Posted on 05/19/2011 6:28:25 PM PDT by Red Steel
Re: Legal proof that President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I have irrefutably proven that the Certificate of Live Birth that President Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011 is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple violations under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense. When this comes to the public’s attention, it will be the greatest scandal in the country’s history—nothing comes even close. This will surpass the all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration.
My Credentials
I have a unique background for analyzing this document. I owned a typesetting company for 11 years so I know type and form design very well. I currently own Archive Index Systems since 1993, which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imaging software (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser. Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging systems and everything about the design of such programs. This will be important in understanding what has happened with Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth.
What President Obama Presented to the Public is an alleged Certificate of Live Birth.
What President Obama presented is not the hospital birth certificate. The birth certificate would have the imprint of the baby’s footprint, weight, length and other information such as the religion. The Birth Certificate would be the source of the same information that would be typed onto the Certificate of Live Birth (the Long Form). What President Obama released is supposedly the Long Form that the County gets from the hospital, which is typed on a blank form given to the hospitals by the county. That copy is then mailed to the county Board of Health and kept as a legal government document. On Obama’s form (Figure 1) the County Clerk supposedly hand stamped the form on the upper right hand corner with a bates stamp. The number is a sequential number that reflects the sequence of Certificates that come into the County Health Department. The reason I know it was stamped by hand is because the number is crooked. The County Clerk also hand stamps the date of acceptance (box 20 and box 22). Obama’s Long Form was supposedly received on August 8, 1961, four days after his birth.
Continued in SCRIBD document below...
News Release: Legal proof that President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.
Thank you. The zombies hardly even attempt to defend their claims. It's all reposting of things that have essentially been disproven, plus personal attack. There seems to be a lot of those. If you don't believe the birther claims of forgery, then you're a troll, an Obot, etc., etc.
A full copy of the high-resolution document is available here.
That it does. However, WHEN he was born is not the issue, nor pertinent. What is the issue for Stig's birth certificate is WHEN it was submitted to the central records. Apparentlynhis report of his birth was not reported for until several weeks AFTER his birth! As a result his birth was registered around 200 births AFTER Obama's even though he was really born the day after and only about five or six babies were born in between Obama and Stig's birth. The NUMBER is issued and stamped on the BC at the central office when someone gets around to reporting the birth... It's not assigned on the day of birth.
Not that I’m saying it necessarily ISN’T a forgery, mind you. But none of the claims in the original document at the beginning of this thread, or any that I’ve seen since then, demonstrate such a fact.
As I said earlier somewhere, if it’s a forgery (and it may be), it’s a decent one.
Look at the very irregular spacing in the second occurrence of "Honolulu" in the Obama document. Look at the no and both lu's. Compare that word with the first occurrence of Honolulu.
Also look at the "ent" in "Student." If you are honest, I don't believe you can tell me with a straight face that what is going on in this document is sophisticated computer-generated kerning, and NOT simply the irregular spacing of letters of a (possibly worn) mechanical typewriter.
Absolutely. See post 181.
I've shown that the leftmost letters are lower than more rightward letters, and that both the M and the K are abnormally skewed downward at the left. None of these effects have any explanation for those who insist that "there's no curve." To deny the evidence I've posted is to deny the facts, as far as I see.
I don't think it can be explained by reversing the order, at least not without invalidating the claim that the layers weren't created by machine. See the thinking in post 147.
In other words, the theory requires a disproof of the very thing it's trying to prove.
Either way, the layers-means-fraud theory collapses.
And that very question is another reason why the layers-means-fraud theory collapses.
That's easy... They started out with scanned documents in one orientation. It's easier to rotate than to rescan when using them if one needs them in landscape and you scanned them in portrait. There is NO reason for a program to separate out an element, rotate it, reduce it, and save that data in the Meta data, in a different orientation than the original document. None what-so-ever.
A most excellent point, Swordmaker.
However, I must correct a mistake that I made earlier.
August 6 was NOT Stig Waidelich's birth date.
August 6 was the date the certificate was filed with the registrar.
Waidelich was actually born, as was reported on the news, on August 5th.
The fact is, your theories have failed at every identifiable point, and you have yet to demonstrate failure of even one of the major points I've made.
I am still waiting for that apology from PA Engineer for his baseless and false personal attacks. The longer he delays in giving it, the worse he looks.
I think it's quite good if it's a forgery. Rhe release of the high-res AP image shows me that the curvature in M and K is there (the low-res images show it too) but it is not quite as sloped as the form lines. That is evidence of a painstaking forgery (rotating the M counterclockwise) or visual distortion.
This particular point, I will concede, is arguable.
As someone who works with graphics, I see no reason for a human being to work with images in this way.
In fact, there is a LOT wrong with a human being handling images in the way they are handled in this document.
Once again, though, it all fails the fact of the higher resolution document. Unless you can come up with a convincing and satisfying explanation for that, you must concede that the overall point fails.
And even if you should demonstrate that a human being might do things that way, you still haven't demonstrated that the human hypothesis is a better one than the machine hypothesis.
I just don't see any way for you to get there from here. And nobody has suggested a viable path.
Do you have a link to an original uncropped version of this “high resolution” AP image?
By the way, there are also further reasons for failure of the human-editing hypothesis that we haven’t even TOUCHED yet.
Yes, agreed. Have you seen my analysis and graphic on that earlier in this thread?
Of course. Layers = obfuscation is the only valid theory. But obfuscation also could help hide a forgery.
Yes indeed, please see post 181.
Duh, sorry, missed that one. Thanks!
By the way, I will probably be offline now for a couple of days or so. Therefore, PA Engineer, you may take advantage of the situation to offer up as many baseless and false personal attacks as you like.
If you’re a decent human being, however, I would more expect an apology.
The first step was to grab a white background abstract, perhaps only available in Hawaii, but possibly elsewhere. Second step was to change the typewritten text, somewhat painstaking but very doable. Third step was to change date rubber stamps. One way is to cut/paste date pieces from elsewhere.
Fourth, and an odd but necessary mistake, was to cut/paste the Alvin T Onaka rubber stamp onto the white background forgery. That was bad since that rubber stamp is supposed to go on the green hash paper post-printing. It was the only serious forgery mistake in this theory. (BTW, it isn't TXE, it is THE, as I have finally been able to see in the high res AP image).
Because of that mistake, the WH PDF does not show the proper green hash background under the ATO rubber stamp. Fifth step was to print the white background forgery onto green hash paper, the way the registrar would do it in Hawaii. Step six was to emboss a seal onto the paper artifact
Now they were ready to show it to Guthrie who took two two crummy low-res photos and didn't bother inspecting the seal. As a witness to history, she basically peed her pants.
Next they made many copies of the green hash paper artifact on a B/W copier. Next they emailed the WH PDF down to the obfuscation room where some 23 year old played with layers and thresholding SW (might be one of the same morons we are forced to watch on utube explaining that document layering is a little known fact).
Finally, they released their two electronic artifacts. AP made a third electronic artifact by scanning the B/W xerox. But some well-meaning idiot also decide to release the high res white background image to AP to bolster the case for native birth (probably just a koolaid drinker with no brain).
That's about it, do you think I've left anything out?
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.
