I Can Haz Monthly Donors?
Donate monthly, and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
Or give what you can
Lazamataz needs you!
Posted on 04/29/2011 11:41:05 AM PDT by West Texas Chuck
People keep asking the same questions over and over in each thread on this topic, I thought I would try to lump them all together and give my analysis of each. Maybe this will help answer a few questions already sorted out before new threads are started, at least until it turns into another hair-pulling, face scratching, dress tearing free-for-all like some threads around here have.
There are probably others, but these are the ones I remember and some of the stuff that keeps getting kicked around repeatedly:
Obama Birth Certificate “Myths”
1) The hospital it mentions wasn't called that back then according to their website - yeah, well maybe not in the hospital records, but the Nordyke BCs (obtained in 1965 or so and highly unlikely forgeries) have the same name. Plus, a fairly well known FReeper here keeps stating his kids were born there, he drove by there every day and that is what the sign out front said. I think the naming is legit.
2) The "layers" in the .pdf file - when you scan a color document that has typing and handwriting on it and turn it into a .pdf the optical content reader software can do that and make it appear to be something it is not. I'm no expert on imaging but what I have seen worries me not at all, it's pretty typical. Try this at home kids, scan something color that is part typewritten and part handwritten to .pdf and then open it in Adobe. Depending on your settings you may see exactly what we see in the BC released on April 27. Whoever created this .pdf forgot to "flatten" it to kill the layers.
3) His father's race is listed as "African" but it would have been Negro back then - who cares, that's probably what Stanley told the nurses.
4) Similar handwriting on Obama's and the Nordyke's - oh come on, women after giving birth are probably aided filling out paperwork by nurses, maybe the same one since it was the same hospital?
5) Weird artifacts that look like WhiteOut - as far as I can tell it is simply a byproduct of the way OCR/scanning software does it's thing, it ain't WhiteOut.
6) Strange looking letters in the typing - a lot of people have never used a manual typewriter or one of those ancient stamping machines. Even somebody good at using one would have a hard time making two copies of the same document all have the same amount of pressure applied to the keys and those mechanical devices were notoriously goofy about capital letters when shift was used as opposed to shift-lock.
7) The document filing number is higher than on the Nordyke BCs - Obama was born on Friday night, the birth records were probably piled on some clerk's desk until the following week and somewhere during the weekend the janitor knocked the pile over and it got shuffled, that's not proof of fakery. These were government employees filing that stuff, how careful do you think they were?
8) Why did Stanley put Stanley in parenthesis above the name Ann - because Stanley is a stupid name for a girl? Maybe she went by Ann, who knows.
9) Snopes lists a different name for the doctor than the BC - Snopes is not your friend, I've read that page and nowhere in there is it stated the doctor she mentions ever claimed to have delivered Obama.
10) Why is the left side curved as if it was in a book? – I have heard a couple of pretty good explanations for this that make sense to me. Let’s start in 1961, the HDoH has a standard form they use to report birth information with. A baby is born and several people have a hand in entering data on it, the parents, the doctor, the nurses, the clerks and local government officials. It is sent to the registrar, lays around maybe a few days, gets processed with file numbers and dates and signatures, then goes to whoever maintains these records. At some point it is added to a bound volume of other BCs, lays around a while longer, and then the HDoH decides it is unable to continue maintaining all this paper and they convert their records to microfilm or something similar. These films lay around for years, occasionally pulled to fulfil people’s requests for access to these documents, and generally just hang out. At some other point HDoH decides to digitize all these records and put them into their computers. I figure when the initial microfilming was done whoever did it either didn’t have time or was too lazy to unbind the volume so they could shoot a flat document, they just took a photo of each page, flipped the page, took another photo, and kept on until they were all the way through the volume. The BC that was presented online does seem to display the photographic perspective seen as the difference in curvature from the top of the document to the bottom. If the document had been photocopied there would be none of this perspective change but since it was photographed from a single point of view the geography of the top is different from the bottom. I don’t think this is a big deal, just typical of the process.
11) Why does it say “Certificate of Live Birth” and not “Birth Certificate” – another who cares. Every state chooses their own title for their documentation, this appears legit to me.
12) Where are the footprints always seen on birth certificates – it is verifiable that some states do not do this, maybe Hawaii didn’t, or at least back then. Dunno.
13) Why do the Nordyke BCs show "Honolulu, Oahu" but Obama's says "Honolulu, Hawaii" in box 7c - probably different people doing the typing, look closely at the two Nordyke BCs, the two of them have it each way. I don't see this as a huge deal.
*** Editor's note: this is where the meat starts, this is where things get interesting IMHO
14) Where is the state “seal” of authenticity – this one is a little tricky. If you close one eye, and put your hand over the other, near the left side of box #23 you can just almost see what appears to be some distortions in the safety paper that I am convinced could be the seal. If it was stamped on the back, which may be the case, and subsequently digitized, this stamp might be darn near invisible in what we have been presented with. One would expect the copies that were ordered from HDoH to have a brand new stamp and probably should be more visible. The jury is still out on this one.
15) What is with the green paper – now, this one is interesting. The WH released two BCs on Wednesday, the .pdf they posted online and the piece of paper they handed out at the press conference. OK, some lawyer flies out to HI to pick up the two copies of their records then returns with those documents. For sure the original records were not on security paper, not in 1961, so either the HDoH printed them on this paper or the WH staff added it later with some manipulation. Why? Good question. Probably just to pretty it up and make it look like the original COLB that showed up on DailyKos a couple of years ago.
16) Why did they put out two different versions on Wednesday - more good thinking. The hard copy the AP got looks more like what I would expect, plain flat background and what appears to be a copy of the original document. What is on the whitehouse.gov website is pretty suspicious. It bears none of the tool marks that should have been present if it was a scan from one of the hard copies retrieved from HI, in fact it appears to be purely a computer-generated assembly of data that has never seen a scanner. This is the sticky point right here. Why on earth would the WH not simply post a scan of the LFCOLB? This is the one point I can’t explain away and seems to indicate some shenanigans are going on.
17) Where is the original BC that Obama mentions in his books – hmmmm, this is really weird. First he had it, then officials in HI claimed they had seen it in their archives, then they claimed they couldn’t find it, then they said it didn’t exist, then Obama ordered two copies last week. This is definitely worth pondering, the story keeps changing.
REFERENCES:
The BC released this week: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
The Nordyke BCs: http://nativeborncitizen.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/nordyke-61.gif
The letters between Obama and his lawyers and Hawaii Department of Health: http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Birth_Certificate_Request.PDF
The infamous Denninger video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eOfYwYyS_c
I always find it amusing when people say “Please be aware I am not a “birther”....” yet then go on to prove that THEY ARE indeed a birther.
I am only here for entertainment purposes. Like I tried to explain, I personally don’t care where he was born because at this point it is almost useless if he wasn’t born here, we won’t be rid of him through the Constitutional requirements because he will never be impeached.
I was just trying to be helpful, I’m sorry if another BC thread annoys people, it is just several of them (probably this one too) have been redundant.
I have one question not on your list.
On the Certificate of Live Birth that Obozo finally released does the hospital entry represent a “birth” at that hospital or a “first doctor examination” at that hospital?
I think we are being dooped again. HI is still practicing Legal Weasel Word statements as is Obozo.
Too many differences over time. Which Hospital and which doctor. You say it is irrelevant, but I do not think it is.
If this has always been as easy as copying a record and printing it, this would have been done a long time ago.
It was not. Something is missing, the pieces still do not fit.
I doubt he was born in HI. I am not sure he was born in the U.S. I know without a doubt he is a liar and a fraud.
I am a Birther and proud of it.
I do not question the validity of this document Obama has put forward.
I suggest you run to reaso Number 3 in this scribe.
“3) His father’s race is listed as “African” but it would have been Negro back then - who cares, that’s probably what Stanley told the nurses.”
This is 100% true. They copied down what Stanley Ann told them.
They listed as Father Barrack Obama. Again that is what she told them. It does nopt prove that Barrack Obama was the father.Only that Stanley Ann told them that. She would not have been the first one to give a false name as the father, and she may have had a good —Frank Davis —Reason to say so.
I wouldnt trust the Mother any farther than I would the son, who is a known perveyor of Untruths.
If this were his real birth certificate, he WOULD HAVE RELEASED IT IN 2008!!!
There is NOTHING embarrassing or compromising in this document. (Other than the fact that his father is not a citizen)
A man is serving time in JAIL because a judge didn’t want to “embarrass” the president.
I saw multiple people saying the dates from a date-stamper were not the same font as the typewriter... duh//
They used to pull the book, do a photostat, give it to whoever and everybody was happy. This was too cumbersome. They went to microfiche and had all this stuff photographed. Then they'd just go to the filed microfiche, do a print, and give it to whoever wanted it.
Later, it's the microfiche that's been digitized, not the original.
HOWEVER, why didn't they pull it out of the book to photograph it ~ that turns out to be very simple ~ since the books were made to be photographed to provide photostatic copies, it was easier to leave everything together, copy the books and away you go.
Interestingly enough we were talking about Xerox machines. Their original 914 machines were used extensively to copy forms to microfiche!
They went into use in 1959. Some of the copying artifacts we see may have been created when the documents were xeroxed FROM PAPER to FICHE ~ if in fact they used that system.
Then, later on, when Obama ordered up his copies from the system last week the software "flattened everything and edited out some garbage from the original xerox copying method.
Didn't want to let that idea slip my mind. I never participated directly in making fiche, but I did have a lot of fiche made. Just never went around the machinery but if history says "914 copy paper to fiche" I'll buy that.
If someone told me “African” I would write down “Black” regardless. The same should be true back then except with negro or whatever.
Administration people are sticklers for rules. They don’t just write down whatever you say because it suits you.
“3) His father’s race is listed as “African” but it would have been Negro back then - who cares, that’s probably what Stanley told the nurses.”
This is 100% true. They copied down what Stanley Ann told them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don’t think so. I’ve seen on numerous threads evidence that Stanley COULD NOT tell them “African”. There were specific state and federal guidelines that the REGISTRAR had to follow in this matter. And in this instance, the COLB would have listed him as “Negro”.
But it's OK for the [so-called] president to embarrass the Country.
The judge should be serving time in jail for incarcerating a man when he knew that all the facts were not presented.
“The definitive list of Obama Birth Certificate myths?”
Do you mean myths about birthers or myths birthers ascribe to? Because I find the latter far more entertaining.
“Please be aware I am not a ‘birther’ and I find that term insulting to people who see the Constitutional issues at play here”
It is and was intended to be insulting, but that’s what you are. Get over it. Embrace it like free marketeers have embraced “capitalism” and homosexuals “queer.”
“It is and was intended to be insulting, but that’s what you are. Get over it. Embrace it like free marketeers have embraced ‘capitalism’ and homosexuals ‘queer.’”
If you are a birther, that is. If you aren’t, then don’t. And by “you” I mean anyone.
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.