Skip to comments.We were warned...
Posted on 07/28/2009 4:24:14 PM PDT by Polarik
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to force his Socialist agenda on America, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the banking industry, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the mortgage industry, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the auto industry, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the health insurance industry, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the health care industry, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control our health care decisions, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control our medical records, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control our energy usage, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to limit our Constitutional rights, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to control the media, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to raise taxes and create a bigger budget deficit than all the previous administrations combined, the liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama wants to hide all of his personal records from the American public, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama has dual citizenship and is not Constitutionally eligible to become President, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
During the Presidential campaign, when conservatives warned that Obama has never shown his real, paper birth certificate to the Senate as John McCain did, liberals called them racists and rightwing extremists.
Now that Obama and the liberal Democrats have been in power for seven months, and all of these things conservatives warned about have either happened or are happening now, and Obama still refuses to release his original birth certificate, preferring to forge one instead, while illegally using campaign funds to pay his personal attorney over 1 million to keep it hidden, the liberals no longer call them racists and rightwing extremists.
Now, they call them racists, rightwing extremists, wing nuts, and tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists with the previously silent, liberal media doing the same.
During the Presidential campaign last year, a vicious rumor about one of the candidates running for President was making its way around the Internet. It made the patently absurd claim that a well-known US Senator was born in another country and was not qualified to become President. These rumors persisted due to extremists on the political fringe who kept them alive. These rumor-mongers insisted that the Senator was hiding his birth certificate because it would prove that he was not born on US Soil. Never has there been such racism displayed or such utter discrimination shown to an esteemed member of our government. These tin-foil hat conspiracy nuts were very reminiscent of members of the 9/11 Truth Movement, a group who maintained that President George Bush and his Administration had deliberately caused the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. There wasn’t just one conspiracy about 9/11, like this birth certificate nonsense, there were hundreds of them and the people who promulgated them were known as “Truthers.” In a similar vein, the conspiracy theorists would come to be known as the “Birthers.”
They would continue to hound the media in hopes they could get some recognition. They were determined to have the Senator removed from the ballot saying that he is not Constitutionally-qualified. When the mainstream media ignored them, one of them had the gall to file a lawsuit in court, charging that the Senator was not born in the US, and because of a little-known clause in the Constitution that requires the President to be a natural-born citizen. The Supreme Court has never legally defined what “natural-born citizen” means, but the president has always been that only “a child, born on US soil, to two US citizens” is a natural-born citizen.
After having the lawsuit thrown out of court because the Plaintiff did not have standing, and tiring of all the nasty rumors, the Senator released a copy of his original birth certificate that members of Congress could also see and accept that he had provided proof that he was fully qualified to become President.
Yet, the rumors persisted, and now a self-styled “expert” was claiming that he “proved” the Senator’s birth certificate was forged! It begs the question as to how a US Senator could have risen so far, as to be on the precipice of securing the highest office in the land without ever being certified as eligible.
Well, so much for Senator McCain’s trials and tribulations. Now it was Senator Obama’s turn.
You heard that right. The original “Birthers” were not right-wing extremists who hated the idea of a Black man becoming President -- they were LEFT-wing extremists who hated the idea of a 72 year-old White man becoming President. In April, the Senate unanimously approved a Resolution, co-sponsored by the Junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Hussein Obama, that Senator John Sydney McCain was a natural-born citizen of the United States, whose parents were two US Citizens serving our country at the Coco Solo Naval Base in the Panama Canal Zone – an area considered to be under US territorial jurisdiction (but has been disputed) – and therefore, was Constitutionally-eligible to become President.
It was the Leftist liberal Birthers who claimed to find not one, but two original birth certificates showing that McCain was born in Colon, Panama. The “self-styled expert” who proved that these birth certificate copies had been forged was none other than Dr. Ron Polarik, at your service.
Senator John McCain was asked by the Senate to show a copy of his original birth certificate, which he did, along with 2,500 pages of medical records, and a unanimous Resolution was passed certifying him as eligible to run for President.
Senator Obama cannot be a natural-born citizen (NBC) according to the majority interpretation of NBC and the precident established in all previous Presidential elections; that is, a child born on US soil to two US citizens.
Why, then, didn’t the Senate also certify Senator Barack Obama in the same way?
Was it because at the time of Obama's birth, he automatically acquired his father's British citizenship at birth rendering him not an NBC?
