Free Republic

“It looks like Obama’s left hand is under his right foot. Therefore, it must have been photo shopped in some way.”

That bright spot you see under Barry’s right foot is the fabric on the back of the sofa. Right below that is a shadow cast from Barry’s foot or his roommates right leg.

If you’re still in doubt, download the photo and brighten it up.

“The hands - are they really entwined or is that photoshopped?”

To the best of my knowledge, it is a genuine photo, and yes, they are holding hands. The photo first appeared in the NY Times on January 20, 2009.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/recollections-of-obamas-ex-roommate/

If you download the photo from that site, you can then do a quick search on Tineye.com and find at least 20 other sites that photo appeared on.

“While I’ve never sat on a couch with a guy like that(one seat between us at a movie)... that video is gay...”

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. (sarc)

http://youtu.be/u59Oua3Vn9E

OK, You are 1000% right. You have explained fully, everything wrong with Obama’s Birth Certificate can be attributed to a worn typewriter ribbon. So, I guess it’s genuine after all. Now why in the world did the prior director of the State of Hawaii’s Health Department claim on national TV, that it was half typed and half hand written? I guess she should get in touch with you, so you can set her straight. Matter of fact, perhaps FR could hire you to prescreen all submissions before they’re posted-that way nothing you disagree with will ever see the light of day.

If what he says is true, that would mean that the Department of Health altered the 1961 Marriage Index to include Obama’s parents, and someone planted a fake Divorce Decree in the Hawaiian Court records.

http://youtu.be/4AUK8b_2iGE

“The word is spelled as Hawaii and not as Huwaii. You are simply misreading the “a” as a “u”. We can see it, albeit with some little difficulty. Why can’t you?”

If YOU can’t see that it is a “u” and NOT an “a”, I suggest you get your eyes checked. After reading your entire comment, I’m convinced that you simply are unwilling to admit it is a “u”. There is absolutely no reason that the camera would make only one “a” look like a “u”, but, only that one letter.

“In 1961 the typewriter typeface was cast in metal. In later years it was also cast in meetallized plastics and plastics, especially with respect to printer thimbles and daisywheels.”

Who cares what letters were made of “In later years”. It is supposed to be a document typed in 1961. Why make excuses for a forger? What you are saying is that it’s OK for the letters to be inconsistent because the forger may have used a newer typewriter. Each and every letter “a” on that document should look exactly the same shape, just as they do in this text. A worn ribbon will not make “a”’s or any other letter change shape. It will NOT shift parts of letters in relation to the other parts. The fact that you bring up kerning, letter spacing, high or low letters or leaning letters, shows just how off the mark you are. No
one, up to this point, has raised any of these issues-That is not what I or the video poster is talking about. When he says leaning letters, he means that on side of a letter is visibly taller than the other. You claim to be an expert, yet you didn’t notice that? Get your eyes checked.

If it is true that the misspelling was caused by the camera lens, why wouldn’t ALL of the “a”’s look like “U”’s. Why would it only affect only one letter on the entire document?

“Characters which are distorted due to gaps on the typewriter ink ribbon and variability in the type bar striking the ribbon against a paper document.”

Typewriter letters are made of metal. While a worn ribbon will cause the letters to appear lighter, the letters will NOT change shape. Letters will not become taller or shorter and parts of the letters will NOT move in relation to one another because of a worn ribbon.

“Assume the forger began with a BC issued to a male born the same day and same hospital as Obama.”

Why would a forger need to do that? Couldn’t he just start out with a blank form? Think about that.

“Some of your observations are correct. However, the ‘Huwaii’ thing is an anomaly which occurs because of low resolution imaging. I have analyzed this particular anomaly and have come to the conclusion the word is indeed correctly spelled ‘Hawaii’.” Then why doesn’t the “a” in the word “Oahu”, both above and to the left of box 7c, look like a “U” too?

“The birth record number is odd, however. Someone pointed out that if you magnify this number 800%, the ‘1’ disappears COMPLETELY.”

