Yo Bama, BC maybe fake... (Vanity)

april 28, 2011 | rgt

[RGT]

Your birth certificate may be a fake if, . . .

. . . unlike a real BC, the first word/number on each line don't line up correctly at the left margin.

Obama's BC is a forgery because these 5 words are not flush to the left margin. Male (box 2), Kapiolani (box 6c), BARACK (box 8), 25 (box 10), STANLEY (box 13), and 18 (box 15) should all be lined up, vertically, under the word Male. They would if typed on a real typewriter.

Your birth certificate may be a fake if, . . .

. . . unlike a real BC, your BC completely ignores tab stops. A standard practice typists in 1961. Very useful when filling out forms.

Obama's BC is a forgery because these 3 words are not in alignment. African (box 9), University (box 12b), and Caucasian (box 14) should all be alignment vertically as well. They would be if typed on a real typewriter using the TAB SET and Tab keys.

Your birth certificate may be a fake if, . . .

. . . unlike a real BC typed on a real typist, the person who typed your parents names took the time to center them.

Obama's BC is a forgery because the names are centered in the space provided. Typewritten names on real BC's tend to be crowded to the left. I don't know why that is but it is nonetheless true.

Compare Obama's BC with those of Susan Nordyke and Edith Coats.

[muawiyah]

You imagine there'd be a seal on the original document. Yet, this is a picture of a picture that was stored as microfiche ever since the file records were photographed.

Your master files really don't need a seal. They are in the records repository. Only copies of official documents need a seal because, ta-ta-taaa-ta, they are NOT in the records repository.

[Mr. K]

geez you are seriously TRYING to be a dumbass aren’t you...

I did not say photocopy it back in the 60’s [when copiers didnt exist], I said make a photocopy today, of the HAND MADE AND MANUALLY TYPED DOCUMENT they made for him in the 60’s... if he has one.

What he showed the other day is not one.

It is not even a copy of one.

It is a modern day manufactured digital file with layers. This would not even be such an easy document to prove it was fake if they had compressed the PDF into one layer (easily done)... Just look at the one the Associated Press (AP) DOCTORED FOR HIM... They took the time to compress it and releasae it.

By the way- anyone have a copy of that AP compressed-layer file? It will show (internally) that it was editted that day, and if we are lucky some identifying info of the computer it was editted on.

[mad_as_he$$]

My FRiend I would believe that if it wasn’t for one thing. The anomaly around the “1” in the serial number. All other things may be explained by your post, but I will not buy the problem the 1 being an anomaly or an artifact.

[muawiyah]

I was there. I lived the 60s. People even completed forms like this by hand ~ in stubby little pencils ~ you can see where they pressed too hard and broke.

Back some time in the early 1970s we created the USPS. They wanted to trim down the load of baggage we were going to take from the 12th and Penn building to then new building in L'Enfant Plaza.

Old hands (and since we'd let everybody retire who had 15 years or more, that meant guys with 7 years were "old hands") got to go to work digging through MILLIONS OF FILES tossing those of no interest, preserving those of historic interest, and finding "current business".

I spent many weeks working on disposal. Pretty much everything Pre-Roosevelt got preserved and send to National Archives for special handling.

So, what did I see in one of America's larger treasure troves of forms? Well, people centered typed material in boxes by using a small ruler, finding the center of the box, then spacing back as half the letters found in the material to be typed in the box.

That centers it.

I saw millions of documents done that way.

[Mr. K]

That is a nice fairy tale about the SS number but it does not fly.

As with other suspicious info with this communist kenyan, you have to think of the age this was created.

In the old days they had to manually carry files of physical paperwork to store within file cabinets. They stored numbers from the states together so they would not have to walk back and forth a million times from file cabinet to file cabinet.

Even if he had mistaken a 0 for 9 on his zip code, the SS office in Hawaii would not have had SS numbers from CT to hand out (do you think they applied, waited for one to be mailed, and then came back? No they gave you one from the stack they had)

[mad_as_he$$]

The “Toots” BC has always been of interest to me. That would make this all fit together nicely except for a bow.

[muawiyah]

The bubble in the second bar down on a typed in 9 is far more meaningful. The same typewriter used twice, and no bubble is apparent in one of them.

The "serial number" was placed there with numbering machine. I own one ~ just like the ones the old Post Office Department used.

When you press down if you don't do it exactly right the rubber "slug" will turn a little bit and give you a shadow.

Immediately to the left you'll find an item called FILE NUMBER. Notice how the font is entirely different than everything else on the document? That may be on the original. It may have been applied to the microfiche. It may have been produced with the batch dumped into the data base. I don't think it's typewritten.

[muawiyah]

Social Security used Lectrievers ~ just like we did at the time. The sort of file management system you imagine for a nation wide operation would actually have been too small for a single state in theBaltimore Operation.

It is huge.

But you are touching on the reason the federal bureaucracy hasn't grown since the1960s ~ they began computerizing filing processes IMMEDIATELY UPON THE INVENTION OF THE COMPUTER and didn't let up.

If an initial 9 or 0 is the difference between CT and somewhere else when it comes to ZIP Codes it's worth looking down at your keyboard and noticing that the TOP ROW is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0 yet today.

WOW!!!!!

We used to have a binary code on the old LSMs in postal sorting operations. The clerk would read the zip on the piece and type in the binary representation of the first three numbers.

This cause brain stresses not to be believed.

[mad_as_he$$]

I asked someone the other day what kind of typewriter was it? Manual I could buy the different finger pressure would render a different result. Electric I do not see how that could be that different. Selestric (from later era) delivered almost print quality compared to manual.

[rolling_stone]

So, what is it you want to talk about regarding typewriters?

