Posted on 05/04/2011 10:01:56 AM PDT by BigFinn
The initial short form COLB didn't list a Dr.. It most certainly didn't list Dr. West.
Many birthers formerly were crying that nobody knew who the Dr. was.
Now that the long form COLB lists a Dr.; now every birther is 100% sure it was Dr. West based upon the Snopes article.
The Snopes article had second hand remembered statement from Dr. West which would not at all be inconsistent with him being there at the Hospital for the birth but not the attending physician.
Prior to the release of 0bama’s long form COLB, the purported ‘gold standard’ of a Hawaii long form COLB was the Nordike twins - and the exact same information that is on what was formerly the birther ‘gold standard’ of what a long form COLB should look like - is now apparently not enough.
If the COLB is an accurate and true reproduction of the original document, it DOES preclude the possibility that the birth took place anywhere other than where it says the place of birth was - Honolulu - unless you are saying they committed fraud on his behalf by listing a birth place that was inaccurate. Are you?
It is unfortunate that you disregarded the previous information. The State of Hawaii policies and habit is to issue an official birth certificate using the Kapiolani Hospital as the place of exxamination long after the birth actually occurred in some other locale. The other locale of the actual birth can be at home in Honolulu, Hawaii. It can be at a maternity hospital or home for unwed mothers in Vancouver, British columbia, Canada. It can be at the Coastline Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. In each case the State of Hawaii will still issue an Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth whenever a family member submits a request for the certificate while merely claiming the parents of the child met the residency and/or citizenship qualifications of the sate of Hawaii.
In the event that the claim of residency and/or place of birth were false and fraudulent, the State of Hawaii would still have issued the Certificate of Live Birth without questioning the fraudulent claims provided in the registration of the birth. So, there was nothing to prevent Madelyn Dunham from filing for her daughter and using fraudulent information. The informaton on the Obama Certificate of Live Birth tends to stronlgy indicate his birth did not occur at the Kapiolani Hospital, and it does stronly indicate it occurred elsewhere inside Hawaii or outside Hawaii.
The Dr. West versus Dr. Sinclair issue is problematical, because it raises more questions than it answers. For one example, if Obama was born outside of the Kapiolani Hospital and Dr. West happened to be the physician attendant at the birth, it may require explanation yet remain possible Dr. Sinclair was called upon to make an examination of the child at Kapilani Hospital days after birth for the purpose of completing the application for the Certificate of Live Birth. There are also a number of other posssible explanatoins for both physicians becoming involved in the birth and paperwork, while the birth did not occur at the hospital. Consequently, the latest Obama Certificate of Live Birth is inherently incapable of precluding the possibility of the birth occuring somewhere other than the Kapiolani hospital appearing on the document.
A child can be born anyplace in the world, and the State of Hawaii will issue an official Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth for that child, if the family claims the parents met the Hawaiian requirements for residency and/or citizenship. The State of Hawaii does not consider such a Certificate of Live Birth to be fraudulent, even though the actual non-Hawaiian place of birth does not appear on the Certificate of Live Birth.
It isn’t even a carefully done job, maybe they don’t realize how many people are proficient with Photoshop. If we had access to a better copy the forgery would be even more obvious.
I’m really TIRED of only getting to see DIGITAL documents from this slimy poseur. I want to know there is a PAPER DOCUMENT available for inspection. (I know I’m shouting. I’m upset...)
The poster claimed that the short form COLB listed Dr. West - that is in error.
Do you disagree? Do you think the COLB listed Dr. West?
If not then we didn't seem to have any point of contention when you began this.
It was a Snopes article that suggested Dr. West was the attending physician and supplied second hand quotes attributed to him, none of which were inconsistent with him being there but not being the birth doctor.
The information of the COLB tends to strongly indicate, by directly stating as much, that the birth happened in Honolulu Hawaii - as both the short form and long form said as much.
This looks pretty convincing to me, but I know nothing about computers. The larger problem is that the MSM is going to ignore this...and probably make life hell for anybody in public life that brings it up.
Where do we go from here?
The economy. Unemployment. Obama's broken promises. Hypocrisy. All topics delivered by a real conservative candidate.
Which may very well be the case.
If so, we'd have another RatherGate "Fake but True" style situation on our hands.
