Skip to comments.
EXCLUSIVE! OBAMA'S FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE: How the forgery was made.
The Greater Evil ^
| 07/23/08
| Polarik
Posted on 07/23/2008 12:40:56 PM PDT by Polarik
There are three facts about Internet blog stories that you need to know:
- Plagiarism is rampant on the Internet.
- You cannot always believe what you see and read.
- When you see the word, "EXCLUSIVE," in the title, it does not mean that the story was the first one or even the only one.
You can imagine my chagrin when I read the following headline in the Atlasshruggs blog:
ATLAS EXCLUSIVE: FINAL REPORT ON OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE FORGERY CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
What this headline, and the story it trumpets, confirm is that all three of the "facts" listed above are validated by this story.
Actually, my first reaction to it was, "Yawn." Here is an article proclaiming to have the exclusive findings that Obama's Birth Certificate image is a forgery -- or, using the acronym that I alone coined, Obama's "COLB ("Certificate of Live Birth") is a forgery.
The only problems with that statement are as follows:
- More than a month before this "EXCLUSIVE," was posted, I posted my own exclusive findings that the Obama COLB images were "poor forgeries" made from a genuine COLB.
- This so-called, "FINAL REPORT" is far from being final, and
- This so-called, "EXCLUSIVE" report is far from being the first to claim a forgery occurred.
- More than a few original findings and ideas of mine were "borrowed" without attribution.
In light of the above, my second reaction to it was, "What chutzpah!" (Which is the Yiddish word for "WTF.")
How can an article, posted on July 20, or a full month after my original proclamation that Obama's COLB image was graphically altered, be labeled as exclusive? I will admit that the techniques used by the author, TechDude, were not the ones I used to discover the forgery, and that he was the only one, to my knowledge, to have used them.
For that, I'd like to offer a pat on the back to TechDude for the work that he did, but also a slap on the wrist, to both Techdude and Pam Geller for misleading the public by implying that they were the first ones to present evidence of a graphic forgery.
Now, that they've basked in the glory of their nonexclusive, "Exclusive," it's time to set the record straight.
On June 19, I wrote the following on my TownHall blog, The Greater Evil:
"The Daily Kos blog has posted a JPG that allegedly is Barack Obama's "Certificate of Birth." From a detailed analysis of the image and the text, it looks like it was created by a graphics program, and is not a true copy of an original, certified document."
So, which part of that statement did they miss? It also appeared on The Free Republic about the same time, and afterwards, on TexasDarlin's blog.
So, which part of these blog stories did they miss?
In my first post, I did make some wrong assumptions, for which I replied, Mea Culpa, and made the necessary changes.
For example, I also made mention of the odd-looking border back then, but that finding turned out to be irrelevant to my research.
However, my essential thesis was then, and has always been, that the Kos image, and all of its relatives, including the FactCheck image, were graphic forgeries, even though I focused on different aspects of it than TechDude did. For him, the border was a crucial part of the puzzle.
For me, that border could have been red hearts and purple flowers for all that it mattered.
I focused on the anomalies of the text, which were many and not explained away by the reasons cited by my critics.
Now, this is not to take away any of the work that TechDude has done, which is notable in its own right, and if you read my blog, you will see proper attributions made to him and his work.
HOWEVER, I do take exception to the lack of any attribution to my work, and is a very egregious oversight, at best.
At worst, it smacks of plagiarism, and there are more than one instance of that, such as the upper left-hand border comparison which was originally mine and emailed to him.
Also egregious is the fact that TechDude, myself, and TexasDarlin had agreed to publish a joint document, and, as you have now seen, one of us renegged on that agreement and stole the spotlight.
I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade here, but I would like to point out that there never was an "uncropped Kos image" posted online. A scan of the entire COLB was never posted to the Kos or the Smears. It was always a cropped image, and I was the one who confirmed the true "birth order" of the images -- especially those of OpenDNA (who was initially "charged" with making the Kos image forgery.
