Skip to comments.Obama birth certificate story not going away
Posted on 04/21/2013 9:17:31 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
According to lead Obama investigator Mike Zullo, fear of ridicule is the number one reason authorities are not acting on the mountain of verifiable evidence of document fraud concerning Barack Obamas birth certificate. Appearing on the Carl Gallups, Freedom Friday call-in show, Zullo said, We are dealing with a fraudulent document that would never survive scrutiny of the judicial process. (1)
Disinformation and the intentional dissemination of false information to protect Obama, will not survive in the face of what Zullo is calling a 100% fabricated document. He listed the following tactics used to discredit the research of Sheriff Joe Arpaios...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
He would need control of the Media and backing from the GOP-e and a GOP-e Republican candidate for president who would support a 3x Obama run.
If Article 2 can be ignored by the political class, why not the 22nd amendment?
I notice the 22nd amendment has a part 2 that renders it inoperable, all that is needed is some “Lawyering” and the support of the media, GOP-e and...
Mitt Romney is a natural born Citizen, he was born to American Citizens on American soil.
“In short, to this day no one has proposed a plausible sequence of events that would involve simply innocently scanning and uploading a pdf of Obama’s birth certificate that could have resulted in the digital characteristics we observe in the pdf.”
Have you heard of mixed raster content compression?
“one that is a stunningly perfect fit for what a person might produce if he had to come up with a 1980 date stamp in 2008.”
But they were able to find an obsolete, round, Honolulu Makiki Station Post Office handstamp? And why would they need a 1980 stamp, couldn’t they use a 1970 stamp or 1960 or 1985 or 1995 and cut off the first two digits?
You know there are certain moments when I think I could rather enjoy a long debate with one of you guys who is not merely committed to refuting kooks like me, but to doing so with a seemingly legitimate effort to employ logic and intellect in the process. Unfortunately, I generally wind up deciding that I simply cant spare the time to engage in such a debate to any significant length.
That said, this is a less busy moment for me, and your questions here seem fair enough. (Although I probably won’t have these answers ready until someone has already addressed you questions better than I will have.) Yes, I’ve “heard of” mixed raster content compression, and I gather that when applied to images it can yield layers with differing color bit-depths, but I do not have in-depth knowledge of the technology, so I am willing for you to bring me up to speed on what software products currently implement MRC in such a way that they would tend to optimize a scan of the Birth Certificate so as to produce the types and number of layers, clipping masks, etc. that are present in the White House pdf. To my, admittedly limited, knowledge, no one has yet to get the details right in their attempts to demonstrate with currently available software how to arrive at a layer set that is principally the same as that contained in the White House pdf. If you are aware of a convincing demonstration that does accomplish principally the same layering scheme, then please share the details.
As to your questions about the date anomaly on the SSS card, I don’t pretend to know all the steps that were taken nor the rationale for each decision, but I can propose a line of reasoning that I think could adequately serve to address both of the concerns you’ve raised. I would suggest that the alleged forgers were able to obtain either a paper copy bearing the Maliki Station postal seal in combination with a round postal seal stamp containing the year-insertion recess which matched the proportions of the seal that would have been used Maliki station, or perhaps they were even able to gain a round stamp that was just like the one used by the Maliki Station during those years. The US Postal Service policies would, of course, dictate that great care be taken to implement procedures to ensure that year stamps are destroyed as soon as possible after the year for which they were created comes to an end. However, the surrounding round stamps, into which the year stamps would be inserted, would logically have been less subject to USPS procedural controls of that nature since the same round stamp would have been intended for use over the course of several years.
They needed a 1980 stamp (thus making a 2008 stamp the ideal counter part), in short, because some days or weeks prior to the request that prompted the release of the full document image, the SSS had already responded to an FOIA inquiry with a date and basic details of Obamas purported registration in bare text form. Also, it’s crucial to understand that Obama had to register before he reached a certain age (18?), and that the date had to come only during those years when registration was a federal requirement, and a place and date had to be chosen which could be reconciled with the publicly stated narrative of Obama’s travels during those years.
The problem with using the digits ‘19’, as I think you may be suggesting, from a 1960 or 1995 year insert, etc. is course attributable to the same difficulty that arises with trying to find a 1980 stamp in 2008. In order to prevent stamp misuse and postal fraud The Postal Service mandates that the year inserts are to be destroyed as soon as each new year begins.