Does it have anything to with an ultra-leftist blog being the first one to see a copy his alleged “original birth certificate?” Does it have anything to with an ultra-leftist blog being the first place a very suspicious-looking copy or his alleged “original birth certificate was posted?
Does it have anything to with this ultra-leftist blog being a site that only ultra-leftist liberals would visit?
No! It is not a place where the public, at large, could see it. So the claim that Obama “released a copy of birth certificate” for the public to see, was patently false for the entire day of June 12, and it was only in the late afternoon that the Obama Campaign posted a copy of the same birth certificate, but one that was less than half its size, and originally contained in a PDF file. Realizing that putting an image in a PDF file is not the same thing as “showing it,” they posted the image as a JPG file.
Then, on the following day, the Obama Campaign announces that is launching a new website called “Fight The Smears” which they said they created to “push back” on all of the “Smears” that his opponents were making, including the one about Obama not being a US citizen, and to fight that “smear,” Obama had posted a copy of his “original birth certificate.” However, when they saw how people were questioning the validity of the image shown on the Daily Kos, they quickly changed their image file into one that was half again as small and barely legible.
Even then, it was a false claim to say that Obama “released a copy of birth certificate” for the public to see, because only supporters of Obama would ever visit his website, and it wasn’t his supporters who were asking to see his birth certificate.
So, during the next three days, both the Annenberg Political Fact Check and its sister site, Politifact, posted their own copies of the same image, but yet in different sizes and qualities. Then, the media went to work, publicizing these sites as bring the places and people who “verified” Obama’s “original birth certificate.”
But, that was a bald-faced lie as this “document image” was portraying a Certification of Live Birth, a two-side piece of paper containing a transcript of a birth record, and was not an original birth certificate. Yet these two sites would persist to falsely claim that this copy was made from “Obama’s original birth certificate.” And what about the criticisms made of the image? Only a small handful of people would continue to say that this image was not a genuine image at all but a heavily doctored one. The more that people persisted in criticizing the image, the more that Annenberg FactCheck would defend it and slander those making the criticisms. This would also be the modus operandi of Politifact, another so-called “Fact Checker,” as well as Snopes, a so-called “urban myth buster.”
These sites operated under the guise of being “nonpolitical and nonpartisan,” but nothing could be further from the truth. These groups were blatantly pro-Obama and anti-Clinton during the primaries, and after the candidates were selected, they were still blatantly pro-Obama but were now just as anti-McCain.
Although they posted a number of criticisms of Obama, the numbers were not equal, and the differential between the weights assigned to an issue, namely the importance of an issue, was heavily weighted in favor of Obama and against McCain.
Clearly, the strategy implemented by the Obama Campaign was to lie about everything and try to get away with it, knowing full-well, that even if half of what they claimed was “debunked” by Factcheck, they would win out on the other half which they knew were the more important issues. Obama had many friends and supporters in common with the Annenberg Foundation that would serve to influence FactCheck on what they should or should not claim about Obama. Metaphorically, the people who ran Factcheck knew on which side of their bread was buttered. The ties between powerful people in the Democratic party and Annenberg, as well as between them and Obama ran just as far and just as deep.
The only meaningful way to characterize Annenberg Factcheck (along with the other so-called “fact checking” sites), is to treat it as a Propaganda wing of the Obama Campaign. Factcheck was Obama’s full-time alibi service. They were so far in-the-tank for Obama that they would need deep sea diving equipment. Factcheck was the perfect shill, having been in existence since 200three.
Without a doubt, this one-sided, heavily doctored image led to the most inexplicable and unbelievable series of defensive efforts ever launched over a facsimile. The visit to the Obama Headquarters by two Factcheck staffers to “see, touch, and take photos” of this “hallowed and revered” COLB object just to prove that there really was a “three-dimensional” piece of paper with a heavily-embossed Seal and the Registrar’s signature block on the reverse side, a side that was never scanned in the two months following the “official” posting of the “scam” image.
Also, for those two months, the number of people who likewise rushed to its defense, slandering and libeling anyone who said anything negative about it. If an anomaly was mentioned, not only was the person ostracized for even mentioning it, there were no shortages of off-the-wall excuses for it.
Unless the average person visited the slime pits that comprise the liberal blosphere, they would have no idea just how savagely they attacked me, while postulating anything that explained away the anomaly.
I said that the Seal is not the same one used by Hawaii on 2007 COLBs, and one of them said that they “changed the design” after on 7, 2007, the date of the date-stamp.
I said that the color was totally changed, they claimed that it was done to make it look better.
