Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?
Blogtownhall ^ | 6/20/08 | Polark

Posted on 06/17/2008 6:00:53 PM PDT by freespirited

 

Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?

Posted by Polarik on Friday, June 20, 2008 12:00:00 AM
The Daily Kos blog has posted a JPG that allegedly is Barack Obama's "Certificate of Birth." From a detailed analysis of the image and the text, it looks like it was created by a graphics program, and is not a true copy of an original, certified document.

I've been working with computers, printers, and typewriters for over 20 years, and given a set of printed letters, I can discern what kind of device made them. Printer output is quite different from the text created by a graphics program, and even if a document looks "official," it may not be.

The "Certificate of Birth," which I will call "COB," is posted on the Kos website as a color JPG. The reason for making it a color JPG, IMHO, is to induce the viewer to believe that this is a genuine copy of an original document -- something that a black & white, or even greyscale, reproduction would not convey as well.

Basically, anyone could have produced this document on his or her own computer, and I'll tell you why.

As represented by the JPG, the "original" COB seems to be a sheet of paper measuring 8.09" x 7.90" with a green "Rattan" pattern embedded in, or printed on, the paper and a "Bamboo mat" pattern for its border:

Photobucket

At the bottom of the JPG image, reading right from left, one can see following text:

OHSM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) Laser     This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]

There are a lot of problems with this statement, foremost of which is that the text in this document were produced by a graphics program and not a laser print, or any other printer, for that matter.

If the letters were made by a laser printer, you would be able to see the background, the pattern, through the spaces of the letters.

Here's a genuine copy of a real certificate of birth -- my own:

Photobucket

When text is entered via a graphics program, the pattern cannot be seen without noticeable distortion. However, when text is entered with a computer printer or typewriter, you can clearly see the pattern below the letters.

Here is a segment of the COB showing the letters, "Certificat" (from the "Certification" field) enlarged about: 500%:

Photobucket

Now, let's enlarge it some more:

Photobucket


The fuzzy outline is a dead giveaway that these letters were made by a graphics program. Also a dead giveaway is that the letters still retain a sharp outline. With printed or typed text, there is a clearly definable characteristic of a symmetrical shadow when the image is saved at a lower resolution,  that is, a more compressed JPG file.

Here is the word, "Certification," from my certificate of birth enlarged :

Photobucket

As you can see, there is virtually no distortion and no pixelation around the letters, and no dropouts from the background. The most noticeable pixelation and dropouts from the background can be seen in the Barack's father's name "HUSSEIN" on the COB:

Photobucket

Take a look at the area between the "S's in "HUSSEIN."  No hint of any background color. Plenty of grey and white pixels -- exactly what would result from enlarging text entered with a graphics program.

WAIT, there is an even bigger red herring here. All of the type on this document was produced by the same program.

Whatever made the text for all of the headings also made the text for all of the entries.

What's wrong with that?

Well, only that real certificates are created ahead of time by a commercial printer, or, at least, a different printer than the one used to create the data entries. This is why the headings on my certificate of birth look entirely different than the entries.

That is questionable by itself. But it is the way the text looks that gives it away.

Any text made by a typewriter, laser printer, or even inkjet printer, would NOT have the smeared, black & white pixels underneath it -- there would be several pixels bearing the same color as the paper, nor would the left side of the letters be clear and free of any artifacts or shadows. Scalable type produced by a graphics program will look about the same regardless of the magnification with a minimal or uneven staircase pattern of pixels on its sides, whereas printed text -- even laser text -- will show a clear, uniform staircase pattern of pixels on both sides of each letter that proportionately increase in size with magnification.

Here are some examples:

Here is the "Certificate" heading from Barack's COB enlarged 5 times:

Photobucket

Virtually all of the letters lack any shadows, and only the "A" and the "R" show only a slight, uneven staircase effect. Basically, the letters would look essentially the same -- especially letters made from straight lines like "I," "E," and "T," regardless of the magnification used to view them, and this is a key feature of scalable type produced by a graphics program.

Now, here is the "Certification," heading from my genuine certificate enlarged 5 times:

Photobucket
 
The double shadow appears on all letters, and this shadow grows proportionately in size as the letters are enlarged. Also, there is pronounced staircase effect on the "C," "A," and "R." Notice, too, that the "steps" are uniform in size, in contrast to the uneven staircase effect on the Barack headings.