Yes, it totally breaks up in the Whitehouse version, but, not in the AP version. Also, explain how a tiny lower case “f”, got inside the final “a” in Africa in box 11. It can be seen clearly in the AP version. I’m thinking it just might be the forgers initials-FA or AF.

“Maybe that’s why he has shied away from releasing his BC because he’s embarrassed it has a spelling error on it?”

I had that thought too, but, after viewing the video about the AP version, and then comparing the three versions against each other, it is clear that the entire document is a forgery. I really doubt that people at the Hawaii Health Department, doodled on Obama’s original Birth Certificate.

“I’ve seen no evidence that entire fields were overwritten.”
Well, then you haven’t looked at the AP version or watched the video about it. Bty, changing the spelling of words is not, “Touching up photocopier artifacts”.

“we must try to force 0bama and crew to submit the document as proof of his eligibility... as required by the Constitution”

That would never happen. Obama’s attorney stated to the press, the day it was released, that the short form is the document that would be used for any legal purposes. That is an admission that the long form is not a legal document.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carney-4272011

Guthrie photo- http://lockerz.com/s/96540937 video here- http://youtu.be/dL6hZRYZ6wU AP version- http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_obama_certificate_dm_110427.pdf video here- http://youtu.be/XuyV7V853kk

Gilda says. “I thought the winer quit? What’s that? Oh that was Weiner? Never mind!”

As I stated before, there is an entire page of statistics that we cannot see, just to the left of the Birth Certificate. The numbers you are talking about are on that page. Until we can see that page, and it is doubtful we ever will, there is no way of knowing what those numbers mean. The numbers are not in the boxes you are trying to link them to.

“Guys and Gals, You have a document that was forged. Obama’s long form BC posted on the White House website is forged. The number 9 does not get you out of that fact.”

It was clearly stated in the video that Obama’s Birth Certificate is a forgery. That was proved the day it was released. That doesn’t give anyone, including the Cold Case Posse, the right to manufacture false evidence.

“Unfortunately this doesn’t hold up as true....”

My responses were based on what was stated the Instruction Manual. A Foreign Born population chart has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Are you now claiming that Barack Obama Sr. was not born in Kenya? His race was listed as African on the document and those instructions said,”If the racial entry is “C,” “Col.,” “Black,” “Brown,” or “A.A.,” “Afro-American,” and the birthplace is the United States, consider the parents race as Negro. If birthplace of parent is not in the United States, code as other nonwhite.” Now you can argue to your hearts content, but, I didn’t write the manual, nor did I code the document. I’d say that coding the entry African as 9 other nonwhite was close enough for government work. It really would not matter that much in the end, one way or the other.

“The birth certificate Obama presented to the American people is altered. Originally it was on blue paper then turned to green security paper? How did THAT happen? Constructed in Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop then printed out, IMPRINTED WITH A ‘SEAL’ THAT IS TOO SMALL AND NOT THE SIZE HAWAII USED, then photographed by Savannah Guthrie so we’d all think it was real?”

The photo taken by Savannah Guthrie proves that Obama’s Birth Certificate was altered. In box 7c it lists Obama’s birthplace as “Honolulu, Huwaii”. Yes, it actually says, “Huwaii”. That fact was passed on to the MCSO, Jerome Corsi and many others, and it was ignored. Can you imagine what those doubting reporters would said if Mike Zullo had put that photo up on the screen? They would have been speechless. Instead of doing that, they allowed themselves to be duped by Corsi’s bogus claim about the vital statistic code 9.

“1. What was the code for no answer provided?”
There was no code for that in 1961.

“2. What happened in the case where the parent(s) couldn’t provide an answer?”
What parent would not know his own race?

“If one were to assume that Sr. was “self” identified as “African”:
1. Would the code have really been “other nonwhite?” to describe a Black who was from Africa?”
Yes, the code would have been 9 other nonwhite.

“What, then would be the code to describe an “African” who was white?”
What white person would list his race as African?

“2. Would the document have been coded to indicate Black or Negro (or similar terminology from the period)?”
According to the instructions in the manual such a person would have been coded as 2 only if his birth place was within the United States. Persons claiming to be black that were born outside of the United States were coded as 9 other nonwhite.