FOX's Resident Windbag Claims Prez's Phony Docs Are Legitimate

8/1/14 | Joe Lynch

[Conservative Gato]

It will come out that Obama was born in Kenya and his white grandparents registered his birth in Hawaii! That is why we only get bad muli-layer Adobe document.

If the masses only knew how easy foreign-born birth certificates were able to get in Hawaii back then, there would be even more Americans questioning it. I stopped watching BOR when he jumped the shark with 0bama and not investigating this more. The foreign-born Hawaiian BC's are FACT! Back then, the young state of Hawaii did this in order to get more federal money for the state.

Since this has the power to take down the corrupt democrat party and their progressive statist big gov't movement, none of them, including the corrupt media, don't want to hear any of it and would rather believe all the lies.

CGato

[HotHunt]

I don’t know exactly what it takes to be a computer document expert, but I been a self-employed digital computer graphics artist and commercial print broker for over 20 years now. I am well-versed in Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat. When Obama announced that he had posted his long-form birth certificate on the White House website several years ago, I went to the site and downloaded the file. Within minutes I was able to disassemble the PDF file into at least 11 separate layers. It was obvious to me at that moment that this was an image created from many parts by (and this is the important part) someone who wasn’t experience enough to “flatten” the layers into one single image before it was published and posted to the WH website. The White House claimed the file was a photocopy of the single page BC. In fact it was an image made up from many different parts that didn’t all match. If the person(s) who created this file had just flattened the image before saving it, nobody would have known the difference. But because they didn’t, the multiple layers were easily identified by even the most amateur computer graphics person.

I saw the exchange last night on O’Reilly and I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. He claims to be a “simple man” frequently on his show, but I think that he really is simple.....minded. For O’Reilly to dismiss the BC fact out of hand, is very telling about his expertise and professionalism or lack thereof. He is wrong about so many things, that it is apparent that his own egotism and narcissism get in the way of intelligent thought and analysis. He goes so out of his way to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, but he gives Obama too much credit. He is clouded by his own inflated view of his own self-importance.

Bottom line is that Obama’s long form BC is phony and so is O’Reilly.

[Carry me back]

Yep Bor is just another cog in the nwo machine. He is no American or conservative. We would be better off if he was deported.

[Ann Archy]

Sadly FAOX now has a LOT of windbags....NOT just BOR!! UNWATCHABLE!!!!

[IMR 4350]

I’ve been told a baby that age can’t clear their ears.

Pressure up and down like on a plane will rupture their eardrums.

Also in 1961 jet travel was just getting started into the pacific.

To get back from Kenya she would have had to travel from Kenya to London. From London to NY. From NY to the west coast.

How many stops with each one, who knows. It might take a week or more just to get to the US from Kenya.

In 1961 it wasn’t even a guarantee you could get a baby out of Kenya because of the disease. Immunization laws were a whole lot different then, and that would have to be British laws not US.

His mother was registered to start school in Washington state, she’s going to have her kid where she’s not going to miss out on starting school.

Having a kid in Hawaii or Kenya it’s not a guarantee she can be there to start school.

[Mears]

Thanks so much for the information.

.

[IMR 4350]

A friend’s wife told me about a baby’s ears rupturing.

She couldn’t fly in a pressurized plane for 3 weeks, ISRC, after giving birth and she couldn’t allow her daughter to fly in a pressurized plane she remembered something like 6-8 weeks because it could rupture the ears.

That was about 17 years ago when she had her daughter, 1961 it would probably be a lot more restrictive.

[piroque]

Bill suffers from his own version of narcissism.

What did you expect from a draft dodger ? Just like blowjob clinton he ran off to England so he wouldn't be drafted.

[Mears]

I’m old——had my first flight in the mid fifties and had my 1st child in 1961,but in those days people rarely flew with children.

My grandchildren all flew as babies,but older,and I didn’t even think of the ears when I posted to you.