Again, the most glaring anomaly in Obama's COB is the following:

All of the letters that appear on Barack's Certificate of Birth were made, at the same time, and by the same method -- which was the use of a graphics program and not the use of any printer.

You can also tell that this is an obvious Photochop by looking at the border patterns.

Looking at the corners of the darker green border, you can see that the border is discontinuous. In other words, the vertical border bars were made by drawing a long rectangle, copying that rectangle, and then overlaying each of them on either side:

UPPER LEFT CORNER OF BORDER

Photobucket


LOWER RIGHT CORNER OF BORDER


Photobucket

What is readily apparent is that the top and bottom horizontal border bars are overlapped by the top and bottom edges of two vertical rectangles.

If this certificate was a professionally-made, there would not be any overlaps, or any outlines of the side rectangles -- the border would appear to be one, continuous whole. Note, too, that both the left and right side rectangles are equal in length. It appears that they were made that way ( or cloned) to make the patterns line up.

Now, getting back to statements on the certificate, there is something else clearly wrong with the "OHSM 1.1" statement at the bottom -- besides the fact that it was produced by a graphics program. There should have been that distinctive "double S" mark preceding the Section number of the statute -- , as in §338-13 --  so as to indicate that a reference is being made to a particular section of a statute, which, in this case, is Chapter §338, Section 13.

As for the first part, the acronym, "OHSM," stands for "Office of Health Statistics Management," which is not the responsible office within the Department of Health for issuing a certificate of birth. The "1.1" that follows refers to a non-existent document. If there were a "1.1", it would mean a revision of "Form 1" or "Document 1," and since "Document 1" is the form for a "Marriage Certificate," "OHSM 1" would refer to a Marriage Certificate form, and "OHSM 1.1," would refer to another version of that Marriage Certificate form, rather than a "Certificate of Live Birth" form.

Also, in this line, there is a reference to "HRS Section 338-13, paragraph (b)" which states, "Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18."

OK...so where is the certification by the department?

Not only is there no department certification, there is also the absence of any watermark on the paper. Official state documents are supposed to have a watermark on the paper -- like my certificate of birth -- especially when that document is a very important one, like a certificate of birth.

A certified document must have a signature (or signatures) from individuals within the State's Department of Health who are authorized to reproduce the document, and to certify that the document is genuine.

Nothing like that appears anywhere in this JPG.

Also, the official Seal of Hawaii in this JPG is a 2nd generation, black & white bitmap copy of the original seal -- at best.

Photobucket

You would think that the seal would be in color, like the original
Photobucket
or at least a higher quality reproduction if this was a copy of an original document.

In short, there is nothing in this copy to indicate that it is, in fact, a "certified copy."  As I have shown above, there is a whole lot of evidence that it is a manufactured copy. There certainly is a very strong motive for creating one.

Unless the voting public is given a real birth certificate to examine, the question of Barack's birth is still up in the air.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; kos; obama; obamafamily; obamatruthfile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 321-334 next last
To: muawiyah

Do you have a stock answer for everything or are you getting them from the fight the smears webmasters?

Let’s all imagine for an instant that this was 2000 and the “certification” was George W. Bush’s DD 214 and it was without a doubt totally generated by a computer program as this one is.

What do any of you suppose would be the reaction of the Democrats or for that matter The McCain camp in 2000?

They would drive this issue home like the stake through the heart of a vampire.

And as well they should, the whole document reeks of fakery and deception designed to appease the masses.

What was it that Ronald Reagan said?

Trust but verify!

So where is the unamended unphotoshopped actual true copy of the original Birth certificate?


221 posted on 06/18/2008 6:49:02 AM PDT by usmcobra (I sing Karaoke the way it was meant to be sung, drunk, badly and in Japanese)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
It doesn’t.

Then you are obviously a troll sent here form the Obama campaign.

/s

222 posted on 06/18/2008 6:51:21 AM PDT by Fundamentally Fair (When all you have is a kitty, every problem looks like a troll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: spatso

The author is saying that this is a fraudulent document meant to look like the official computer printed docs that they actually do use in HI.


223 posted on 06/18/2008 6:53:16 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Beckwith

“Now, whether Obama’s Certificate of Birth is real or unaltered — that’s another issue.”

********************

that is the author’s contention, that it is a fraudulent Certificate of birth.


224 posted on 06/18/2008 6:54:33 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

So several days ago someone proved conclusively that this particular .jpeg file is in fact Obama’s birth certificate? I doubt it but you are welcome to provide a link to the definitive answer CONCERNING THIS PARTICULAR .JPEG file and the issue of how Obama’s father’s race was listed.