Now, the FactCheck image was, indeed, posted as an uncropped version of the Kos image, although one cannot escape the likelihood that the extra border was added, post-hoc.
What I did confirm is that all of the online images came from one source file.
I also confirmed that my critics and detractors, coincidentally, are also the same to TechDude and his research. It is safe to say that there will always be people who are antagonistic to others who reveal unpleasant truths.
But, now is the time to separate the men from the boys, so to speak. The critics and detractors who claim that the Kos image is NOT a forgery, demand to see someone actually create one from scratch.
I couldn't agree more. it is one thing to postulate that a forgery has been created, but it is entirely a different matter to actually create one that is a clone of the Kos image.
What may surprise these critics and detractors to learn is that beginning about two to three weeks ago, a clone of the Kos I created was posted to my latest blog post.
You see, the image that I referenced as the original Kos imageis actually the clone I created more from Michele's 2008 COLB image.
Here's the Daily Kos image from their website:
![](http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg)
Here's my clone of the Kos image:
![](http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate-0612.jpg)
Keep in mind that this is not a point-for-point clone of the Kos image, since I did not proceed from an original, scanned image (a bitmap that has never been seen by the public), but it's darn close, and nobody was the wiser.
How do you tell my clone from Kos?
The "Time of Birth" on my clone is 7:25 AM; on the Kos it's 7:24 PM.
I replaced everything, EXCEPT the funky border. Like I said, the "security" border is not very secure when it can be reproduced by a scanner.
Making an exact "forgery" in terms of the Kos image dimensions, file size, JPG compression and resolution was not an easy job, although I spent less about an hour to make it. I'm still feeling the effects of a flu bug.
In the next few days, when I feel a little better, I will post a real "exclusive" -- a step by step guide showing exactly how I produced this clone, as well as posting a sampling of all of the dead ends I reached using the explanations professed by the nonbelievers.
I have about 320 images in all, but I'll post a sufficient number of them to satisfy anyone's doubts.
Like I've said in previous posts and in comments made on other blogs, if someone can make a Kos clone just by scanning, reducing the size, changing the compression, or any combination of these ways, they are more than encouraged to try.
Until then, I stand by my conclusion that I made over a month ago: that the Kos image looks the way it does because the original text on a previous image was graphically altered or replaced.
"Why" it was done is still open for debate, but the discovery that I made over a month ago still holds true. The image is not a "horrible" forgery, IMHO, because it fooled a lot of people...and that's the sole purpose for making a forgery.
Hopefully, the critics and detractors will come up with their own clones made in the ways that they claimed. In the meantime, the evidence provided in my posts and in TechDude's posts far outweigh any evidence that the images are are genuine, accurate reproductions of a paper COLB document.
It may look like a duck, but it walks, talks, and flies like a Dodo bird.
PREVIEW:
When I received a true copy of a recent COLB from a person named, Michele, I promised my readers that I would manufacture a clone of the Kos image to demonstrate how it was created. In doing so, I would validate my theory that someone's actual COLB, or a scanned copy of it, was used as the basis or template for creating a forgery.
I had theorized that the pixel patterns between the letters on the Kos image I was viewing were not JPG artifacts, or scanner artifacts, as the critics claimed they were.
These pixel patterns were characteristic of text added to an existing image while the image was an 8-bit, 256-color bitmapped image, and not while it was a 24-bit, 16.7 million color JPG.
Before I reached that conclusion, I had tried every other way possible to duplicate the Kos image.
People may say that OpenDNA, aka Jay McKinnon, already tried to do that -- that he produced two images that were also graphically altered.
However, both of these images were 800 x 781 pixels @ 96 DPI, which is a far cry from the larger, 2427 x 2369 pixels @ 300 DPI Kos image. Basically, OpenDNA's "forgeries" were easy to do given how small was the area that needed to be modified.