All I was thinking is that a newborn would be a snap to fly with compared to an to an 18 month old. :-)

,

[IMR 4350]

With the immunization laws in 1961, Obamas mother may not have been able to get her jug eared clown out of Canada if she had him listed as a British subject born in Canada, which is why they may have needed a phony BC showing he was born in the US.

I remember as a kid in the early 1960’s the whole town had to line up for immunization a couple of times.

People simply weren’t allowed to come and go into and out of the US without the right shots.

[MMaschin]

She was moving to Washington permanently, so it's likely that she had all of her possessions. That being the case I find it highly unlikely that she would have flown, and believe that there is a high probability that she traveled to Washington by ship.



I find it amazing that some people actually believe that the PDF is an authentic copy of a paper document. All you need to do is look at it - try this.

1) Download the PDF directly from the WH - http://whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

2) Open the PDF, and zoom into box number 4 - that's the box with twin information.



Notice anything? So.... You have a form that was hand drafted back in the 50's or 60's. Then it was filled out, and put into a book. 50 years later it was photocopied, and then scanned into a PDF. And two boxes in that section come out as pixel for pixel exact copies of one another?! Simply impossible, one box was copied and pasted into the document to create another empty box. Why? I have no idea.



Before anyone says something stupid like it's a result of optimization, or OCR, I'll explain the basics of those processes.

OCR works by finding pattern matches to known fonts. When a match is found the image data representing the number/character is removed, and the number/character from the font is added to a text layer. This results in a searchable text layer being created with all the values that were recognized. These numbers/characters all come from he font data, so they will match, so for example every 'A' found will be an exact copy of every other 'A' found. But what's important to remember is that they all come from the font data, so they will all match the font definition - so they will be very sharp and clean. There are many cases of letters and numbers that are exact copies of others on the document, but they are not sharp, they didn't come from an existing font file, and there is no text layer. So they are not the result of OCR.


Optimization works by finding repeating patterns, and replacing them with a pointer to one instance of the data. For example, if a document contains 1000 'A's in a row, in 10 different places, then the document can be optimized and the 1000 'A's are stored once, and in the document they are replaced with simple pointers to the one instance. What is important to remember here is that optimization does not change anything, it finds patterns that are already exact copies, it doesn't change things that are similar into exact copies of each other.


I'd love to see someone try to explain how those two boxes are EXACT copies of each other.

[GregNH]

In Dreams he says "I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school."

If you were born in a foreign country it would be very natural for your BC and vaccination records to be together.

[IMR 4350]

I put my money on Canada so he would be a British subject like his daddy.

[4Zoltan]

Mixed Raster Content compression is the answer.

Look at this PDF

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/rules/comments-3-13-TalismanEnergy.PDF

It has letters that are pixel-for-pixel identical. In the second row the name “Smelley, Ronald”, the “e”s and the “l”s are pixel identical.

It’s how the scanning software creates the smaller file size.

[maddog55]

I’m no expert but from what I’ve read and seen the birth certificate is fake but it’s irrelevant what anyone thinks until there’s proof positive submitted to and ruled on by a court. Until then there are no fake documents regardless of what anyone says.

[MMaschin]

Here's a link to how MRC actually works.

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0SO8wdYFuFTsTcA2WBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzNWllOW1jBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ4OV8x/RV=2/RE=1407289049/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fsignal.ece.utexas.edu%2f~queiroz%2fpapers%2fei99mrc.pdf/RK=0/RS=P4xdhsKIX7BdVcagnGqrDOG.Ny8-

First, MRC only applies to multi-layer images - these boxes are contained on a single layer.

The fact that one box is an exact copy of another, can not, and is not a result of MRC. If what you are saying was true, then why isn't the background behind the boxes identical? The answer is because they are separate images contained on separate layers, and therefore there is nothing that MRC will do with them.

To test this fact, simply print off the document and scan it back into a pdf, and see how different the boxes come out to be.