By the way, now that you mention it, this raises a point about another key anomaly that I had not remembered to include in my long list. When the first bare text date of registration was emailed in response to an FOIA requester, a date was relayed that wouldn’t have coincided sufficiently to put Obama in the right place at the right time at the right age. The requester then responded asking for clarification, pointing out that the date provided could not fit Obama’s timeline for being in Hawaii. Without further explanation, dates provided for all subsequent FOIA requests were modified so that they reflected a more plausible date, the same date which later then appeared on the full registration card image.
I’m not sure Ill have the time to make it another round with you any time soon, but I think this addresses (inadequately, I suppose youd say) each of the questions youve raised for this round.
By the way, I don’t suppose you’d like to propose a explanation as to how the two-digit date stamp could have occurred as it did on the SSS registration card which would in no way rely upon the occurrence of tampering or manipulation?
“If you are aware of a convincing demonstration that does accomplish principally the same layering scheme, then please share the details.”
Not a demonstation but a statement by one of the developers of the Mixed Raster Content (MRC) compression standard after he reviewed the whitehouse pdf,
“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 didnt 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.”
Ricardo L. de Queiroz”
“As to your questions about the date anomaly on the SSS card”
The timeline for information release was like this:
February, 2008 - Selective Service reports that Obama’s SS registration is in order.
August, 2008 - Selective Service in an e-mail to PJMedia says there is nothing out of the ordinary about Obama’s SS registration.
October, 2008 - Selective Service releases copy of Obama’s SSR card.
The Selective Service in a 2012 letter to Mike Zullo, explained the process for SSR cards. The information is transcribed into the computer system, two microfilm copies of the card are made and the original paper card is destroyed. The two microfilm copies are kept in separate Federal Data Centers. One copy is kept as the record copy and the second is used as a working copy.
So for this to be a forgery, someone would have to break-in to at least one of the data centers and replace the existing microfilm roll with a replacement roll that contains the forged SSR card, or at the very least splice the forged image of the SSR card onto the existing roll. And do that before October, 2008.
There would be no need to actually create a paper copy of the SSR card, but instead just create a image that coud be put onto microfilm.
“a date was relayed that wouldnt have coincided sufficiently to put Obama in the right place at the right time at the right age.”
The law for that time reads - “1-103. Persons born in calendar year 1961 shall present themselves for registration on any of the six days beginning Monday, July 28, 1980.”
Obama was in Los Angeles from September, 1979 to at least June, 1980 and again from September, 1980 to June, 1981 (Occidental College years). Could he have been in Hawaii in July, 1980?
For many of the same reasons the first “O” and the second “L” in Honolulu are missing on the hand stamp.
That is the nature of ink handstamps, sometimes the image doesn’t come out complete.
Plus repeal of the 22nd Amendment. Good luck with that one.
If Article 2 can be ignored by the political class, why not the 22nd amendment?
Is Article 2 being ignored?
I notice the 22nd amendment has a part 2 that renders it inoperable, all that is needed is some Lawyering and the support of the media, GOP-e and...
And a time machine putting Obama in office in 1951.
I will be out for a while but will get abck to you.
In the meantime, here is something else to consider:
Obama’s SSR card has a ten digit Document Locator Number (DLN) - 0897080632. This DLN was stamped on the card at the time it was processed.
Susan Daniels and Linda Bentley obtained SSR cards for two individuals who registered within days of Obama at the Makiki Station Post Office in Honolulu. Their DLNs are as follows:
Date - JUL 31 1980 DLN - 0897 080 653 (Darrel Oniwa)
Date - JUL 29 1980 DLN - 0897 080 632 (Barack Obama)
Date - AUG 2 1980 DLN - 0897 080 613 (Bruce Henderson)
So the forger was able to get a DLN from the 1980s but not a 19xx stamp
Wow, thanks for taking the time to reply in such depth, I appreciate all the effort.
Can you name ANY Tea Party endorsed Republican in either House of Congress who has called for congressional hearings on either the constitutional definition of the term “natural born citizen” or for hearings on the bona fides of Barry Soetoro?
By way of contrast, the House of Representatives has been more than willing to issue myriad congressional subpoenas for every file in their “Fast & Furious” investigation and even hold for the first time in American history, the Attorney General in Contempt of Congress for his recalcitrance (and he’s black).t
Can you name any well known conservative constitutionalist attorney (such as any of the former Republican Solicitor Generals) who has submitted an amicus brief in support of any Obama eligibility challenge?
Both former Governor Lingle and former Director of Health Fukino were sued multiple times to force the release of birth records related to Obama’s eligibility ( as has been current Health Director Fuddy)). Lingle and Fukino prevailed in all the lawsuits against them.
There has been ample opportunity to raise and examine all the issues you have discussed. There have been 206 Obama eligibility civil actions filed in courts in practically every state in the nation. To date, 201 of those civil actions have been adjudicated. There have also been 90 state and federal appellate level rulings and 25 denials of certiorari or applications for stays, injunctions or extraordinary writs such as mandamus/prohibition at the Supreme Court of the United States. Every one of the Justices in the 5-4 conservative majority except Justice Alito has had the opportunity to grant a stay or an injunction but none have.
Here are quotes from two conservative judges who have adjudicated cases involving these eligibility issues, first a Reagan judge and second a Bush #43 judge:
“Ever persistent, plaintiff (Orly Taitz) has once again come before this court in an effort to uncover “the biggest cover up in the history of this nation.”
She believes that the President is using a “fraudulently obtained” social security number and that the Social Security Administration—among other agencies—is involved in a scheme to cover up social security fraud, IRS fraud, elections fraud—and possibly treason” committed by the President.
As her numerous filings with the court demonstrate, plaintiff will stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.”—Chief US District Court Judge for the District of Columbia, Royce C. Lamberth. Taitz v. Astrue, 8/30/11
“A spurious claim questioning the presidents constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Courts placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.Rhodes v MacDonald, US District Court Judge Clay D. Land, US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
When you total the multi-judge appeals court panels, the state elections boards with citizen members hearing ballot eligibility challenges (there were challenges heard in 22 states in 2012) including the 206 original jurisdiction judges, pretty darn close to a thousand Triers of Fact have had opportunities to examine allegations and evidence concerning birth records, father’s place of birth, social security numbers, Selective Service registration, kerning, photoshop, layers, smiley faces, Virginia Sunahara’s birth certificate and every other allegation.
But since 2008: zilch.
Now, 4zoltan, the shred of hope I had that you would try to maintain the appearance of intellectual integrity is fading. In the last few posts, youve raised several points and questions. In my opinion, the responses that a person from my perspective would offer to most of them will be immediately evident to most any discerning observers who might be tuning in to this discussion.
Ill take the time for one quick example, but then I must get back to my day job.
Has Mike Zullo been granted access to the SSS microfilm record or national archive microfilm records, or is anyone contending that Zullo has been granted or could be granted that access at this point? Remember that I did mention the SSS changed its own rules; to be more specific, they did so such that going forward only federal law enforcement entities (i.e. entities that are generally under the direct authority of the executive branchnot unlike the SSS itself) would be assured access to microfilm or other evidentiary document sources.
Are you really telling me that I can only believe tampering would have occurred if I also concede that someone spliced an archival microfilm role?!
I certainly cant rule out that, if not by now then perhaps eventually, someone may have had to go so far as to tamper with the film, but my hypothesis is clearly, obviously in no way dependent upon anyone having to do that up to this point. Am I just not understanding your someone would have had to splice microfilm for that to happen argument? Or did you just really not understand why MCSO would have sent letters asking to inspect whatever the SSS is keeping in their files? Or are you just having a bad day? Or could it be that your main goal is simply to blow some fog into the discussion in the hopes that it will confuse and dissuade those who arent paying close enough attention to the details.
Remember, it was the noticeable presence of intellectually dishonest, half-truth telling debunkers on these boards that really started to spark my interest in the Obama eligibility/identity fraud questions.
Alas, I realize for the sake of time, I wont be able to keep up with you and youll think yourself a winner by virtue of having the greater endurance and keeping your questions coming faster than I was able to answer them, but I will cling to some optimism that many of the people reading these boards are more discerning than you give them credit for being. They will see right through your line of reasoning.
Do you really believe that, for example, a conservative Republican from a deep red state, like say, Wyoming, where 1% of the population is black is concerned about anyone playing the race card?
Did the race card stop House Republicans from issuing a Contempt of Congress citation for our first evert black Attorney General?
I have a relative who was a staff member to a former member of the Republican Majority in the House. There was a Republican National Committee meeting in 2008 that Governor Lingle participated in via conference call. Shortly after the New Hampshire primary in 2008, a conservative rank and file Republican sued John McCain and the Republican National Committee on the grounds that RINO McCain was not a natural born citizen due to his birth in Panama. McCain’s attorneys and the RNC’s attorneys decided to use the Article III standing defense to get the lawsuit dismissed. That defense succeeded, the lawsuit was dismissed.