The old COLB did not include a doctor, but other information released HAS had Dr. West as the birth doctor
Geez are you trying to be obtuse???
What kind of Freeper is so smarmy?
If you really want to oust Obama, and you dont like the birther issue, then GO SPEND TIME ON AN ISSUE THAT YOU DO LIKE instead of bashing others on your side...
You will note I did not say before anyone had email, I said before everyone had email.
Yes, but why would the WH scan his BC using OCR? All they have to do is post an image of it. Makes no sense to to me, they just wanted to put up the image on the web for all to see.
Do people here actually understand the OCR process? Because it sure doesn’t seem they do.
OCR = Optical Character Recognition
It is the process of scanning an image (either an image file like a bmp or jpg, or a piece of paper with text on it) looking for patterns that match letters of the alphabet.
The result is a SEPERATE FILE. That seperate file might be a text file or a stream of data that feed to another application. The main point to get from this is: the original file isn’t affected in any way, shape or form.
It would be like someone taking a picture of your car (from 20 feet away); you later noticing a dent in your car door; and someone saying “that was probably a result of the photographic process.” No it wasn’t! Photographing a car won’t change a car in any way, and OCRing a document won’t change the document in any way.
Are people confusing OCRing and scanning? Scanning is taking a piece of paper and reading it into electonic format IN A SINGLE OPERATION. The result of scanning a document is a single image file (a bmp, jpg, etc...) It will not have parts or sections, but will a single, undivided, unsectioned stream of bits.
A PDF file is just a container designed to contain and display pieces of data in a predefined manner. Think of it like an envelope. You put things into the envelope (image files, text, fonts, etc...), arrange them in a specific way, and then show them to people. From the outside of the envelope it looks like a single piece, but a PDF is actually an envelope that contains arranged pieces.
When people opened the Obama birth certificate PDF “envelope” and looked inside, one of the things they should have found inside was an image file (bmp, jpg, etc...)—a single image file—that was the result of the original document scan. Remember, the result of scanning a document into a computer is a SINGLE image file (bmp, jpg, etc...)
That’s what this PDF envelope should have contained—a single image file; a single “layer” of data. Instead it contained multiple image files (multiple “layers”) that were arranged to give the illusion of a single image file.
That is what should be sending up red flags.
Can’t be . Hannity just said the BC issue is over !
You directly said the short form COLB listed Dr. West. That is wrong. “the old release from Obama has Dr. West”
Is correctly an absolutely incorrect assertion “bashing”?
I caught a lot of flack in the early birther days for pointing out there was no “travel ban” on Pakistan in 1981.
Birthers resistance towards accepting the truth, and instead attacking the person who attempts to correct them; has led to an elected GOP officials looking like a fool and kook when, quite recently - he was STILL talking about a “travel ban” in Pakistan in 1981.
But if you would rather look like an absolute moron and go around saying the short form COLB listed Dr. West - go on with your bad self. Don't expect me to join the parade, and don't cry too much when I jeer from the sidelines.
I wasn’t clear about one thing in the above post.
The result of the OCR process is TEXT. Not an image file, but plain text.
That text might include coordinates as to where the text is found on the original image file, but again those coordinates are numbers—text numbers like 15,25 or 157,397.
Under no circumstances (ever) does OCRing a document produce an image file—ever.
In short, OCR is the process of turning a printed document into a TEXT FILE.
Scanning is the process of turning a printed document into an IMAGE FILE.
Scanning does not produce text; OCRing does not produce images. They are two totally different processes.
None of it makes sense. Why send an Attorney 9000 miles to make certain the document arrives unsullied, release a clean copy to the press (this actually has not been confirmed, but somehow the AP got one) then post an obviously butchered copy as the real deal on the website. Why release such an amateurish hack job, when you have all the tools to create a flawless counterfeit.
Not always. If you're scanning documents for archiving and later retrieval, the OCRed text might be saved as part of the PDF. Here's a company that makes scanning software for that:
A text searchable PDF is a PDF file that contains an invisible machine-editable text overlay that allows the user to search for and locate specific text within the PDF document. This invisible layer of text is necessary for a text searchable PDF since the visible text contained within PDF files is not recognized by computers as text. The software used to create text searchable PDF files is called OCR.This kind of software would be used by a law firm or government office that has to scan and search lots and lots of paper. It's no surprise it might have been used here.