"Cloning" the Kos took a little, more work than that.
I ask that all of you to be patient as I recover, and that you will soon be rewarded with the recipe for forgery.
TOPICS: Conspiracy; Politics; Reference; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: birth; birthcertificate; certificate; certifigate; colbaquiddic; forgery; kos; newbie; obama; obamatruthfile; pl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 381-384 next last
To: Blood of Tyrants
Of course it's fake... since every citizen has an interest in making sure that the potential president of the United States if fully eligible for the office, can we pool our money and hire a lawyer to sue Obama for a certified copy of his birth certificate shipped directly from Hawaii?
What a humiliatingly bad idea. This birth certificate whining is such a distraction from the issues that I'm sure the lefties would love for you to take on a quixotic suit like this and hand them a public victory. But hey, it's your money, and I'm sure you could find a lawyer willing to take it!
161
posted on
07/24/2008 11:54:43 AM PDT
by
aNYCguy
To: Captain Rhino
Not quite. The correct formulation is IF you are born outside the United States AND one of your parents is a United States citizen AND your parents are married AND your United States citizen parent meets the physical presence and residence requirements, you are a citizen of the United States by statute. But that is the November 14, 1986 version of the rules. Wikipedia notes that different rules apply for persons born abroad to one U.S. citizen before that date. It goes on to note United States law on this subject changed multiple times throughout the twentieth century, and the law as it existed at the time of the individual's birth controls.
So, do you have links to the specific law in effect when Senator Obama was born?
(Not that it is any more than academic exercise since another poster to this thread has supplied a link to the Obama birth notice in the local Hawaiian newspaper, thereby giving further weight to the claim he was born in Hawaii.)
Here is a link to a legal opinion which sets forth the nuances of the law and the effective dates of the relevant modifications: "Obama and McCain: Citizenship And Eligibility--Legal Issues Vanity | July 4, 2008 | David"; http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2040753/posts
There are two holes in the opinion as set forth. The legal research engine I had when I wrote it does not reach the effective date of the modification that took the "after age" cut off from 16 to 14--since Stanley Ann missed, even if the age was 14, I have not viewed it as a relevant question.
The significant change took the period from 5 years to 2 years--as set out in the opinion, that change covered persons born after November, 1986 and thus does not affect Obama.
The other hole is 8 USCA Sec. 1409(c) which governs persons born out of wedlock which I now believe is irrelevant to Obama's situation.
I don't view the newspaper clipping as dispositive in any way. In fact, I have forecast that we would find evidence of a filing around August 8, 1961. The issue is what the underlying facts are.
Someone on the mother's side, either Stanley Ann or one of her parents, was concerned about the citizenship issue and took steps to address it.
It would be helpful if someone would look at the other Hawaii newspapers for the period of the first two weeks of August 1991 and determine if the announcement is anywhere else, perhaps with additional information.
The local title company could look at the address given in the note and determine who was in title on that date--maybe find a lease.
An increasingly important question for the Hawaii authorities is the data underlying the August 8, 1961 filing--at what hospital was he born? Who delivered him and how? I continue to believe that is the reason the campaign is concealing the birth records and obstructing access to Mrs. Dunham Sr. and to Sarah in Kenya.
162
posted on
07/24/2008 12:06:49 PM PDT
by
David
(...)
To: Captain Rhino
It doesn't appear to be such an open issue to the United States Senate Horse droppings.
It is such an unresolved issue that in the last election cycle McCaskill submitted a bill to establish the eligibility to hold the office of the president to anyone born to a U.S. citizen who is serving overseas as an active or reserve member of the U.S. armed forces.
Why? Because senator McCain's father was a Navy officer serving in the Canal Zone when McCain was born in Panama (NOT IN THE CANAL ZONE). That makes him technically ineligible in many minds.
The laws was never passed. Whether McCain is eligible is still an open question.
