This Jeena-posted image is attributed to a friend of his, named "Hendryk", who's obviously pretty good at Photoshop (note lighting effects on the 's').
HF
Posted on 02/09/2014 10:49:33 AM PST by FreeAtlanta
Authorities say the cause of death for the Hawaii health director who died after an airplane crashed off the island of Molokai was cardiac arrhythmia — an irregular heartbeat. Loretta Fuddy died due to the stress from the horrific Dec. 11 plunge into the water after the si …
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.nbcnews.com ...
“.... It’s obvious that Kansas and Kenya do not produce native aboriginal Hawaiians.....”
But “born-at-home” birth certificates can say..... ANYTHING ;)
Maggief,
Many thanks for that research !!
The amount of money involved in this trust is mind-boggling.
Following the money has been.... interesting.
No, because the Google results’ use of the word “Norman Asing” was in the announcements from jeena paradies’ wikileaks full-page Advertiser announcements page. The words from the ads on that Advertiser page were there in the Google search results also.
Butterdezillion,
I found your analysis; many thanks!
So you followed the link to the wikileaks website, found the full page of the Advertiser on which the announcemets were printed, and where was the name Norman Asing, other than in the announcement section? Something tells me I haven't got this right...
What was initially received from the Hawaii State Librarian did not follow the protocols for how they do microfilm copies. They have a copyright stamping that they put on microfilm copies when they make them for people. They copy the full page and stamp it with a copyright statement, to make sure that they wouldn’t be sued for copyright infringement for making the copy.
We have no way of knowing whether that clipping came from microfilm. We know it wasn’t handled how microfilms are usually handled. i strongly suspect that it was just a copy from the microfilm, with Obama’s announcement inserted in. Pretty easy to do when it’s just a little square of 4-5 announcements you have to make look genuine.
If Obama’s name was really in the microfilms at that point then the Obots could easily have gone to the libraries, made a full-page copy, and shown it to the world. They didn’t do that. Somebody at the Advertiser office farmed out an image of the Star-Bulletin announcements page with Obama’s announcement in it, to Mike Rivero at Whatreallyhappened.com, to “Koa” at TD’s blog, and to somebody who posted at the Prius Chat board - the exact same copy, with the same hair in the viewer and the same edges created from the scanning. It was the exact same SCAN, farmed out to 3 different people - 2 of whom each claimed to have gone to the library and made the copy personally. No way did they do that. This is the same exact SCAN.
So instead of doing what they CLAIMED to have done - which would have been a piece of cake if the announcement was really on the microfilm copies at that point, as claimed - they lied. Both the full-page Advertiser and Star-Bulletin announcement images came from the same place: somebody at the Advertiser office, which passed off jeena paradies’ editable, C&P-line-riddled wikileaks page (submitted to wikileaks by somebody in SWEDEN) as being from the Advertiser office in Honolulu. How the heck did a guy in Sweden end up uploading to wikileaks a copy supposedly taken directly from the microfilm at the Advertiser office in Honolulu? And later on the Advertiser office showed a different blurry version of what they also claimed to be from their office but that lacked the C&P lines that were in paradies’ image.
By putting these images out there and claiming they were from microfilm, time was bought to change out the actual microfilms. The Library of Congress microfilm box had its call number altered for a while, presumably to ensure that it was “misfiled” for a while (and thus unavailable to any curious eyes) until the call number was “fixed” and the roll became find-able again. But errors were made, even at that - stuff like a large scratch down the length of the roll, ending on the page right before Obama’s announcement, or the page right before Obama’s announcement accidentally being filmed TWICE on the roll as would be expected if somebody accidentally made a splice AFTER the page intended to be replaced rather than before, the fingerprints, the poor microfilm quality that wouldn’t have happened with the microfilming company’s standards, etc.
And at least one anomaly like that happened in each of the libraries we checked. Some libraries we checked at different times, and the later copies were missing “scratches” that had been in earlier copies - showing that at least one change-out had made and suggesting that SEVERAL had been made in that particular library.
I hope you can follow what I’m saying here.
