Replies

"Under high resolution on the Orly Lavender image, the schmutz can be clearly seen to only partially obscure the correctly spelled word “maiden”, not the Obot’s incorrect spelling. The Lavender hoax image is not exactly the same as Orley’s image as you claim, but only very similar."

Nothing in that paragraph is true. Orly's image is not high enough resolution to show that. You are, frankly, seeing things.

The Punker's image was the original high resolution copy that Orly's reduced image derived from, and you cannot see the misspelling on that. So seeing it on a lower resolution copy like Orly's is wishful thinking at best. That it is the identical image (except for resolution) could be seen by the fact that the background textile and creases on the paper were identical right down to every visible detail of the pattern and weave.

The misspelling is only visible on those images where the "smuts" was removed (though a stain still remained).

"The Australian individual whose BC is claimed to be the model for the Orly image has a controversial history and a person with a very similar name, perhaps a relative, was connected to the Obama campaign in the US, if I remember correctly."

Nothing you remember there is correct. It was just some poor guy in Australia who had no idea his online BC was being used in this way. But that is neither here nor there. The Bomford certificate was online for at least two years prior, and is clearly the source document for the forgery right down to the surnames... a forgery that (by the way) resembles no genuine Kenyan BCs ever found and presented on line.

"The only indisputable fact is that Obama has not authorized HI to release his original vital records which would reveal an actual claimed physical birth address and witnesses."

Given that there are no Presidential eligibility requirements regarding birth addresses or witnesses, one can only respond with the observation (again) that the COLB in and of itself meets the requirements of the State Department for proof of American citizenship at birth.

"The alleged HI COLB has never been confirmed to be genuine by HI officials and has never been placed into evidence (claims in Obama defense motions and by Factcheck don't count)."

Well, you're not quite right there either. The State Department's response to the Strunk FOIA suite absolutely does count since it is testimony under oath by an organization in the position to know. Further more, the COLB is confirmed by Hawaiian officials since it has Alvin Onaka's certification and their stamp right on it.

You guys keep forgetting that it is precisely those features that makes it a self authenticating document requiring no extrinsic verification whatsoever.

So until somebody actually comes up with actual evidence that contradicts the COLB, it never will need to be confirmed by another Hawaiian official and it will never be presented in a court of law.

“The Punker’s image was the original high resolution copy that Orly's reduced image derived from, and you cannot see the misspelling on that.”

See this post by BP2 showing close-ups of the original Orly Lavender BC and the “Punked” BC in which Orly's is higher resolution.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts?q=1&;page=7846

Here is a larger image from BP2 before Hoosiermama pointed out that the Orly image had “mai_en” not “maleen”:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts?q=1&;page=7835

I read the Orly Lavender BC as “mai_en” and the “Punked” BC as maleen.

I do not see the paper folds and creases as identical as is discussed by BP2.

Textile weave proves nothing.

Neither the Orly BC nor the "punked" BC has been subjected to forensic examination, yet you claim to know which one is an original. I make no firm assertions of authenticity either way. I just call the specific features as I see them.