225 posted on 06/18/2008 6:55:54 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
226 posted on 06/18/2008 7:22:25 AM PDT by WalterSkinner ( In Memory of My Father--WWII Vet and Patriot 1926-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8

I think there probably are people who would not vote for him if he were an illegitimate child. Definitely not many among the younger generation, but among the older generation I think there are some.

There has to be a reason that his campaign won’t release the original birth certificate. If the media can go to court to get Jack Ryan’s divorce records unsealed, they certainly should be trying to get his birth certificate.


227 posted on 06/18/2008 7:43:17 AM PDT by freespirited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Where is the original, the one printed in 1961 and don’t tell me it is been lost, I was born in 1961 and I still have my original birth certificate!

Since the Obama campaign hasn't claimed that it's been lost, one can logically infer that Obama has it. But the campaign has refused to release it. Within days of this becoming a controversy, this substitute appeared.

228 posted on 06/18/2008 7:54:45 AM PDT by freespirited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Yes, what I said is that politically correct terminology in America rapidly changed from “negro” to “black” to “African American.” But since his father was not an American, they may have just put “African.”

Or, as you say, it’s possible that they wrote “African” rather than “Kenyan” on the original. Who knows?

The dispute would be at least partly resolved if Obama would instruct the State of Hawaii to release his birth certificate directly to members of the press who request to see it. It would not be entirely resolved because apparently Hawaii has a policy of revising birth certificates after the fact. But at least it would satisfy the question of why Obama will not permit reporters to see his birth records.


229 posted on 06/18/2008 7:57:01 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Okay, so let’s concentrate on that, not the distortions around the letters. I’m pretty confident those are from a scan of a printed document.

Of course, if Fightthesmears has an image with the correctly aligned pattern and the same content, then if this is a fake, this document obviously being put out as a ‘gotch’ for Buckhead wannabees.

The really relevant one to analyse if there is something crooked going on in a coverup of some detail of Obama’s birth is the one his campaign put up.


230 posted on 06/18/2008 7:59:50 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Fishy


231 posted on 06/18/2008 8:00:09 AM PDT by The Louiswu (Just say NO... to Hillary and O'Bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Where is the original, the one printed in 1961 and don’t tell me it is been lost, I was born in 1961 and I still have my original birth certificate!

Interesting bit of logic there. Let me get it straight. You were born in 1961. You still have your original birth certificate. Therefore, everyone born in 1961 has their original birth certificate.

232 posted on 06/18/2008 8:29:30 AM PDT by Fundamentally Fair (When all you have is a kitty, every problem looks like a troll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Fundamentally Fair
Exactly!
Wow you nailed me on that one!
Amazing!!!
You're freakin brilliant, astounding and I am sure fun at parties as well.

Looks like my inter-web access will be revoked now...

You are sharp!!!

Amazing...oh I said amazing already...well you really are.

Bet you waited all day to stomp on that one...good for you!!!
233 posted on 06/18/2008 8:39:55 AM PDT by The Louiswu (Just say NO... to Hillary and O'Bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

All that drama aside, do you stand by your reasoning?


234 posted on 06/18/2008 9:04:05 AM PDT by Fundamentally Fair (When all you have is a kitty, every problem looks like a troll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: billmor
How about if the RNC takes this to court to ask the Court to determine whether Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States?

There is no basis in law for a suit, before the Supreme Court or any other court, to make someone "prove" something like this.

Obama has not been chosen by the Electoral College as President-Elect. Until he is, his citizenship and birth status is of no legal significance whatsoever.

235 posted on 06/18/2008 9:23:25 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Cut the birth certificate crap! It's the communism, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

“I called HI records and conformed that these HI documents have the Signature Stamp AND an embossed/raised Seal ON THE BACK. The embossed seal is deep enough to be easily seen from the front.”

That is very interesting. Thank you for calling them.

How did this reporter “email her copy” if it the same one posted in this article that we are looking at without a certificate number? Since when does Hawaii DOH perform “email/telephone” confirmations as opposed to what is described on their website as written confirmations?

