Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.
The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.
The perceived unreliability of the image has provoked petitions and widespread demands for Obama to submit for objective inspection the paper versions of the "birth certificate" he claimed in his book Dreams from My Father was in his possession, as well as the paper version of the Certificate of Live Birth for which the image on the Daily Kos and the Obama "Fight the Smears" website was supposedly generated.
Without a valid birth certificate, Obama cannot prove he fulfills the "natural born citizen" requirement of the Constitution, throwing into doubt his eligibility to run for President.
McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.
(Excerpt) Read more at web.israelinsider.com ...
#104 - on why Obama will never release enough info to satisfy the most doubting:
“So it’s a twofer- discredit anyone taking the false bait, and to keep anyone from following a potential true lead for fear it might be another fake.”
We know both parents were socialists, and there is other stuff in his past that would make him unelectable. A false positive conspiracy-theory can do wonders to ‘innoculate’ Obama.
Be wary.
Blacking out the cert # BY ITSELF suffices.
No it doesn't. The image is not the document. It's a copy of the document. There is nothing wrong or even mildly suspicious about blacking out information that one may think should be kept private (whether or not that is a valid concern.)
I am.
I can’t wait for this to shake out. I am dead tired of following Obama. I HATE following Obama every day in and day out. I don’t do it out of love, I do it out of FEAR. Fear for what might happen in November.
Now, you have affronted JR over your BC, with a challenge, knowing he can’t moderate as much as he used to.
That’s CHEAP. You are CHEAP. If you really wanted to solve BHO’s B/C saga, you would have posted your certificate as Ms. Acosta has, for analysis.
But no, you pick fights with freepers who are gnawing their fingers to the bone to bring down Obama.
May you ‘laugh heartily’ when we succeed.
So you cant use a posted internet graphic as an official, legal form. I agree. So what? That was never the issue. People are twisting ‘invalid’ to mean ‘not real’ as in not an image from a real COLB.
You CANNOT deduce from the graphic Obama’s website posted that the original COLB it was produced from is invalid.
Capiche?
You are arguing in a circle. You just said it isn’t invalid, because it is invalid.
(Just in case you didn’t notice that)...
There is an old saying that "If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." Different graphical variations of government forms bearing the same form number are very common, as I can personally attest. There may be reasons to doubt the veracity of the birth certificate Obama posted, but that is simply not one of them.
So any gross errors, use of the wrong phrase, or badly stitched together borders made of the wrong size diamonds doesn't count?
You have it backwards.
You can't prove a web image is from a genuine document.
Absolutely! But they have different rev numbers and/or rev dates.
I think I see where you might have been confused. Let me try again. Even if you don't think it is valid to be concerned about whether a certificate number should be kept private, there is nothing suspicious that can reasonably be inferred from Obama's choice to black out that information. Further, the blacked out part of the copy of the form is not an alteration of the form, and has nothing to do with the "any alterations" statement you cited.
Again, as I can personally attest, that is not at all universally true.
I’m sure you are exhausted. I would be to if I were you.
And I am “cheap” according to you. Thanks a million. Fall flat on your face.
At one time only one person said sayyyyyy, there are companions orbiting Saturn. Did this make it true?
Now 50 million school kids know about the Galilean satellites. Does this make it true?
Yes I do, because the document says that any alteration invalidates the document, and the only thing Obama released is an image of one side of a document altered with the certificate number blacked out. According to language on the document, that invalidates it.
I'm willing to accept that the actual document is valid if one is produced that is unaltered. Until that happens, I will not be bullied by Obama into accepting a web image depicting one side of an altered document as the real thing, with all the legalities that go with it.
His campaign has released evidence, a scan of his COLB that says he was born in Hawaii. You cannot prove its legit without seeing the original and noboy has come even close to proving its a forgery.
Again, I'm not claiming it's a forgery, I'm claiming that it is invalid as evidence because it has been altered. I am curious to know why only one side has been made available, as if it were the only side in possession, but I suppose that's the prerogative of the Obama campaign.
Its impossible to ‘release’ a physical document on the web.
Absolutely true, but since when did the Web become the vehicle for such things. What happened to calling a press conference and making the physical document available for inspection? That's the way it's been done for hundreds of years.
Were we in a courtroom and the burden was on him to prove it, I’d agree that he has not proven it beyond a reasonable doubt. But that still leaves the fact that *all* you have right now are doubts.
True. We are not in a courtroom, but he is seeking our votes, so the burden is on him to win them. If I have doubts, it is because he released an untraceable document because he blacked out the certificate number. Why should I accept that?
-PJ
You stated earlier that you are "not the only person" who thinks that any change in the graphical appearance of a form would necessitate a change in the form and/or rev number. No matter how many people join you in that assertion, it is still only an assertion, and a gratuitous one.
I don't think so. People are saying invalid because it breaks the link to anything that verifies the tie to the valid document.
We are being asked to believe the contents of the document, but the one piece of information that links the image to the real thing is lost. It begins to feel like the "fake, but accurate" of older days, where we are to believe that the contents of the image are true, even if the document that contains them may not exist. If we had the certificate number, we can verify the existence of the real document, and then confirm the contents.
But I think you know this.
-PJ
When I said:
Absolutely! But they have different rev numbers and/or rev dates.
You replied with:
Again, as I can personally attest, that is not at all universally true.
OK. Show me ONE example. Same form number, same rev letter/date different form. This should be very easy for you to do as you have already said "Different graphical variations of government forms bearing the same form number are very common"
You need to get some rest.
You have accused me of threatening you. That is not rational nor factual.
You accused me of “black mail.” Have you apologized for that either? Nope.
Turn over my identity to a loon like you...no thanks, ain’t gonna happen. I am not as crazy as you are.
Sure. I will dig out some of my old Army stuff and scan it for you. Hope it's okay if I black out a few things. ;-) Good night.
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.