news people. He knew that news organizations would accept the word of a state official.
3. He really didn’t have a copy of his long-form certificate, or at least not one that would pass inspection. I find this less likely, but I guess it’s possible; I found that one of the “birth certificates” in my house wasn’t any better than the ones people were trashing from Obama. And I only have real birth certificates for my kids, although my “birth certificate” has been good enough for everything I’ve had to do.
I also don’t know why Obama didn’t release his form a long time ago. I also support every state passing a law requiring all presidential candidates put on the ballot in a primary to provide a birth certificate to prove eligibility to appear on the ballot.
BTW, there may be an issue with requiring that for the general election, because the candidates are not officially ON the ballot, but instead we are voting for electors, who theorectically have the job of determining eligibility, and who don’t themselves have to meet the eligibility requirements.
I am willing to accept, because it doesn’t really matter to the outcome, that Dan Rather did not purposely aid the production of the false documents, and that he believed they were good documents until it was proven otherwise. Likewise with his daughter and her “friend”.
I guess there would have been a couple others working with Barnes to produce and sell the documents, but beyond that all you needed was people who were willing to believe anything.
In some ways, the conspiracy theorists here and elsewhere are a lot like Dan Rather. They see what they want to see, and are so certain the story is true that they assume all evidence that supports them must be true, and all evidence against their theory is part of the conspiracy.
SA Dunham's actual signature.
And look at 18b’s date compared to the Nordykes sig date in 18b’s.
A little too similar, eh?
barry is using a deceased CT’s persons SS# and it seems a dead baby’s BC.
Dan must have believed unknown Republicans with no access to Reserve Officer Records in the Clinton regime had somehow done something his friend Sandy, who had access to all records everywhere, hadn't done.
Dan's smarter than that.
It is easier for us to believe that Dan Rather engineered this whole deal than not!
1. He wanted to continue the appearance that he thought this was stupid, and that he had to go to extraordinary lengths to provide this stupid evidence to shut up stupid people like Trump.
June 2007: I wonder why Obama ordered a birth certificate in June 2007, because at that time there wsa no Trump breathing down his neck.
June 2007: I wonder why Obama ordered a short form, when, at that time, persons had a choice of ordering either a short or long form.
KAPIOLANI HOSPITAL OFFICIALS: April 27 to May 1: Depending on how you count the days, 4 or 5 days have passed and counting since Obama displayed his long form birth certificate on April 27, and yet not a sound from Kapiolani announcing that indeed Obama was born there.
Can you imagine the increase in tourist traffic and income for Kapiolani and Hawaii once Kapiolani comes out and officially verifies that Obama was born there and in room number so and so.
But, there is nothing coming for Kapiolani. Complete silence. I wonder why.
I may eat my words later, but I believe that the Kapiolani silence is due to the fact that Obama was not born there.
And the longer Kapiolani and Obama continue to resist demands to see Obama's mother's Kapiolani records in order to verify the authenticity of Obama's long form birth certificate, the more trouble Obama will face during the upcoming 2012 presidential campaign season.
Thanks - there’s one other thing that’s been bothering me, and I haven’t seen anyone comment on it...would be interested in hearing your take?
In box 20 & 22, the date - the proportion of ‘1961’ looks totally different than the font/spacing of the ‘AUG - 8’ part. Does that seem normal to you?
Hold the presses! I just accidentally extracted on of the modification layers by accident using Windows Paint. I copied the image in the PDF file, and dropped it into Paint, and there it was. It was too easy! Here’s a link to the jpeg file I saved:
Yes indeed. The last layer is what I pulled off by accident while copying the image in Windows Paint of all things.
As far as replacing certain letters or parts of words, imagine you are trying to construct a graphics document from near scratch. You might have part of what you need, but you need the rest to complete the document. To make it look authentic and reflect what you want it to say, you need to copy graphics images of letters or parts of words, and assemble them on the document image. Maybe some of the words, or letters in words, have the wrong background, wrong shade, or some other artifact in the text block that you don’t want. So, you are forced to copy and paste those images from the cleanest alternate sources you have available. Or, as a last resort, you computer-generate them on to the document image by using a graphics text box, much the way you would put text on to a Windows Paint picture. This is what the anti-aliasing in the “R” in “BARACK” shows. It was computer-generated, and not copied and pasted.