I said that the borders don’t look like the actual 2007 borders, they said it was the fault of the scanner the Campaign used.
I said that there were white and grey pixels in the letters, and in between the letters, they said that it’s scanner artifacts, or JPG artifacts, or anti-aliasing.
Every little idiosyncratic difference I found, they came up with another cockamamie excuse for it.
If you had 850 million dollars and you wanted to make an honest copy of a very important document so that people who see it would know that it’s genuine, THIS is not the way you would do it. This scan image is about as far away from being genuine and representative as any copy can be. The evidence that this image has been edited and altered is irrefutable. It has all of the digital signatures of being Photoshopped: the process of editing an whenever an image or photo is edited to make it resemble something that does not exist in real life, we say that it has been Photoshopped. Adobe Photoshop is a high-end graphics editing software with a long history of being the program of choice for professional photographers and graphic artists. Photoshop, and programs like it, can take a photo or image and recreate it according to wishes of the user.
If someone wanted to take a horse and make a unicorn out of it that will have believe they exist, then Photoshop will do it. It has all of the physical quantities of being Photoshopped.
More to come. Stay tuned.
So not that much has changed.
Nicely done, what are the chances they’ll publish it (or claim it for their own)?
But we never expected our congress critters to be so pliable and gutless. Whatever bad law is passed, they too have to be held accountable. Obama alone is not able to destroy this country singlehandedly — it takes Congress to help him with it.
Every time a conservative warned America about Obama’s plans for America, the liberal media would intercede on Obama’s behalf and calm the waters.
Very impressive article! I’m looking forward to seeing it in WND.
bookmark to read later
May God bless you in your work and ( especially) keep you safe.
Anyone who believes an anonymous poster’s claims is psychotic.
An anonymous poster who claims to be qualified to give expert opinion is psychotic.
Are you people really so mentally deranged that you believe some person posting on the Web?
Where is your ability to think critically?
Experts’ opinions are valued because of WHO the person is, not who he or she claims to be.
Someone hiding himself and preying on your suspicions of Obama is using you. I urge you to stop and think clearly about the utter insanity of buying this person’s snake oil.
He’s at least as bad as Obama himself.
It pains me to see you all fall for this. WND, I can see falling for it. Because WND persists in publishing lies that it knows are lies.
I thought FR was different. It never used to have so many gullible people.
It’s so sad to watch you all go mad, for that is surely where you are headed if you don’t stop thinking like crazy people.
Don’t forget that I am totally opposed to Obama’s political philosophy — what I am railing against (above) is your buying into the insanity of what Polarik says about himself and about the document Obama produced.
Maybe the COLB is a fake.
But a real man or woman will prove it, not a coward like Polarik, whose goal is apparently simply to get attention.
He’s sick, folks, so I pray you’ll protect yourselves.
Just remember that I totally oppose EVERYTHING Obama stands for.
Ok, TE, I don't believe a word you have printed here. Thanks.
No, Troglodyte. Experts are valued for the facts they find, and we don't give a sh** about YOUR opinions.
(Congressmen don't read what they pass judgment on either.)
Question about the BC thing...
I don’t have my original, paper birth certificate - all I have are the “certified” reprints you can order. While I am not attempting to stand up for Obama, why is that such an impossible thing?
“Stay the course!” Please, “Stay the course! The Truth Will Out!
Wayne reminds me of these other nuts and Lyndon LaRouche fruitcakes he championed in writing as poor little "victims":
Valerie Plame Wilson
Gen. Janis Karpinski
Tech ed, I am such a cynic on anything printed or reported that most of the time I just set it all aside and wait for more facts.
From my research I knew last year who obama was and no one would listen to me. I already knew these things without the forensic science behind Polariks evidence. In fact, he is the only one who could make me understand the borders stuff.
I just had a feeling and went digging. My friends were shocked I became political. I felt my children were going to lose the America I grew up in. Obama’s past was scary and the way he went about hiding it meant I was on the right track. I found articles scrubbed and I found obama was a total phony. I had no means of proving it and I was too busy working to call the media or find the facts to prove my theory. Polarik and others put a lot of it together for me.
I wish you would argue or discuss the facts instead of shooting the messenger and berating them personally. Which parts specifically do you disagree with? You say use common sense. Common sense says you don’t hide something unless it will hurt or destroy you.
Obama is hiding something, many things and i want to know what it is. He is taking our country to his progressive ideology and if he is backed by radical islam then I want him out of office NOW.