That’s what this PDF envelope should have contained—a single image file; a single “layer” of data. Instead it contained multiple image files (multiple “layers”) that were arranged to give the illusion of a single image file.
I wish people would stop saying the file contains layers. It doesn't, at least not when I opened it in Illustrator, and not as shown in one of the videos. It contains one single layer, with multiple "groups" on it. That is, the objects on the page have been collected into groups--just like the OCR process does. And they're groups that make no sense for the purpose of assembling the document--they don't make human sense, but they do make machine sense.
Nobody would use Illustrator to assemble a document like this anyway, so the chances of the groups being left over from an Illustrator session are slim. Furthermore, the layers don't show up in Acrobat, lending further support to the idea that they're something the computer created and Illustrator reveals, rather than something a forger did on purpose.
Exactly. You scan a document with any garden variety scanner, just like many people have at home. You then launch your OCR program to import that scanned image, and try to find what looks like letters and then create a real document, not a “photo”. You would have absolutely no reason to try to get your OCR software to process this BC image if you just wanted to display it.
The poster claimed that the short form COLB listed Dr. West - that is in error. Do you disagree? Do you think the COLB listed Dr. West? No, of course not. I never stated nor implied it did so. I did not comment about that at all.
If not then we didn't seem to have any point of contention when you began this.
No, that is not true. There was a point of contention. You wrote:
Now it has been released, and it does have the name of the Dr. listed - and now suddenly every birther is 100% convinced the REAL Dr. was Dr. West.
Firstly, you were using "birther" as a term of ridicule in a manner intended to intimidate anyone who dares to question the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama and the possibility he was born without any US. citizenship due to birth outside of Hawaii and/or the United States.
Secondly, you used the false phrase, "every birther is 100% convinced" to grossly exaggerate and misrepresent the attitudes and beliefs of an entire group of people for the purpose of subjecting them to false prejudice and intimidation by false ridicule.
Thirdly, you used the phrase, "the REAL Dr. was Dr. West," as a means of erroneously implying the name of a physician which actually does appear on a Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) must always be the name of the physician who was the attending physician present at the actual time and place of birth. Since the name of a physician appearing on the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) was in some instances not present at the actual time and place of birth, the implication and your ridicule of anyone asking for the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) with the physician indicated on it is servanted, wrong, and obnoxious in tone.
It was a Snopes article that suggested Dr. West was the attending physician and supplied second hand quotes attributed to him, none of which were inconsistent with him being there but not being the birth doctor.
Yes, and the Snopes article did nothing to disclose the possibility that their report of Dr. West was not the name of the attending physician at birth. Scopes half truth, assuming the quotation was accurate, deceived readers by causing them to incorrectly conclude Dr. West would likely have been the one and only attending physician at birth, and the request for the name of the physician by obtaining a true copy and image of the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) was unnecessary, redundant, and moot.
The information of the COLB tends to strongly indicate, by directly stating as much, that the birth happened in Honolulu Hawaii - as both the short form and long form said as much.
In the above statement you once again make a false statement of fact. The information on the Certification of Live Birth (short-form) and the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) purport to indicate the place "of birth." In reality, however, the actual place "of birth" is not the places indicated on these documents, because the State of Hawaii directs the Department of Health to report them as being in Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii, even when the births occur anywhere else in the world. Consequently, the Certification of Live Birth (short-form) and the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) "strongly indicate" nothing more than the fact an Hawaiian official is issuing a birth certificate for a birth that could have occurred anywhere in the world.
Also, since the Certificate of Live Birth (long-form) lacks certain birth statistics and includes the names of certain officials not associated with Kapiolani Hospital, it tends to "strongly indicate" the birth did not occur at Kapiolani Hospital and did occur somewhere other than Kapiolani Hospital.
In the event that the birth of Barack Hussein Obama were ultimately proven to have occurred in a foreign state, this event would be the most flagrant case of un-prosecuted birth certificate fraud by an illegal alien in U.S. history.
In the event that the birth of Barack Hussein Obama were ultimately proven to have occurred in Hawaii, this event would be the second case of the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution being arguably violated by an occupant of the Office of the President.
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.