Unfortunately for the plaintiff, a birth certificate that he proferred as an exhibit showing John McCain having been born in a private hospital in Colon, Panama was fake. McCain was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal Zone.
Several members of Congress raised the question of Obama’s eligibility as the “Obama is ineligible” movement was just getting off the ground in early Spring, 2008.
The congressman that my relative worked for was a part of that meeting where the McCain campaign (following the lead of the Hillary Clinton campaign) decided to look into Obama’s birth records through Governor Lingle. Governor Lingle asked her Director of Health to confirm the existence of a Hawaii birth certificate for Obama and report back. Hawaii published a News Release on October 31, 2008 stating that Obama’s birth records were on file. At that time, the primary issue being raised was whether there was any birth record at all for Obama.
Sometime later, persistent complaints from constituents prompted the congressman that my relative worked for to request a report
from the Congressional Research Service on Presidential Eligibility and Natural Born Citizenship. That report was issued in 2011: “Qualifications For President and the Natural Born Citizen Requirement.” The 53 page report pretty much shut down any opposition to Obama on eligibility grounds for the 2012 election cycle. Yes, Congressional Research Service reports can often carry that much weight.
and yet some here slavishly listen to, quote, purchase from and otherwise support these
4zoltan sees the world through the eyes of a liberal.
You have to read forward from this post to get the full gist of it:
Sorry I forgot your courtesy ping.
NBC/ABC/CBS and other broadcast networks have a disproportionate hold over low information voters, media heat soon drops a politicians poll numbers.
Governor Lingle was Republican in the same way Governor Crist was Republican. Both were/are puppets of the democratic party.
Both people were pure GOP-e in 2008, seekers of office not truth.
To even run as Republican in a Democratic fiefdom like Hawaii requires many “Deals.”
However some of the language in the US-Pamama treaty is total double-speak, typical of the sort of mush you get from diplomats.
The point is not actually that he was or was not NBC, it was that there was a sufficient element of doubt to get Mccain to agree a non aggression pact.
Low level staffers are not even going to get a hint of something that sensitive.
My understanding is that if a person was born outside of the US to citizen parents who maintain a permanent residence in the US , the offspring is a Citizen of the United States at Birth.
You’d be surprised at what congressional staff are privy to. Why sometimes even unpaid interns named Monica have access to important information.
All I am saying is that since Obama had the MSM to lick his boots in the 2008 campaign, it would be logical for Mccain to agree to not persue any deep probing inquiries on the Obama NBC issue as the media would be set on him with
“...but you were born in Panama, shut up you hypocrite..."
The way around that is to have your surrogates raise the issue, ask the questions and make the attacks while the candidate himself stays above the fray and never comments on the issue directly.
Not saying he's ineligible, just that both candidates against the lawless one had questions about article 2 themselves. This was not just a coincidence.
Your point is moot. There was never a question as to Mitt’s ArtII status, there was however a question about his Dad’s ArtII status when he ran fro POTUS. Congress even debated the issue and it is a fascinating read if you care to. But he did not get the nomination so that debates became moot as well.
And here I wondered if might be clashing swords with you in vigorous debate about whether there are legitimate reasons to doubt the certificate, but after a single (yes, a long one, I realize) reply to your post, you abandoned parrying and jabbing and tried dropping a piano on my head.
If I'm not mistaken our dialogue could be roughly summarized in this way:
ME: Hey rawlycat, I don't think its fair to declare the Birth Cert forgery evidence "irrelevant."
YOU: Hey ecinkc, did you ever consider that the reason everybody in congress ignores the Birth Cert forgery evidence is because they realize that it doesn't stand up to the fact that GOP Gov Lingle and her chums at the HDOH already told us "everything is hunky dory"?
ME: Oh, um, hi there Nero. Well, despite Governor Lingle's assurances, I actually think there's a long list of statements and actions which seem to thoroughly tip the balances toward casting doubt on Lingle's statement and adding strength to the forgery evidence. Can't you see why I would be influenced by the following issues?: long list, long list, long list, lon . . . etc.
YOU: Oh yeah, you lousy loser? How about this? Your puny team of weaklings loses everything! You lost this battle, you lost that battle, and then you lost these other fortyleven battles over there. You've never won anything, and no one who even counts agrees with you at all, dweeb! Your ridiculous Russian queen is the laughing stock of the entire universe right about now! All you do is lose, lose, lose, because you and your 17 loser friends are all a bunch of big, fat losers!
