Skip to comments.Why did Obama release electronic birth certificate?
Posted on 06/07/2011 8:08:11 PM PDT by RobinMasters
NEW YORK The White House's release of an electronic copy of Obama's long-form birth certificate instead of a certified paper copy raises questions in a 22-page criminal complaint with the FBI filed by an international expert in scanners and document-imaging software.
Doug Vogt's complaint charges that individuals within the Hawaii Department of Health, Obama political operatives and an unidentified graphic artist worked in a multi-state conspiracy to create a fraudulent long-form birth certificate for Barack Obama.
Vogt's complaint asserts: "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."
He claims the long-form birth certificate the White House released April 27 as an electronic document in PDF format was forged from a composite of legitimate birth certificates obtained from the Hawaii DOH archives and manipulated to replace the original information with a fraudulent Obama birth record.
The birth certificate the White House released consists of an electronic file that when opened as a PDF file in Adobe Illustrator reveals nine different layers that corresponded to different sections of the form, including the signatures.
"I also opened up the White House PDF file in WordPad so I could see the codes and headers in the file. There I discovered the evidence for the nine layers embedded in the code," Vogt writes. "The big surprise I discovered was that the file was finished or created on April 27, 2011, and the copy I had downloaded from the White House web site was modified on April 28, 2011, at 9:58 a.m., the day after the news conference."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Even if impeachment is started a day before he is booted....I would love it. HE is such a piece of crud; it would be a fun spectacle for a day. Even the idea has me smiling.
I do not have a personal website and the documents are .pdf documents. I could e-mail them if you contact me via Freep Mail. I suspect that someone else has already put them up in the original form. The one the AP created from the print handout is probably of little value as far as analysis. The internals of the AP .pdf are pretty clear who created it and what type of equipment did the scan. I have some details on the MAC system that created the .pdf with the security paper background. That was embedded in the .pdf.
The problem with all of this is that very few people have the technical prowess to understand with certainty what is real, and what is memorex.
LucyT, don’t know if you want yet another one, but here it is just in case.
So, if the pubbies are such p**sies to not go after the Zer0 poseur by 2012:
Does that make his 2008 election, and all the bogus laws and EO’s that he has signed and invoked as a poseur: valid; as the time of retraction may have been surpassed by the election of another President; CIC in 2012???
Critical question, as the time for attack may be now!
If what they have presented is authentic, let them produce the original, from whatever form it was copied. If it is authentic, there is no reason to keep the original hidden. If so, it would prove the electronic version correct.
Here is some of the internal data in the color .pdf (forgery)
27 0 obj
/Producer (Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext)
It indicates that it was created on a Mac OS X 10.6.7
Quartz is an internal component of the Mac OS, I am not a Mac person so I do not know how many programs can use that component.
It was created on 4-27-2011 at 12:09 :24 Z
My version does not indicate it has been revised, creation and Mod date/time are the same.
Now, what does this mean. I am not sure it means anything further than I showed. It does not necessarily mean it was forged.
The layering thing I think is smoke.
The differences in type within lines of the document to me indicates very high probability of forgery.
The fact that the .pdf is a creation containing 9 seperate images and no text content indicates to me a very high probability of forgery.
The fact that Obozo first said they sent an attorney to HI to pick up 2 copies of the document and later changed that to state they e-mailed it to them, is another case of catching them in a lie.
All in all, it is a forgery. And I do not believe there is an original COLB in HI for Obozo.....
I am disgusted with our very highest military officers. Where is the evidence that they have sought certifiable evidence from congress or the courts to prove that Obama is eligible.
Gee! Silly me! When did upholding identity theft, election fraud, fraudulently collecting campaign money, and impersonating a Commander in Chief become part of the military code of honor?
“The problem with all of this is that very few people have the technical prowess to understand with certainty what is real, and what is memorex.”
Except when they go to the beach and watch the chicks in bikinis walk by. Real and memorex are clear there.
I don’t disagree that it is suspicious as hell, and I’m inclined to think that this has been in the works for a long time. But... now what? I’ve said that any BC proves he can’t be President if Barack Sr. has his named attached to it.
This seems to be something easy to verify, as to be honest, when a 'document expert' starts making claims identifying specific creation software (Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop), my BS indicator pegs. So I downloaded the copy of the long form off of the Doug Vogt website, a copy off of the White House website (yep, you can still save the document, no problem..), a turner website, the azstar website, and finally, the copy I downloaded off the first links that appeared on FreeRepublic when the story broke.
I opened each file using notepad++, a very common text editing program, and discovered something interesting. Four of the copies are formatted exactly the same, one is not. The Doug Vogt copy has a dramatically different formatting in the start and end of the file. All five files share the exact same creation timestamp string (though the Doug Vogt one somehow leaves off the time zone portion of the string following the Z), the Doug Vogt file includes a separate modified string.
So one copy is dramatically different in formatting, and includes a separate modified string. I have to speculate, as I'm being kinda lazy here and not actually testing, that Doug used the 'save as' feature on whatever PDF viewer he had and this created the modified timestamp. And in doing so, it created different formatting for the PDF file as well. The only significant change between the five files appears to be the formatting and the modified timestamp.
Anyone interested is welcome to give it a go themselves, as I said, all of this is easily available online to try out. Wordpad should work just as easily as notepad++. Did Doug Vogt find a special smoking gun version of the document? Or did he inadvertently contaminate the document he was going to examine? Or did some ubersecret conspiracy go out and make sure that all the other documents including the one on my personal computer exactly matched so I'd question Doug Vogt's methods of handling the archival of the very document he planned on examining?
” Hawaii didnt have the original one any more for the Halfrican, “ half/American born.
They never had the “original”. He wasn’t born in Hawaii.
If there's one thing that probably isn't going to happen, it's the despised birthers being proved correct after all. The ruling elites are all in on the eligibility issue and if it appears to be unraveling, Obama goes out for health reasons. They're not going down with him.
All the pols are scared to touch this for fear of the proverbial “racist” charge. To them it’s the radioactive equivalent of 600 roentgens, ie certain political death.