The only valid ‘long form BC barry bassturd has ever had did not come from the criminal sewer known as Hawaii. He may well have seen a BC tucked away among his relatives’ papers, but if it was the first and original, it wasn’t generated from Hawaii.
The only valid ‘long form’ BC barry bassturd has ever had did not come from the now criminal sewer known as Hawaii. He may well have seen a BC tucked away among his relatives’ papers, but if it was the first and original, it wasn’t generated from Hawaii and the name Barack Hussein Obama was not on it.
1. Just a thought: Does anyone have a copy of grandmother's signature or handwriting so that we can compare her handwriting to the mother's signature on Obama’s long form birth certificate? Thanks.
2. OBAMA'S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE: When I examined the long form birth certificate, I was confused by Obama’s mother's signature, because of the way “Stanley” was in parenthesis and sitting on top of the main signature “Ann Dunham Obama”, as if “Stanley” was an after thought. It just seemed so peculiar to me.
3. My point is this: I believe that Obama’s mother would have written “Stanley” first on Obama’s long form birth certificate, not stick it in parenthesis on top of the main part of the signature, because whether or not she was ashamed of the boy's name, I believe she used it as her main name when she signed documents.
4. So, now that I can compare Obama’s mother's signature on Obama’s long form birth certificate to her signature on her Social Security card, I think that Obama has some serious explaining to do as to who really signed his mother's name to his long form birth certificate.
5. NOTE: On some documents from Obama’s past, his signature is very different from his signature of today.
6. Pro-Obama supporters dismiss such differences by saying that many people's signatures change with the passage of many years.
7. Well, Obama’s mother's signatures on her Social Security card and on Obama’s long form birth certificate occurred within a few years of each other, so the argument that a person's signature changes over time does not apply to this situation.
Again, you are interpreting what you are seeing, but without an explanation.
What name do you think they had an image for such that it spelled “Ba-ack”, and they had to add the “r”?
Do you think Barack was not born anywhere? Is he some alien life force from another planet? You don’t think they have some form with his full name on it, so they had to construct his name from parts?
How does that possibly make any sense to you? And what word do you think they found that had the letters “-enya”, so that they had to add the “K” to spell “Kenya”?
Your theory is based on a hypothesis that what we see is a combination of parts they had on the document, and parts they had to add. But the parts they had to “add” make no sense, and the parts the “had” make no sense.
Your theory would at least have some logical possibility if you found an entire name replaced, you could argue they took someone else’s certificate.
Further, where do you think the basis came for the document? Hawaii officials have said they sent THIS document to the White House. Are you arguing that the people who GENERATED the original had to cut-and-paste to build the name “Barack”? Or did the white house have to do that to what was sent? If the latter, why? Why wouldn’t Hawaii have printed a document with Barack’s full name? Why did they leave out the “r”?
Your analysis is lazy.
When the Dan Rather forgeries hit, a good freeper spent long hours on the issue. And the things found that were wrong made sense — bad kerning because they used a word processor instead of a typewriter; proportional fonts that weren’t in use on the typewriters owned by the guy who supposedly wrote the documents, among other things.
You have a mystery here of sorts, what caused the layers and the oddities you are seeing. But rather than solve the mystery, you are simply claiming the mystery proves your hypothesis, when you give no reason why that interpretation makes any sense.
Scanning software can be set to try to convert images into text. They apparently can do this in layers, so that the things that are text can be separated from the things that have to be left as images. Why is this not a more rational explanation for why some letters were turned into computer-looking letters, while others are still images? That’s exactly what the software is trying to do.
And it’s a better reason for “r” in barack to be wrong, rather than some unexplained need to substitute the “r” out from “barack”.
I still have it sitting on my computer. When I refresh it, the whited out copy shows, then the rest.
They mixed vector and raster images.
How many people do you think using Pshop requires?
On the other hand I had a good source who'd worked with the War Department/Navy Department standard memo and orders layouts in the 1940s and she advised me those documents met the standards she had had to follow back then.
I think the screw up on the formats was in the Photocomposition guy being handed the WRONG STYLE BOOK for Department of Air Force ~ most likely he got a U.S.Army Air Corps style book with the cover ripped off. Probably no dates in there ~ just inside the inside leaf.
They are all so embarrassed at having gotten caught so soon after they produced their nonsense they won't talk about it.
The Photocomposition guy is still jittery though. You just drop the term "kerning" in the middle of a thread and it's like you'd walked up behind Ned Beatty and said lowly "Squeal like a pig".
Ya know, your blather5ing is getting tedious. The ‘r’ was not picked up in the OCR copying conversion. A digital addition was made to finish the word. You knew that and that the n00bie poster wasn’t claiming the mischaracterization which you’ve tried to float now for several posts. You’re working for the other side. Shut the hell up if all you can do is sow mischaracterizations that you then attack. You have the axelrod stink about you, charles.
I'm NOT saying that I believe -bama is the antichrist but I've always wondered how someone could be 'raised up' as a world leader with such a huge following as prophesied in the Bible. With the help of an evil and agenda driven media (the false prophet?) such as the one that helped put -bama into office, I now understand how it could or will happen.
This is mirse, the person who wrote the original message above.
A CORRECTION: After I wrote the message above, I checked out Obama's mother's signature on the internet.
After searching the internet, I learned that the Social Security signature that I first looked at seems to have been a fake, because it is so different from the signature on Obama's long form birth certificate, and other people on the internet said that the weird looking signature on the Social Security I first looked at was indeed a fake, and the Social Security card itself was also a fake.
For instance, one site displayed Obama's mother's 1954 Social Security application form with her signature, and that signature looked similar to Obama's mother's signature on Obama's long form birth certificate.
Still, I' m disturbed by the awkward way "Stanley" is put in parenthesis on Obama's long form birth certificate, because from other samples of Obama's mother's signatures on the internet, she seems to have used "Stanley" a lot as part of her signature.
If she was often embarrassed because she had a boy's first name, Stanley, it seems that she lived with it the best she could, and she seemed to have no problems using Stanley when she was required to sign legal documents like a passport application.
So, in my opinion, I have serious questions about whether or not Obama's mother signed Obama's long form birth certificate.
Sad for me to say, but I am beginning to think someone else signed Obama's mother's name to the long form birth certificate, because of the clumsy way the name "Stanley" is placed in parenthesis.
"Man-In-The-Middle attack is the type of attack where attackers intrude into an existing connection to intercept the exchanged data and inject false information. It involves eavesdropping on a connection, intruding into a connection, intercepting messages, and selectively modifying data.
The term "Man-in-the-middle attack" (MITM attack) refers to the type of attack where the attacker intrudes into the communication between the endpoints on a network to inject false information and intercept the data transferred between them."
In Obama's case, we could be looking at a "Man-In-The-Middle" attack in a sneaker shoes network. Enter Perkins Coie lawyer(s) who fly off (on foot ; sneakers) to Hawaii to retrieve it. Obama and his lawyers are the men in the middle, and/or Hawaii is actively in on the cover up.
Look. This guy has proven that this doc is a composite of two vastly different types of type.
We want to know from either Obama or the Hawaii Dept of Health, WHY?? If there was one file in the archives from 1961, why wasn’t everything on it, typed in 1961?
We simply want to know why.
Would Hawaii officials speak up to affirm or deny that what Obama put on the net is not an image of the copy of what they gave to Obama's lawyer. Or would they keep silent in much the same way they did regarding the Certification document, the short form images on the net since Jun 2008. Remember that Hawaii never confirmed that any of those images on the net were copies of something that they issued. Hawaii has been very willing to cooperate with Obama's stonewalling and game playing regarding the vital records in HI for Obama.
People have pulled off that layer before.
The point of all this is, WHY? Why was it manipulated? ANd, Hawaii Dept of Health, do you swear under oath that this document is exactly what you gave to the Pres?
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.