So if I'm to give you the benefit of the doubt I'll suppose you have chosen this course of "argument" because you actually do care enough to want me to come to the truth and have decided the best tact to accomplish that for a loser like me is to remind me of the overwhelming majority consensus standing against me and my rag-tag band of comrades. Maybe you thought, "I know how to refute each and every pathetic argument the pitiful ecinkc is launching, but who has time to work through all of the that? The best way to get through to this dolt is to tell him all his tea party heroes and all the judges and legal scholars in the land loudly and consistently disagree with him." Or, maybe you thought, "Hmm those would be interesting arguments to evaluate and research and hear him out on, if I wasn't already so sure that something so preposterous as a president getting away with a forged birth certificate is simply impossible. So I'll just give him the big picture and be done with it."
In either of those cases, I must agree that the numbers are thoroughly sobering and daunting, and I would be a fool to not consider the fact that if the whole world is against me, there's a good chance I'm simply mistaken. The trouble is, on this Obama identity fraud issue, it seems I'm just so remedial as to be incorrigible. I'm afraid I'm forever going to be lost in my bizarro-world until someone stoops to my level and convincingly goes toe-to-toe with me on the facts, weeding out my irrational views one at a time. So, you big bully, I've heard you out. I am a twerpy little loser on a team full of losers that practically everyone on the face of earth disagrees with, and so for that reason alone I should wake up and realize I must be wrong. I'll be spitting up sand for weeks, and I hope you're satisfied. Now, don't you have enough to do elsewhere, without having to take over my little spot in the playground also?
On the other hand if I'm to be less generous in my assessment of your tact, I might wonder if perhaps you're feeling as though you're outmatched when it comes to arguing the objective facts on whether Team Obama and the HDOH has been shooting straight with us. Perhaps then, as a result you've realized your best shot is to attempt to break my resolve (and that of others who may be watching) by rubbing my face in the fact that no one who's anyone is honestly giving the objective evidence its due weight. You hope that forcing me and others to face the crushing blow of the inevitable futility of our efforts, will be enough to get some of us to give up and go home. At the same time, faced with your inability to keep up with the arguments focused on actual evidence, this "yeah but you measly pipsqueaks have lost every game you've ever played in" offers you some comfort along with the empty pleasure you feel from gloating.
If it's this latter paragraph which describes you best, you are not merely a bully, you are a villain who stands against reason and wisdom. You should stop what you're doing right now and rethink your life.
Have a nice day! :-)
“Has Mike Zullo been granted access to the SSS microfilm record or national archive microfilm records, or is anyone contending that Zullo has been granted or could be granted that access at this point?”
Did he get a court order or search warrant? If not why not?
Or did they just send a letter saying we want to come in and look at your records?
“Are you really telling me that I can only believe tampering would have occurred if I also concede that someone spliced an archival microfilm role?!”
No, but if not than are you claiming that in 2008 the Selective Service Administration, when faced with a FOIA request for Obama’s SSR card, created one from scratch, including adding a DLN from the 1980s, and a paper copy of the Makiki Station PO handstamp (but not a paper copy of the 1980 stamp even though they have thousands of examples of it).
I have no problem whatsoever with criminal investigations by a statutory law enforcement agencies (which is not a volunteer posse’) or formal grand juries being convened to look into criminal indictments being issued for forgery, document tampering and identity theft.
I say Go For It! It should be obvious to all that civil suits will not do the trick.
My preferred method for getting to the bottom of the eligibility question would have been congressional hearings with witnesses being called to testify under oath with the threat of Making False Statements, perjury and contempt of congress indictments hanging over their heads. I was really hoping that such hearings would have occurred during the 2012 campaign season so that Obama would have had all the attendant publicity and media attention that Congresssional testimony and subpoenas bring. But the Republicans decided to go with Fast & Furious and Benghazi rather than natural born citizen-gate.
Your creative writing contributions are very entertaining. Thanks for the chuckles.
You have a nice rest of the day as well; take good care.
Although I feel your precision scalpel line that happens to shun the tiny group of law enforcement agencies into which the Cold Case Posse would be categorized while welcoming all other law enforcement agencies is leastwise oddly arbitrary if not a bit silly, I’m content that we needn’t agree on everything, and I can’t deny that most everything else you’ve said in this last post seems quite fair and reasonable to me.
"No, but if not than are you claiming that in 2008 the Selective Service Administration, when faced with a FOIA request for Obamas SSR card, created one from scratch, including adding a DLN from the 1980s, and a paper copy of the Makiki Station PO handstamp (but not a paper copy of the 1980 stamp even though they have thousands of examples of it)."