Not only is the reporter calling it a birth certificate, so is her supposed contact at DOH when it is a Certification - one would expect the official to be familiar with this distinction.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/article630058.ece

“It hit our inbox just like the chain e-mail attacks that made us want it in the first place, the final piece to a puzzle we’ve been sorting out for months. Sen. Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

“I know there have been some rumors spreading about Obama’s citizenship, so I wanted to make sure you all had a copy of his birth certificate,” Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor wrote in an e-mail.
...
To verify we did have the correct document, we contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records.

“It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,” spokesman Janice Okubo said after we e-mailed her our copy.

Okubo said a copy of the birth certificate was requested this month, but she wouldn’t specify by whom. But as we know from our attempts to get one in April, Hawaii law states that only family members can access such records.

Amy Hollyfield can be reached at...”


236 posted on 06/18/2008 10:15:56 AM PDT by xiangchi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Well, I downloaded the image from Obama’s site. It’s a much lower resolution jpeg. Truth be told it looks more like what I can create with a graphics program than the higher resolution one from the Kos: when you zoom in the letters go jaggy and the background colors infiltrate the letters. The higher resolution one posted at the top of this thread looks like a scanned document when zoomed in.

It’s hard to tell at the resolution, but the border on the one from Obama’s site may have the mismatching rectangles. It certainly looks like it on the left edge when zoomed in: two rows of the dark border pixels, rather than one as it would be if the border rectangles matched correctly.

Of course, maybe the State of Hawaii created the background using a graphics program.

Could someone from Hawaii with a genuine certification of live birth please scan a copy, then photoshop out the personal information, leaving the headers (like Child’s Name. . .Date filed by Registrar) as text samples and post the result, so we can see what the border and type look like on a scanned copy of a genuine certificate?

Preferably post a few different resolution scans.


237 posted on 06/18/2008 10:26:13 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
I believe it is a real copy made in the last two years. I have a friend who was born in HI and I compared her COB to this one - it was/is identical, all the way down the the anomalies the author notices. And yes, the seal is in black/white and hers has the authentication stamp on the back, in blue, which is identical.

IMNSHO, there is no story here.

238 posted on 06/18/2008 10:37:10 AM PDT by SoftballMominVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xiangchi
“It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,” spokesman Janice Okubo said after we e-mailed her our copy.

That can mean the FORM, LAYOUT, PAPER, ETC. is valid, not that this exact certificate is valid and all the information on it is valid.

Okubo said a copy of the birth certificate was requested this month,

The stamp date on this one is from 2007.

239 posted on 06/18/2008 10:42:29 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: JLS
The earlier thread addressed each and every issue being raised in this thread and rational answers were provided for each and every issue.

Basically the argument has been "Hey, bro, this thing has been scanned and changed", and, alas, that's what happens when you convert physical copy to an electronic format and then prepare that to fit on a website.

If that which you would expect to happen does seem to have happened, then it probably did happen.

I'd be really surprised if the document on the net showed different characteristics than that.

Another argument was that Hawaii was a foreign country in 1961. Although absurd on the face of it, the point was posted numerous times by different people. I doubt any of them were legitimate Freepers if you want to know the truth.

We also have claims by his brother that "Hey, he's all Moslem, Fo Sho", and I can imagine his brother doesn't particularly want to get murdered because some doufous Moslem in Kenya thinks it makes you an apostate to have Christian relatives. BTW, his brother wasn't raised with him, has a different mother and all that, and probably has very little more information about his man than that they shared a baby daddy (and there's a thread on what "baby daddy" means too).

Then there's this crazy argument about whether or not he should have been called a Negro, black, African or Raelian back in 1961. Look, I was there. I lived through it. The federales had not yet forced a monopoly on acceptable terms for race and people were free to call a spade a spade, a Jew a Hebrew, and a pig Petunia! They did so with relish. They also used a variety of other words for black people including "The N'WORD" ~ if you can imagine that. There was a period of time when "race" might be entered as "German", "Italian", "Irish" and so on. Language changes and sometimes faster than you can notice. As a certified member of the nomenklatura (a perfectly good Soviet word referring to those who decide what words mean) for most of my working career, I assure you that even as we speak there are people being paid to change the meanings of every word I have typed into this post, and within 10 years, the meaning of every item could be the opposite of how you perceive it today.

Here we are dealing with stuff done in 1961. That's when punch cards and digitek were still considered "high tech". You can get a certified "abstract" of the original document if you want. It will tell you his mother was white, his father from Africa, and he was born in Hawaii. Not much more to tell really. Babies come to us without a past you know.

240 posted on 06/18/2008 10:43:15 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 321-334 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson