[MHGinTN]

You have stepped right into the trap set by the forger: "But, that “African” on the computer generated, database driven document from Hawaii, does jump out." There is no computer generated document that has been seen by the American people which was generated from data in Hawaiian vaults! You are lending credulity to a forgery! The document obama placed on the Internet was a fabrication. It was not 'generated from vital records database'! The people in vital recrods have stated there was no request for a CoLB filled on the dated which bled through the forgery, a forgery which lacked the raised seal but was later added to subsequent images of the same forgery!

[Author2]

Finally someone has gotten it right! DHS has said that they have never, as in not ever, issued a COLB to anyone named Obama or anyone else during 2007.

[RegulatorCountry]

I’ve stepped right into nothing. I’m looking at what has been put forth, and questioning the significance of the visible information contained within the image.

It’s no different from the laughable, gold-plated “analysis” from a now-discredited psychologist who apparently loves to take on spurious online identities to manipulate people, who had no discernable knowledge regarding file formats used in the graphic arts, despite presenting himself as possessing an advanced degree that would require such knowledge. I’m talking about Ronald Polland, of Florida. I’m not going to use any FR screen name, because I don’t even want to ping the b-tard, even though he’s opused and claims never to sign on again, under that FR screen name.

You accepted that, hook line and sinker. Do you know for a fact, that this image, at it’s base, is somehow a “forgery?” No, you don’t. You won’t know that until the subject of the photo of the scan is presented, and even then there is reason for suspicion.

This sort of crap is the reason I’ve tried to avoid any discussion directly relating to the whole, nonsensical “birth certificate” thing. It’s an intentional house of mirrors, filled with smoke, that’s gotten a lot of otherwise decent, intelligent people, such as yourself, stuck to a deliberate tarbaby, at the expense of applying the considerable knowledge and resources of FR to the known facts of the matter, relating directly to Constitutional eligibility, instead of some tangential snipe hunt.

Now, I apologize for the rant. You and I have had quite reasonable, even entertaining exchanges before, but you and I have had some that weren’t, back in the fall of last year, regarding this very online persona.

I told myself then, that I was quitting the “birth certificate” thing, to concentrate on the Constitutional aspect, and I should have listened to myself, this time.

But, I didn’t, and here we are, again.

Good luck, with whatever it is, that you hope to prove, with a JPEG of a photo of a scan of whatever it is you believe it to be.

[Fred Nerks]

You have stepped right into the trap set by the forger: "But, that “African” on the computer generated, database driven document from Hawaii, does jump out." There is no computer generated document that has been seen by the American people which was generated from data in Hawaiian vaults! You are lending credulity to a forgery!

thanks for pointing that out! It's the first thing I thought of this morning...we are discussing a FORGERY!