Congrats, that's a pretty decent, reasonably challenging question. So, as I said before, I have no way of guessing actual flow of actions nor all the rationales for the decisions made along the way. Nevertheless, I do think that Team Obama relied in part upon some level of cooperation from the SSS (whose director is appointed by Obama) and also utilized the resources of a private firm and/or found a away to justify charging the Secret Service or the FBI with some of the tasks related to getting the forged registration card on file.
I agree that, on the surface, it seems odd that whoever produced the actual forgery would have had any interest in using a literal rubber stamp to make an impression onto paper--given that it seems likely that the forger would have understood that the piece of paper would never, itself be kept on file in the care of the SSS anyway.
What I think might have happened is that the forger was aware that applying a rubber stamp leaves a result with a fingerprint of it's own unique artifacts--each application is like a snowflake in that sense. So, the forger realized that by copying the mark left by the same stamp on some other piece of paper he could conceivably be leaving himself open to a situation in which somewhere somehow the identical snowflake eventually could turn up, casting enormous doubt on the card bearing Obama's name. He was determined, then to build an image that included a universally unique snowflake stamp impression.
According to this theory, the forger was so obsessed with the value of having a uniquely artifact-ed stamping that he compromised on the two-digit year, desperately hoping that people would conclude, as you have, that it's absurd to think someone would go to all the trouble of obtaining so authentic (including it's unique artifacts) a round stamp impression and yet be content to include a chopped up year insert. He told himself, "Most people will accept a 2-digit date stamp without any further thought, but those who care enough will tend to overlook the blaring mistake, because the subtleties are so perfect that they will be forced to assume no forger could be so dissonant with himself.
I know you'll think that I've taken quite a leap in proposing that interpretation, but don't forget that a forgery job by necessity involves trade-offs, calculated risks, strange disparities of resources, and the involvement of imperfect people who may at once weild well-honed skills alongside ill-developed idiosyncratic ones.
Your idea, on the other hand that the missing "19" digits were simply absent due to the fact that such absences often occur randomly when applying rubber stamps might seem more plausible than mine--if it were not for this fatal flaw: While it is true and normal that sometimes parts of a stamp are not visible in its inked impressions, it is most certainly not true that the same phenomenon could account for a year stamp that is offset to the lower right of where it would normally occur relative to the rest of the circle stamp into which it's inserted, nor is it true that the eight would so strongly bear the appearance of having been turned on its head.
One more quick point and then I'll depart this discussion, leaving the last words to you and the discerning onlookers. Thanks for the quote from the MRC compression engine developer. It illustrates a genuine effort on the part of the debunkers to overcome their hardest argument in all of this. Nevertheless, it is simply inadequate. Yes, you have the words of a bonafide expert, but the most he can say is, he sees in the White House pdf some similarities with what some obscure implementation of some version of his compression algorithms might have produced, but he admits that he hasn't taken the time to fully research the matter.
I will continue to contend that it is not too much to ask, when I say that I want to see a demonstration of a normal process using a normal set of tools that could have conceivably been used in the White House in 2011 that would produce principally the same layering scheme and other digital characteristics that can be found in the White House pdf.
There, now as I have said, my time constraints dictate that I will need to leave the rest of this debate for now in your hands and in the hands of others. Have at it. Decimate me; massacre me; do your best.
Count me in the rag-tag band, please. Carry on. I love a lopsided spat. You’ve overwhelmed the underwhelmable.
No, the primary issue wasn't whether there was a birth record at all, but whether the jpg that Obama presented in June 2008, and that factlack dot org CLAIMED to have photographed in August 2008 (despite embedded data showing the pictures ere taken in March 2008) was a genuine Hawaiian birth certificate. The news release issued by the HI director of health delicately avoided that issue. Second, this recollection about the Republican governor seems to leave out the falsehood she made in 2009 where she claimed that 2008 news release said that Obama was born in Kapiolani Hospital. It did not say this. Second, Lingle made it sound like she was providing a timely response to the issues raised about Obama's birth certificate, but the news release only came out three days prior the election. IOW, too late for anyone to make a reasonable challenge.
“whose director is appointed by Obama”
In 2008, then-Senator Obama appointed the SSS Director???? Maybe the Bush Administration just really hated Senator McCain.
Here is Jeffery Stephen Coffamn’s affidavit in which he dates his contacts with SSS:
February 13th. 2008 - SSS says Obama registered for Selective Service.
Here is PJMedia’s August 13th, 2008 article with e-mail from SSS.
“Barack Hussein Obama registered at a post office in Hawaii. The effective registration date was September 4, 1980.”
“His registration number is 61-1125539-1.”
Public Affairs Specialist”
Here is Debbie Schlussel’s posting of the SSR card in November, 2008 - Coffman’s copy:
Here are SSR cards collected by Susan Daniels and Linda Bentley, Bruce Henderson and Darrell Oniwa:
Here is a clearer image of Bruce Henderson’s:
“it is most certainly not true that the same phenomenon could account for a year stamp that is offset to the lower right of where it would normally occur relative to the rest of the circle stamp into which it’s inserted”
Look at the SSR cards provided by Daniels and Bentley, see the one in the second column, third one down. It is the card with the KAPAA, HI postal stamp. Notice how the 1980 is pushed way to the right. Maybe the forger of that card was also trying to create a unique fingerprint.
“Have at it. Decimate me; massacre me; do your best.”
Admit it - it was painless.
What you said!!
After Governor Lingle’s radio interview with Rabbi Shumley Boteach, the elite of the Republican Party developed “the party line” on the birth certificate issue.
The party line has been a variation on one word: “distraction.”
Governor Lingle implemented the party line in her radio interview (”This issue kept coming up so much in the campaign, and again I think it’s one of those issues that is simply a distraction from the more critical issues that are facing the country”); and here’s another Republican Governor using the party line: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y15Q9MEr3ws
And here’s Newt Gingrich using the party line: “LAS VEGAS — Former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich praised Mitt Romney’s handling of Tuesday’s controversy over Donald Trump’s renewed questioning of President Barack Obama’s birthplace.
‘Governor Romney is not distracted. The Republican Party is not distracted. We believe that this is an American-born, job-killing president,” Gingrich told reporters in the lobby of the Trump International Hotel, on his way into a fundraiser for Romney on Tuesday evening. “Other people may believe he was born somewhere else and still kills jobs, but that’s an argument over background,” Gingrich said. “I’m happy to say I believe he was born in Hawaii. That doesn’t change the fact that he’s killing jobs.’”
I could go on and on with quotes from big name Republicans saying that the birth certificate/natural born citizen/Article 2, Section1 issue is “a distraction,” but I’m sure that you get the point.
I see nothing “delicately” worded in Dr. Fukino’s press release. She said:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
What’s “delicate” about that?
Yes, it came up SO MUCH during the campaign that she waited until three days before the election to put out a news release that doesn't legally verify anything. It certainly did NOT list a place of birth.
and heres another Republican Governor using the party line: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y15Q9MEr3ws And heres Newt Gingrich using the party line: LAS VEGAS Former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich praised Mitt Romneys handling of Tuesdays controversy over Donald Trumps renewed questioning of President Barack Obamas birthplace.
Governor Romney is not distracted. The Republican Party is not distracted. We believe that this is an American-born, job-killing president, Gingrich told reporters in the lobby of the Trump International Hotel, on his way into a fundraiser for Romney on Tuesday evening. Other people may believe he was born somewhere else and still kills jobs, but thats an argument over background, Gingrich said. Im happy to say I believe he was born in Hawaii. That doesnt change the fact that hes killing jobs.
I could go on and on with quotes from big name Republicans saying that the birth certificate/natural born citizen/Article 2, Section1 issue is a distraction, but Im sure that you get the point.
Of course, I get the point. You're trying to deflect what I posted previously, which had nothing to do with a "party line."
I see nothing delicately worded in Dr. Fukinos press release.
That doesn't mean anything. And I didn't say it was "delicately" worded. I said it delicately AVOIDED the issue of whether the jpg was a genuine birth certificate or not. Fukino says nothing about the alleged document presented by Obama. Thanks for giving the quote that proves this point. It's interesting that she says she has the statutory authority to oversee and maintain these types of vital records. She also has the statutory authority to make those records public. Saying that an "original birth certificate" is on file doesn't address whether it lists Hawaii as the place of birth. It doesn't address whether Obama's jpg is legitimate. It doesn't mean much of anything, especially when it is not accompanied by the actual records nor is it being submitted in front of a court of law.
Does the Hawaii Dept of Health keep non-Hawaii birth certifcates on it's files?
According to the HDOH website "Vital records (birth, death, civil union, marriage, and divorce certificates) for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health.
I haven't heard somebody say that in probably 40 years. I said it once and my wife looked at me as if I were from another planet.