On September 8, 2004, Dan Rather cited exclusive information, including documents to justify major CBS Evening News and 60 Minutes stories alleging that George W. Bush shirked his duties when he was in the Texas Air National Guard in the 1960s and 1970s. Within a few hours of those documents being posted on CBS Newss Web site, however, typography experts voiced skepticism that the documents had actually originated with their alleged author and Bushs former commanding officer, the late Lt. Colonel Jerry Killian. As the evidence mounted, Rather stubbornly clung to the idea that his story was bulletproof, and he derided critics as partisans and Internet rumormongers. When he apologized on September 20, Rather would not concede that the documents were forgeries, only that he and CBS could no longer vouch for their authenticity.
CBS Disregarded Experts, Challenged Laura Bush: ABCs Brian Ross reported on the September 14 World News Tonight that two experts hired by CBS News say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast about the disputed National Guard records. But over on CBS, reporter John Roberts wondered why President Bush wasnt taking those memos seriously: The President has yet to weigh in on new documents about his National Guard record made public last week by 60 Minutes. Roberts also chastised First Lady Laura Bush for doubting CBSs memos were authentic: Laura Bush offered no evidence to back up her claim, and CBS News continues to stand by its reporting.
Sticking By His Smear: On September 10, Dan Rather responded to charges the memos he cited as proving Bushs dereliction were forged, telling his CBS Evening News audience that the memos were genuine and attacking any doubters as partisan rumor-mongers. Today, on the Internet and elsewhere, some people, including many who are partisan political operatives, concentrated not on the key questions of the overall story, but on the documents that were part of the support of the story, Rather castigated. But his lame defense ignored key challenges to the documents typography and content, and the doubts voiced by the widow and son of the supposed author, the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. Instead, Rather chose to repeat his indictment of President Bushs National Guard service. Rather arrogantly concluded: If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far there is none. (CyberAlert, September 11, 2004)
Of course, the fact that he has been in more mosques than Churches since usurping the Presidency and is rabidly anti-israel and pro-arab should not be taken as a sign that he is a crypto-muslim.
Until recently, my profile linked to my actual business, so for years, people here knew who I was.
You’ve been outed by:
You have NO credentials in document examination.
You have been lying to everyone, and now everyone will know.
By the way, you really should post a picture that’s taken more recently than 30 years ago, don’t you think?
Who delivered him, what doctor?
Where are his passport records?
You attacking one "Polarick" sheds no light on any of those questions, so your attack is pointless.
you mean like liberals had the 9/11 government conspiracy going? And that Bush went to Iraq to take all their oil? And how Halliburton was stealing from Americans while diane feinstein funneled money to her husband? How the oil men went to war because they were in oil and how they raised gas prices intentionally?
Spare me. Valerie Plame was a political agenda and nothing else. the timelines prove this.
Let’s talk about the progressive agenda and ethics violations going on right now that the dems in control are refusing to look into. lets look at the ACORN fraud that taxpayers are funding. Rangel, Pelochio, Feinstein, Dodd, murtha, the list goes on and on. Not conspiracies but the facts are there and dems, hey, we aren’t going to do anything about it.
Let’s talk about Pelochio doubling the deficit since she took over in 2006 and obama tripling it in 6 months.
conspiracies, the one most hurtful was the government was in on 9/11. Don’t talk to me about nuts.
Unless you have evidence on what Obama is hiding, all you are doing is attacking someone trying to find truth. Do you have all this information in the form of a legal document we can see?
Who delivered obama, what doctor?
Where are his passport records?
where are his senate records? By law he must keep them and he said maybe they were thrown away.
where are his college records?
how did he pay for college?
what kind of grades did he get in college?
If he went to Indonesia and was adopted, where and when did he come back to the states and on what passport?
Where is obama’s mother birth certificate?
Youve been outed by:
by whom? outed? it is a website saying nothing about any evidence but a lot of jealousy over a single person trying to find truth. It goes to court cases with no decisions. That goes more to obama not telling the truth than anything. It may take a year or two but obama will answer in the courts. I promise you that.
why don’t spend your time trying to get obama to show his documents and get this out of the way instead of berating anyone asking for verification? Then you can come back here and say neener neener you were all wrong. Like G Gordon Liddy said, when Chris Matthews proves Obama is natural born we will admit and apologize we are wrong. Not a problem but until then....
I am way more concerned by all of these people calling birthers names, ridiculing them and they have no facts whatsoever. I feel like obama is using taxpayer money to send out these goons to deflect truth. To make everyone sound stupid and not go further. the reports onTV never have the whole facts of the case or they choose not too.
If everyone stopped thinking and asking questions of the powers that be, the progressives in charge right now would be euthanizing seniors over 65 immediately. It would be Hitlers regime all over again.
The POINT is that it’s kinda hard to say one is seeking the truth, when doing so based on a lie. If the story is accurate, Polarik has misled everyone here.
THAT DOES NOT affect any of your statements, Rome2000, about what Obama has refused to disclose.
That DOES — or should — affect the weight given to Polarik’s various claims.
Yup. He’s not to be trusted. No document examination experience.
And he’s got a vintage website to go along with his vintage picture: circa late 1990s.
There is something fundamentally wrong with this picture.
It has been reported that Husseins college education was paid for by Khalid Al-Mansour, a black panther with ties to the Saudis.
The man has no verifiable background and IS HIDING DAMAGING INFORMATION related to his eligibility to be POTUS, his association with known communists and terrorists, and indeed his loyalty to the USSA.
It is NOT going away, because every day this marxist son of a whore tries to nationalize another industry, take more of our money, and take more of our freedom, in fact running the nation as if it was some third world African marxist dictatorship like Zimbabwe.
There is a reason this is happening, that he is not governing with this nations best interests as a priority, and that reason appears to be that he is trying to destroy America.
The Obama Campaign had an $850 million budget. They could have bought certified paper copies of his real birth certificate and given them to all 535 members of Congress.
The Obama Campaign had an $850 million budget. They could have spent one-thousand of one percent of it and bought the Imacon FlexTight scanner (which scans at 8,000 DPI), about the best scanner you can buy, and used it to make a digital scan.
I have a $100 Canon scanner that I used to make real scans: ones that clearly show the texture of the paper, clearly show the Seal and both folds, and accurately reproduce the actual color and appearance of a real COLB.
But, what they did instead, was to make a single scan image that does not show the texture of the paper, does not show anything more than pieces of the Seal, does not show both folds, and does not accurately reproduce the actual color and appearance of a real COLB.
I began my research on June 13 of last year with a very simple hypothesis: "
Is it possible to naturally produce an original scan image like the one posted online?"
The answer is, "No."
The fact that I am the only one to take an original scan of a real COLB and make it look like the Obama COLB "scan" - and to document what I did to do that, should be telling, in and of itself.
Basically, the bottom line is that you cannot take a real COLB, put it on the scanner, any scanner, and simply press SCAN, and expect it to come out looking like the Obama COLB "scan." You have to manually manipulate the image itself by changing the color balance, blurring, then sharpening the image, and saving it more than once.
These manual changes were not made to make the scan image "better-looking," but "worse-looking," especially the border when compared to original scans of known COLBs with the same border.
Can anyone think of a cogent reason, other than to hide the evidence of forging, why someone would go to all this trouble to fundamentally change the way an original 300 DPI scan image should look like?
I've made several hundred COLB scans myself. Other than increasing the exposure level on the scanner, as you would with a camera, all of the images were originals and fully representative of the COLB document I was trying to reproduce.
All of them had a very visible Seal and second fold line, and if you saw the photo I took of it, it would show that the Seal impression in mine is way more shallow than what appears in Factcheck's photos.
There is no reason on Earth why the Seal shown in the photos would not be visible on a 300DPI scan of it. It doesn't take a document forensic expert to see that: a child can see that.
Factcheck refers to their photos as "high resolution," but, in reality, the resolution of their photos is 180DPI, less than the 300DPI resolution of scanned images.
Scanners produce a more accurate representation of a paper document than do cameras: unlike a camera, they don't have to be precisely aliged to the document and you don't have to worry about focusing and controlling the lighting to avoid color casts and shadows as you would with a camera.
so, for anyone to say that Factcheck photos absolved the the Obama Campaign from having to make any more scans - of better quality and both sides of a COLB -- is patently ludicrous.
Obama supporters are convinced in their mind that the "scam image" is real, genuine, and conclusive proof of his birth in Hawaii, and the only way to resolve the cognitive dissonance is to marginalize the people producing the facts to the contrary.
Worse yet is for Factcheck and Politifact to insist he is a "committed Christian."
"Committed" to what?
excellent job.. please let us all know when you get this published.
Can anyone think of a cogent reason, other than to hide the evidence of forging, why someone would go to all this trouble to fundamentally change the way an original 300 DPI scan image should look like?
Logic seems to be trumped by insanity in the minds of The One’s Followers