At the time that I did the Google search the wikileaks page wasn’t available. I could see that it was referring to the full-page Advertiser announcements because it had the words from the ads on that full page, as well as the words to the Norman Asing son’s birth announcement. And those words were searchable to Google’s search engine, so I knew it was an OCR-enabled file and not a graphic image as all the other images were.
I learned how to search archive.org and was able to find an archived page with the wikileaks posting, showing the submitter as jeena paradies. I sent myself that page in hushmail. Then there was some high drama I was involved in that threw me for a loop so I had to get away from the research for a while. When I came back I couldn’t get to my hushmail stuff because I hadn’t signed in to the account for 3 weeks. So the proof of the jeena paradies posting was lost. Wikileaks has since removed the information about who posted the image, and removed the image from the Austria and US versions of wikileaks - I presumed because forgeries could be prosecutable in those countries if the image was left up in those places.
That was also around the time that the sheathing on the wiring on my husband’s van was cut and my daughter’s computer crashed (which I was using because my computer had a trojan on it) so I had no way of figuring out where, if anywhere, on the computer(s) I had saved that proof. It was an awful time. But I remembered the name and once as much as could be was retrieved from the crashed hard drive I found I still had some of the search results from when I had tried to find out who this guy was, after I had found that he was the original poster of the full-page Advertiser image.
Whew. I hope this isn’t too confusing.
I follow! It’s almost item for item the same story as the birth certificate. If there had ever been one for a child born on that day, at that time, whose parents were Mr & Mrs Obama, who lived at that particular address, then that ridiculous COLB without a number would never have appeared on fightthesmears, there would have been no need for the factcheck fiasco, and we would not be looking at a forged image presented on a screen, an image that is made up of numerous layers.
And Onaka wouldn’t have needed to play word games, he would have been able to VERIFY that the document was true and correct.
Then, he would have signed the verification himself.
Thanks for that concise, focused outline, it surely leaves nothing uncovered.
You know what it all indicates? Panic. They weren’t prepared. If his cabal had thought he had a chance at the presidency, they would have cleaned it up beforehand, instead, it looks like they rushed into it AFTER.
Recall now what it was he was reported to have told Alan Keyes? He said it didn’t matter that he wasn’t eligible, he was only standing for Senator.
I think we can reasonably assume that the announcement we see is what replaces the name of the dead little girl.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3052914/posts?page=40#40
quote: We don’t know if she’s his real birth mother. Even Cold Case Posse investigator Mike Zullo confirms that.
Re #328 replying to #327
Summing up the info in those posts:
The forgery was done sometime between 0 running for senator and when he was fixing to run for president.
And re: #329
The posse FIRST uncovered evidence of forgery of that birth cert, and THEN they cast doubt on the parentage.
Following up,
The posse has now expanded the investigation, bringing in officers from the sheriffs department itself.
Means its now an investigation into crimes having been committed.
yep, but don’t tell seize. ;-)
btw, can you cross post that comment on his special thread?
Absolutely. So can none “proven” BC. See my post to you on other thread
Only a properly obtained certificate be used in a court of law as I said there O is again twerking the legal system
Many thanks for the info and analysis!
That BC of o’s is not proven legally.
And its hiding something he doesn’t want let out.
That’s why he and his minions have obfuscated, Alinsky -ized, and stonewalled any attempt to get to the bottom of it.
HF
Yep
As it stands right now the material he has presented is just hearsay and does not follow the standard of proof needed in court
The reason for the standard of proof is to eliminate the falsehoods that do intentionally or non intentionally arise from hearsay
Re: date of forgery
The good people we in the process of impeaching him while a senator
(Link is somewhere in the Chicago crime thread)
Iirc one of the charges was that he had lied on his application for a law license. — checked he had never used another name the BHO
That certainly would have instigated a need to get the material on record of Lolo ‘s adoption removed from legal documentation
He would be charged with falsifying that documentation if exposed
Re: date of forgery
The good people we in the process of impeaching him while a senator
(Link is somewhere in the Chicago crime thread)
Iirc one of the charges was that he had lied on his application for a law license. — checked he had never used another name the BHO
That certainly would have instigated a need to get the material on record of Lolo ‘s adoption removed from legal documentation
He would be charged with falsifying that documentation if exposed
Gathering material on Illinois impeachment here:
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.