I haven't heard somebody say that in probably 40 years. I said it once and my wife looked at me as if I were from another planet.
Yes, Hawaii, and many other states in the Union, keep non-Hawaii birth certificates in their records.
According to Janice Okubo, the former communications director of the Hawaii Department of Health: “If you were born in Bali, for example, Okubo explained, you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate.”—The Washington Independent, July 17, 2009
Lol. I have an older woman I work with who taught me that one, as well as some Yiddish!
Another good one.....”first time in a row”!
The long form says place of birth: Honolulu; date of birth: August 4, 1961; time of birth: 7:24 p.m., Name of Hospital: Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital; and signature of attendant: Dr. David A Sinclair.
Former Health Director Fukino’s second press release stated: “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen.”—July 27, 2009.
Nobody said such a thing. "Hawaiian" birth certificates can include out-of-state places of birth. This is what spokesbabe Janice Okubo indicated when she said Obama's birth certificate should say he was born in Bali.
"If you were born in Bali, for example," Ms Okubo told the Washington Independent, "you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate."
link to story
Right, the "long form" that has never been legally certified nor submitted in any court of law ...
Former Health Director Fukinos second press release stated: I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen.July 27, 2009.
Thanks for posting this. Why did Fukino change the terminology from "original birth certificate" in her Oct. 31, 2008 news release to "the original vital records" ... why did she have to look at multiple records?? If the COLB was genuine, she should only have to find this information on the original birth certificate. Remember?? She said she had "personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate ..." The only reason to mention multiple records in a follow-up is if the original birth certificate was not complete. If that's the case, then his birth certificate should indicate that it was not complete.
Second, you misquoted Fukino's statement. Why did you do this?? She didn't say Obama was "a natural born citizen." She said, he "is a natural-born American citizen." In this country, we are U.S. citizens, not American citizens. IOW, she used a legally meaningless phrase.
Third, Fukino later said that Obama's long-form was half handwritten and half typed. The PDF that Obama released in April 2011 is NOT half handwritten. So, why would she lie?? Why did Governor Lingle lie and say that Fukino's 2008 news release said that Obama was born in Kapiolani hospital when this is on NEITHER news release??
Bump. Brilliantly stated analysis of Fukino.
In my up-thread summary for Nero (whose maniacal persecutor namesake seems fitting) I alluded to Fukino’s use of “tortured and evasive language in the two key statements she made while still the Director.” I guess I was hoping that the points you’ve made here yet again so crisply would have already been sufficiently established. Shockingly, it seems Nero may have just never considered these salient points about Fukino with which you just soundly thumped him.
The tact of so many would-be debunkers is to just keep shifting arguments in the hopes that they will outlast their challengers.
If I say the birth certificate has digital evidence of fabrication, they say layers are produced all the time by optimization processes.
If I nail them down on the specific kind layers, they raise a straw man to argue with about splicing microfilm in the national archives.
When I point out the overt absurdity of the straw man, the argument makes quick shift without apology to why a forger who got a hold of a postal round stamp would resort to a chopped up, inverted year insert.
When I explain that year inserts, unlike round stamps, are destroyed according to policy after the year for which they were made, the response comes back celebrating a 4-digit, right-side-up date stamp with a more subtle offset from center than Obama’s inverted two digit version.
I make a side comment about how Obama’s situation benefits from the fact that he appointed the director of the SSS. A debunker rises up brandishing his mighty correction that when the FOIAs started for the SSS Obama was not yet President, quietly setting aside the fact that it was Obama appointee Romo at the helm when the law enforcement disclosure rules changed and when the MCSO was denied access to probative evidence.
Nero, himself, in this thread actually resorted to an oft used fogbow tactic of regurgitating a laundry load list of all authorities opposed and cases lost.
When I sarcastically cried mercy, he managed to disengage by offering the pretense that he favored a congressional probe with witnesses testifying under oath.
I love it that you have for the moment silenced him with this clear concise illumination, once again, of the red flags that riddled Fukino’s words and greatly darkened the pall of doubt already cast over everything emanating from the HDOH.
Edge, I know you’ve been at this for quite a while, and I’m always grateful to watch when you turn up to rattle the opposition. Thanks again.
Start at #35 and read ecinkc’s and other’s excellent posts -
language as a weapon. excellent!
IIRC, it was Neil Abercrombie who made that statement.
My daughter’s birth certificate lists me as he birth father; I didn’t even meet her mother until she was nearly three years old.
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.