And why should we think anything will ever happen because of this? The One was elected, end of story. You have to to convince the voters that “ rule of law” matters. Good luck with that........
. . . looks like another job for BUCKHEAD to take on .
good to see a presentation that just involves Xerox and typography-very good presentation for the ‘man or woman in the street’
I still find it interesting that within a week of Obama releasing the so called “Long Form Birth Certificate” that Bin Ladin is killed and the news quickly shifted to that story from then on, burying the BC story.
The emphasis by the Obot afterbirthers is now some variation of, “No body cares. This is hopeless. Give it up and concentrate on the issues. Who's going to hold Obama accountable? “...etc. Yes, they have used this debating point since the 2008 primaries, but now, it's the **only** argument that they have left.
Obama posted crudely made forgeries. **That** can not be defended even by the best of the Obot afterbirthers!
Well...( sigh)...Maybe God will provide us with justice this time. Who knows? I do know that there are still too many good people, living good and righteous lives, in this country who pray every day for our nation. He will not abandon us.
But this is really a clear and well presented analysis of variations in the typefaces that could not occur if the letters examined had been produced on a single typewriter. I thought this one was particularly devastating:
That this grifter hasn't been frog-marched out of the White House yet is beyond belief.
Sure it’s a forgery but the SCOTUS, CIA NSA, FBI, etc are all in on the treason,so don’t expect much help there.
Forgery or not, this whole birth certificate is a dead-end.
One could form an airtight case that Obama is not a natural born citizen and the majority of Americans will still dismiss the claim.
It’s basic psychology. People are disinclined to believe the very worst about those whom wield the greatest power over them. The more horrible that truth might be, the less they will be inclined to believe it. The reason for this is pretty simple - to accept such horrible truths would be to accept the precarious fragility of one’s state of existence. Human beings, being creatures of habit, want to believe that our lives are stable and safe until something cataclysmic convinces us otherwise. This, incidentally, is why it takes a Pearl Harbor or a 9/11 to wake the people up to what otherwise ought to have been obvious threats.
This, incidentally, is also why people are willing to accept the Big Lie and why, when attacked most feverishly, the Big Lie can only grow stronger.
I don’t write any of this to discourage people from seeking the truth about the birth certificate - far from it. The truth matters. But I do believe that doing so too loudly and making it a focal point can only hurt us. The fact of the matter is that the majority of people will always dismiss as “fringe” even the greatest truths if they fundamentally threaten the way those people view the world.
Is there a single document expert in the world who has declared the BC to be genuine?
The 2nd birth certificate was a forgery design to thwart the release of Corsi’s book: “Where’s the Birth Certificate”
IT worked... because the media will never question “The One”
Corsi need to release a new book “Where’s The Birth Certificate: Part 2- Obamas Latest Forgery”
Does anyone know how to contact Corsi?
The one on the left looks a little like one of Abe Lincoln. And the one on the right looks more like Bart Simpson! Doesn't it!
So where did these come from?
They are both inversions and enlargements (same scale) of the areas framed by the bottom part of the letters 'R' supposedly produced by the same typewriter. What a joke! The first, the Lincoln one, comes from the 'R' in Barack Obama's given name on the "birth certificate" he released on April 27, 2011. The other one, the one that looks like Bart Simpson, comes from his father's name on the same document.
I appreciate and support the idea that the so-called long form is problematic, but minutely examining character shapes seems a waste of time, since scanning commonly introduces distortions like this.
Actually, in this situation, this might be quite explainable: 1) a preprinted form with one or more typefaces, 2) standard hospital information typed on copies of the same form using a different machine(s) and typeface(s), 3) typewritten entries for individuals being birthed.
So the forger was an idiot? Given a document that might have had a half-dozen or a dozen "A's" in it he or she goes out of the way to get one from another document that doesn't match up? Given two "n's" or "e's" right next to each other in one document, the forger goes to a wholly different document produced on a wholly different typewriter to get the two letters?
I'm looking at the father's first name on the jpeg and I don't see any significant difference between the first and second "A's" in the graphic at the size of a typed document. If you want to magnify it to twice the size, you may notice differences, but they aren't visible to the naked eye.
Understand too that the document would have been bound in a book and that may account for a slight deformity in the letter. Take a look at the small case "a's" in ""male" and "Kapiolani": they are in about the same position on the document as the first "A" in father's name "Barack" and may be a little different from the other "a's" in other positions, because the bend in the document due to the binding affects the two dimensional computer graphic produced from a three dimensional book. If you've ever compared a flat map to a globe, you'll understand.
There's something incredibly stupid here, and I don't think it's the forger. Cursi magnifies manually typed letters something like ten times and notes the differences. Of course there are differences -- it's not a computer printed document and pressure and the amount of ink on the type gives the letters slightly different appearances. Magnify the letters a dozen times and those differences are bound to look enormous.
What's more likely: that a forger couldn't get two "A's" or two "n's" typed by the same typewriter on the same document or that Corsi is simply magnifying ordinary typed letters to the point where they begin to look wildly different?
Argument #1: Some letters are the same, therefore it's a forgery.
Argument #2: Some letters are different, therefore it's a forgery.
That does pretty much cover all the bases...