Posted on 03/15/2012 10:52:58 AM PDT by Danae
s President Obama’s birth certificate a forgery? Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., believes it is. He recently held a press conference in Phoenix to discuss the findings of a new 10-page report. Mr. Arpaio’s investigators have come to a stunning conclusion: The long-form birth certificate Mr. Obama released last year is a “computer-generated forgery.”
With the exception of The Washington Times, however, no major U.S. media outlet reported this bombshell story. The liberal press corps is desperately trying to suppress any discussion of Forgerygate — potentially one of the biggest scandals in American history. The media class is betraying its fundamental mission to pursue the truth.
“Based on all of the evidence presented and investigated, I cannot in good faith report to you that these documents are authentic,”
((snip))
The Washington Times story, written by Stephen Dinan, points out that Mr. Arpaio has called for Congress to investigate the matter. Think about this: A high-profile sheriff orders a team of former law enforcement officials to examine whether the president is truly a natural born citizen and that he has the constitutional and legal right to occupy the White House. Their official report is that Mr. Obama’s documents are shoddy and he likely engaged in deliberate fraud. And yet, most of the American press corps doesn’t believe this is an important news story? The liberal media has become rotten to the core.
Ironically, the foreign press reported widely on the story. For example, Pravda — that’s right, the former official organ of the Soviet Communist Party — did an extensive analysis of Mr. Arpaio’s findings. The article by Dianna Cotter asks the obvious question: What are U.S. journalists afraid of?
Read more at: http://times247.com/articles/forgerygate-ignoring-arpaio-s-report-is-a-scandal-in-itself
(Excerpt) Read more at times247.com ...
I hit the bulls eye Pal. Top edge of 80 is bottom edge of 08. 2008 is in the stamper for 9 months, with the lower edge getting hammered a few hundred times a day, with the outer edge taking more blunt force pressure than the inner part. Our postal worker agrees that the stamp edges get crushed, lowering the outer portions of the insert.
By my and others guesses the forger had two days to make it ...Obie was on the news saying he had registerd for the draft in 1979 (actually 80) so immediately people began searching for records...
On Sept. 7, 2008, Obama appeared on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” and stated, “I had to sign up for Selective Service (SS) when I graduated from high school … And I actually always thought of the military as an ennobling and, you know, honorable option. But keep in mind that I graduated in 1979. The Vietnam War had come to an end. We weren’t engaged in active military conflict at that point. And so, it’s not an option that I ever decided to pursue.”
FOIA requests were made in October and the SS computer showed an access date of September 9, 2008..thus the two days to come up with something...
What you have not done is explain why the "19" isn't there so you get no brownie points.
The 20 was cut out of the insert with a razor. Hello???
Wake up and smell the subscript and kerning.
Correct. According to Zullo, they could NOT find a 1980 stamp so they had to use the 2008 stamp. Hence, cutting off the 20 and inserting 08 upside down. They stuck it on the end instead of the middle of the insert without thinking about how it would look offset like it is.
Where’s the 19?
There is no 19 because there is no 19. Got it?
Every other stamp out of that office in 1980 had 1980 because they were stamped in 1980. This forgery was stamped in 2008.
Yes, that is Correct. There should be a 1980.
The clipped edge of 80 proves it is a used and inverted 2008 insert with 20 cut off. There is no 19 because it wasn’t stamped with 1980.
Simple question. Do you think this is a forgery or not?
“Of course! With the year plug only being changed once a year, it gets lots of pressure on the outer edge.”
Thank you Miss, your input is much appreciated.
Three Simple questions.
Should the top of 80 be printed with ink on the 8 and 0?
Why would the top edge of both numbers be missing? (Hint: Inverted 08 after 9 moths of pounding on lower edge. Are you seeing this?)
Is the Docment a fraud?
Do you think this is a forgery or not?
I believe there is very strong evidence of it being a forgery. Namely because of the missing 4 number year stamp.
So let me ask you this, you being an engineer and all...
If one were to "roll" a flat stamp, as you suggested earlier, then isn't it logical that the outside edges of the stamp would be what was worn away instead of what was in the middle and which would have an even pressure exerted upon it?
See 194.
See how bold the numbers in the center are?
The outside is generally worn or light, not the inserts in the middle.
I just can't see your "rolling" method and explanation as viable. That type of stamp simply isn't used in the manner in which you prescribe.
We agree that its a forgery.
We agree the outside of the stamp would be worn more.
The botom edge of 08 will be crushed down when compared to the top edge.
When stamped as 2008, it will still work.
When stamped is flipped as 80, it will be crushed just enough not to print because the high side will now be on the outer edge. The inner edge of 80 will be to low to contact the paper.
This is just more evidence to back Arpiao.
Sorry, your explanation just doesn't make sense.
I'm done. Believe as you will.
Eventually it will make sense to you.
When you smash a stamp you can’t hit it flush every time. That causes uneven wear. That extra concentrated wear is to the outside of 2008. Flip it inward and the inner edge will not print.
Pretty basic. It validates Arpaio conclusion.
The forger could not order a new 2008 insert. He might get caught.
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.