Replies

I’ve seen the PDF in question. I downloaded the PDF in question from Whitehouse.gov. I’ve opened the document up in Adobe Illustrator and there is no question in my mind that 0bama’s “birth certificate” is, in fact, a fraud and a very poor one at that. It was a rush job intended to fool the vast majority of people who have no computer graphics experience whatsoever: the very definition of 0bama’s constituency - low information voters.

Oddly interesting they put so little effort into such a critical piece of their deception, almost like they don't feel the need to care any more.

Did they not think it would get this far? Are they that arrogant or sloppy/lazy or is there some other reason?

What do they know or have planned to negate such a major mistake?

I’ve seen the PDF in question. I downloaded the PDF in question from Whitehouse.gov. I’ve opened the document up in Adobe Illustrator

I told my IT friend about Sheriff Joes original presser and he said "you know I have a copy if that file from when he first hit the internet. I don't think that the president would be so stupid to put a digital forgery out for scrutiny, but I'm going to look at it". About half an hour later, I heard a loud "HOLY SH**" from his office and I just cracked up laughing.

Hi Stingray,

I opened the PDF in either Illustrator or Photoshop. (20 years experience with PS, less with Illustrator) and the layers were right there.

Now the investigator said that the file was uploaded from a Mac platform document viewer program that “scrubbed” the mega-data— which I assume would have flattened the image and converted it to a jpg or tiff format. But the image was uploaded as a pdf file, which preserves layer information.

I can’t resolve the pdf with the scrubbing utility claim made by the investigator. Can you explain?

I’ve always wondered why they didn’t flatten the image. Was it deliberately preserved by a guilt-ridden underling, or was it an inside joke? The whitehouse has posted a lot of questionable images in the past (Bin Laden for example) so they have at least one person employed in that capacity, probably more. Now, there has been one death from among the people I would expect to be close to that operation, and I can’t help but wonder.

If the pdf release was a deliberate open door intended to reveal the fraud, who might be the party responsible? Any ideas?