I’d like to hear from an RN or Doctor who worked in the 1960’s exactly how they filled out BC forms (I’m not going to assume they had typwriter at nurse’s station) and then from someone in government how they processed the birth certificates from start to finish...but I don’t see either on your resume..

[Mr. K]

"But you are touching on the reason the federal bureaucracy hasn't grown since the1960s ~ they began computerizing filing processes IMMEDIATELY UPON THE INVENTION OF THE COMPUTER and didn't let up."

HA HA HA HA HA DING DING DING ~!

LIBTARD ALERT~!!!

sorry bozo... you just gave yourself away.

Go back to DUhmmyland...

[rolling_stone]

But you are touching on the reason the federal bureaucracy hasn’t grown since the1960s ~ they began computerizing filing processes IMMEDIATELY UPON THE INVENTION OF THE COMPUTER and didn’t let up.

So like WOW how did the Great (computerized) US State Department selectively lose Obamas mothers passport records and why wont they turn over the index of the records?

[moehoward]

Not exactly. There’s definitely two versions. The AP version, which assumedly represents the certified copies requested by WH counsel. Then the digital copy the WH posted on it’s website.

The WH version (causing the hubbub) is larger and has a safety paper border added. I’m guessing this was emailed at some point from HI DOH.

[moehoward]

"They used a pretty sophisticated scanning software because it converted a curved surface into a flat surface with very little distortion.

The same can be accomplished by laying a heavy glass on the binder then photographing it. OR laying the volume on a scanner. I do it all the time.

Here's my little hypothesis.
HI DOH decides to go paperless, hires out some 'experts'.
Hi DOH has millions of paper docs in varying degrees of legibility.
SO said 'expert' sets his image processing software to run a series of filters to each scan. Possibly a little sharpen and contrast.
(These filters has obviously been run at some point)
HI DOH stores all hard copies away and prints from newly created digital templates as requests come in.

[moehoward]

"It would have been a simple task to take an original BC to the copy machine and run off a few. You and I can do that. Why does Obama find that so difficult. Occams' razor applies here- he cannot run off copies of an original because it was not easier to do that, for some reason."

Assume, HI DOH went paperless a while back and the originals are stored off sight, safe in their little binders.

When requests come in they simply hit print from their little 'digital abstract' and you're on your way.

[muawiyah]

The heavy glass would work if you were breaking the binders. But it's slower than the other method ~ you just digitally photograph the fiche files.

The files themselves were originally photographed for the fiche files.

They had to keep the original file folders intact until they could be cross checked against the fiche files. Doing otherwise always led to an awful mess.

Consequently they have the top part of the bend, where the binding bolt is located, in the picture, but not at the bottom.

The whole fiche picture has been "flattened" so it looks like it would as it originally was before the form was placed in a folder and bolted in. There's a lot of noise in your typical late last century fiche files that's been removed in this process of digitizing everything.

Then, when you need a copy they just tap the data base and whip you up what you need sans noise sans margins sans holes sans paperclips or whatever.

[TheOldLady]

Getting fed all the news at Free Republic?
Haven't donated yet?
Please consider it
Give whatever you can
Or sign up to donate monthly
and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10

Lazamataz is fading away!

[ml/nj]

I’m guessing this was emailed at some point from HI DOH.

I don't think any DOH anywhere has ever supplied anyone with anything other that a piece of paper with an image of some record they hold on it. They don't do emails. And there is absolutely no indication that Hawaii sent an email image to the WH after they sent someone to Hawaii to pick up the two paper copies.

ML/NJ

[moehoward]

"If you watch the “layer” videos, you’ll find that one layer only contains signatures.'

Not all of them. Box 18 loses part of the mother's signature. And 21, the Local Registrar. What is quite odd about Box 21 though is that the signature is uniform in weight and color density yet not all of it gets separated by the alleged OCR pass.

[bolobaby]

You, my friend, are seriously unhinged. Think about what you are saying.

"um... no, he would show it to us... like at the press conference...

or scan THAT ONE and email it, like I have done a thousand times... are you really this obtuse? or just an idiot?"

So, if he held up a copy of the document at a press conference, you would be satisfied? No, of course not - you'd want to personally see a copy.

Email it to who? You? Every American? He did better than that. He scanned the document and posted it on the White House website so anyone could go get it.

Plus, your logic doesn't follow. "...scan THAT ONE...?" Which one? Let's get the facts straight. He contacts Hawaii and asks for a copy. The original BC is now in a bound book, so they take the book to a photocopier and make a copy on security paper. Then they certify that copy and send it to Obama. Obama's staff takes that single, original certified copy and scans that in as a PDF and posts it for everyone to see. Which copy is the "THAT ONE" from your statement? There is only one copy of which he is in possession. The state of Hawaii did not send him the original book containing all of those BCs including his.

You've gone off the deep end. You are no longer applying logic to the situation. If you asked for a copy of your long firm birth certificate, you would get the same thing Obama received. What would you do with that copy differently to somehow make it more valid than the one Obama received?

I'm no troll. And that accusation is akin to liberals calling people racist. It's the last refuge of scoundrels. I've been around this site almost as long as you. I've got plenty of conservative cred. I'm just a logical thinker whereas you are helpless latching on to this birth certificate thing instead of attacking Obama for destroying the country.

I'll tell you what: you keep at it on the BC issue, and I'll keep arguing that his policies suck and we'll see who is more effective in getting him ousted from office in 2012. Deal?

(Oh, it's also very bad form to call me a liar. My development team is extremely talented. I manage them for a major corporation, but I'm a technical leader, not paper-pusher. I have been in IT since 1990. If you think calling me a liar somehow lends credibility to your weak line of reasoning, keep at it. I'm sure there are some tin foil hatters who will gladly side with you.)