[MMaschin]

This is the link I was including - http://signal.ece.utexas.edu/~queiroz/papers/ei99mrc.pdf

[4Zoltan]

You link to an article by Professor Richardo de Queiroz?

Did you know he reviewed the White House PDF.

“MRC is about separating the single-image document into multiple layers, hopefully each one with a given characteristic. This has to be done automatically, in what we call segmentation. What I see in the document [White House PDF] are signs of MRC segmentation consistent with strategies in line with the techniques pioneered by DjVu. I (and my students) do not advocate doing the segmentation that way, but that is not the point either. In fact, I would not be surprised if the software which segmented the WH document was derived from some DjVu tool.”

“They first try to “lift” the text to another layer. They can find more than one type of text and place them in different layers. The rest is background and they compress with standard image compression methods. In the POBC [President Obama Birth Certificate] I see lots of signs of that. It missed a lot of text, like the R in BARACK and in many other places. The missed text is aggressively compressed with JPEG for example, which justifies the damage to those text parts.”

[skip]

“I took a birth certificate which has a similar background pattern, scanned and compressed using an older DjVu tool. It has shown the same problems as POBC, like text letters that were missed and sent to background, and multiple text styles. It didn’t have halo, though, because its algorithm decided to obliterate the whole background pattern. Perhaps if I had time to toy around with packages and parameters I might find something very close to what was used to generate the document shown by the WH, but I unfortunately do not have the time right now.”

“In summary I can only say I see much stronger signs of common MRC algorithmic processing of the image rather than some intentional manipulation.”

“Sincerely”

“Ricardo L. de Queiroz”

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/09/genuine-world-class-computer-expert-evaluates-obamas-birth-certificate-pdf/

There are a number of PDFs available on the internet that like the White House PDF have multiple layers (one 8-bit layer and multiple 1-bit layers that is typical of MRC processing), they have pixel-for-pixel identical elements. Their 8-bit layer are always lower resolution (bigger pixel size) than the 1-bit layers (smaller pixel sizes) just like the White House PDF.

BTW, Professor de Queiroz has in the past been willing to respond to e-mail questions about MRC.

[CpnHook]

Did you know he reviewed the White House PDF.

It would seem MMaschin did not. Holding up a person as an authority only to be shown that very person destroys your premise as to the very thing at issue is textbook case of "self-shooting."

“In summary I can only say I see much stronger signs of common MRC algorithmic processing of the image rather than some intentional manipulation.”

Prof. de Queiroz's conclusion comports with the 16-page report issued by computer expert Ivan Zatkovich:

Ivan Zatkovich has 28 years experience in computer science, ecommerce, internet publishing and document management. Mr. Zatkovich is the principal consultant with eComp Consultants, a technology consulting firm specializing in intellectual property for telecommunications, web publishing, and eCommerce. He has provided eCommerce and web publishing consulting services for corporations such as McGraw‐Hill, Houghton‐Mifflin, Citicorp, GEICO, and Amazon.com. He is also an industry speaker for online publishing standards and web content management. Mr. Zatkovich has over 10 years experience as an expert witness providing testimony in Federal Court for criminal and civil litigation involving document validity as well as patent infringement, and software disputes in eCommerce, web publishing, and internet copyright cases.

His report gives these expert's conclusions:

The following is a summary of my analysis:

1. The Hawaii Department of Health stated that they have a record of the birth certificate of Barak Obama.

2. A certificate was produced by the State of Hawaii and copied onto green safety paper, as per normal procedure.

3. The ‘Green copy’ was then scanned, presumably by the White House, to produce a PDF document.

4. The PDF document was then modified in some fashion (e.g. layers, white halo).

All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.

So both experts (de Queiroz and Zatkovich) conclude the WHLFBC is a scan of a hardcopy document. Neither finds any evidence to suggest information was "cut and pasted" into the image.