If it is not such an issue McCaskill wouldn't have gone through the unsuccessful effort to try to clarify the non-issue.
It was an issue then. It is an issue now. Should McCain be elected the "progressives" will insure it remains an on-going issue. It will be their "modern" version of "selected, not elected", and "He's not MY president!"
McCaskill wasn't able to get her bill passed. The most McCain has saying that congress recognizes his eligibility is a "sense of the senate".
As if the senate had a lick of sense...
163
posted on
07/24/2008 12:08:58 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: aNYCguy
Do you have a job?
Serious question.
164
posted on
07/24/2008 12:10:14 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: Kevmo
Geez, that's wierd. I was about to quote that same piece of Revelations.
Here's another thought. I've seen many people spelling Obama as "Obamah."
If that is a legitimate variant of his name, the number of letters in each of his three names would be 666!
165
posted on
07/24/2008 12:56:11 PM PDT
by
Polarik
("The Greater Evil")
To: Polarik
Oops, I can’t add, either.
166
posted on
07/24/2008 12:57:07 PM PDT
by
Polarik
("The Greater Evil")
To: null and void
Sure he does...as an English Professor.
167
posted on
07/24/2008 12:59:17 PM PDT
by
Polarik
("The Greater Evil")
To: Polarik
I saw a great graphic on some FR thread that showed “the only difference between Obama and Osama is just some BS.”
168
posted on
07/24/2008 1:02:20 PM PDT
by
Kevmo
(A person's a person, no matter how small. ~Horton Hears a Who)
To: Kevmo; Grampa Dave
Ummmmm, post #118 of this thread maybe?
169
posted on
07/24/2008 1:26:05 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: Polarik; aNYCguy
Nahhhh, an English professor would be able to answer the question.
I'll give him a bit more time since he might be in class...
170
posted on
07/24/2008 1:28:22 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: null and void; Polarik
Yup, that’s it. It makes a lasting impression, unlike a forged stamp on the back of a birth certificate.
171
posted on
07/24/2008 1:35:57 PM PDT
by
Kevmo
(A person's a person, no matter how small. ~Horton Hears a Who)
To: Kevmo
Islam borrowed much from Christianity and Judaism.
172
posted on
07/24/2008 1:51:43 PM PDT
by
Calpernia
(Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
To: Calpernia
Yup.
The very first recorded words out of The Serpent’s mouth were “Hath not the Lord said...”
Satan has a long track record of twisting Scripture to his own ends and for our destruction, hasn’t he?
173
posted on
07/24/2008 2:03:21 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: null and void
Yes, a Hildabeast operative would have been motivated to disclose damaging information a long time ago if it was to diminish Senator Obama’s chances to gain the Democratic nomination.
174
posted on
07/24/2008 2:05:54 PM PDT
by
Captain Rhino
( If we have the WILL to do it, there is nothing built in China that we cannot do without.)
To: BykrBayb
It was here last PM. I’ll look.
175
posted on
07/24/2008 2:29:11 PM PDT
by
MindBender26
(Leftists stop arguing when they see your patriotism, your logic, your CAR-15 and your block of C4.)
To: null and void
176
posted on
07/24/2008 2:36:36 PM PDT
by
Calpernia
(Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
To: BykrBayb
177
posted on
07/24/2008 2:38:35 PM PDT
by
MindBender26
(Leftists stop arguing when they see your patriotism, your logic, your CAR-15 and your block of C4.)
To: null and void
Do you have link to interview video? Have lost link.
178
posted on
07/24/2008 2:46:53 PM PDT
by
MindBender26
(Leftists stop arguing when they see your patriotism, your logic, your CAR-15 and your block of C4.)
To: MindBender26
179
posted on
07/24/2008 3:06:54 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
To: null and void
Just a little BS is right.
180
posted on
07/24/2008 3:09:39 PM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
(Obama gets the special-ed treatment as our untouchable affirmative action candidate)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 381-384 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson