News Release: Legal Proof That pResident Obama’s Certificate Of Live Birth Is A Forgery (Lengthy)

ObamaRelease YourRecords ^ | Tuesday, May 17, 2011

[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.

[Yardstick]

I got you mixed up with jw, when you inserted yourself in our back and forth on his side.

This is a forum with lots of people involved in the discussion. It seems odd that this would confuse you.

Point still holds, can you explain away the color aberration problem?

No one is interested in "explaining away" anything. I'm guessing you meant "explain" but are incapable of putting things in neutral terms. To answer the question, no, I can't explain the color problem, but I'm not an expert on this stuff.

And I can't help but notice that you've again ignored all the points JW made in his earlier post. Normally a debate involves some back and forth. Maybe you could try dealing with his points before demanding that he deal with yours.

[Yardstick]

I’ve never seen any other BC that sat around longer than a week.

How many BCs have you looked at?

[Tex-Con-Man]

A computer can only use anti-aliasing on text, not scanned images.

Anti-aliasing is a font display technology for making text display more clearly on a computer screen.

Photoshop offers anti-aliasing within any image, text or not. When adding one image onto another, it's a "blending" function that can be adjusted by the number of pixels desired.

[john mirse]

Here are the last digits of the cert#’s and “date filed” in order for the 4 numbers:

Susan Nordyke #637 Aug 11

Gretchen Nordyke #638 Aug 11

Barack Obama #641 Aug 8

Stig Waidelich #920 Aug 8

Over on my blog they’re trying to argue that the state registrar “filed” BC’s for weeks without numbering any of them and then alphabetized them (but only by surname) and numbered them. Here’s what I posted regarding that:

*****

I'm still confused, so could you please help me with these questions:

Date filed: Are there any birth certificates that were filed around Aug. 9 or 10, or Aug. 6 or 7, because the dates you list above are Aug. 8 and Aug. 11?

Waidelich number #920: I wonder if there are any birth certificate numbers out there with numbers 918,919, or 921, 922?

It would appear to me that something was not right if it turns out that Waldelich was the only person born in August 1961 with a number in the 900s.

My wish: I wish persons born in Hawaii, especially at Kapiiolani Hospital, in August 1961 would let us see there birth certificate number by contacting you directly or by posting their number on this message board at Free Republic.

[john mirse]

Even Obama’s forged long-form has the date accepted by the local registrar the same as the date accepted by the state registrar – Aug 8th....

******

I'm sorry, but I am having trouble following your train of thought in your message, like the passage above.

Is there any way you could re-write your message for me? Thanks.

NOTE: I have read your message several times, but I still get lost as I read the message. Sorry.

Most of the time I can follow and enjoy reading your messages, but this time, I am having trouble reading this long message. Thanks.

[Kleon]

My example of multiple pixelation involves no text. I ask you again to find me an example in one of the drawings or some other place where things which are obviously not text exhibit multiple pixelation.

Sure, no problem. You can see this effect more clearly in another version of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.

In particular, take a look at page 89 of the PDF. As you can see, the bottom portion of the illustration is enhanced while the rest of picture shows a different pixelization.

What's happening here is that the scanning software draws a box around the elements that will be enhanced or not. Since it's not perfect, parts will be left off, and it doesn't matter if it's a picture, text or signature. If the software doesn't recognize an element, it won't get changed. That's why some elements in Obama's certificate look different when blown up.

[Exmil_UK]

“Photoshop offers anti-aliasing within any image, text or not. When adding one image onto another, it's a “blending” function that can be adjusted by the number of pixels desired.”

I am talking about a scanning program that is used to make a faithful digital representation of a vital record, *not* a program famed for its ability to create wild new artistic possibilities or Frankenstein monstrosities.

No DOH can afford to employ Photoshop experts to manually do this. A simpler program to scan the entire record once in a reasonable greyscale resolution as a permanent record is a far more simple option.

Saving memory is not the most vital consideration as these images would have been permanently archived to optical disk, not server disk space.

[ml/nj]

In particular, take a look at page 89 of the PDF.

Again I have to complement you for coming up with examples that might seem to be single scans, but I don't think the stuff from Google qualifies.

I didn't see any pictures on page 89 of the book, but I looked at the image you offered. The lines at the bottom are simply not from a scan. They are all a uniform black (RGB=0,0,0) and are not a product of a scan. Maybe they are some frame that Google added? I don't know. As I said I didn't see the source for this.

And it doesn't matter. I did Google =google books scanning technology= . It's pretty clear that Google has their own proprietary system. This isn't something that would be necessary or available for scanning any document received from Hawaii and in fact nothing similar happened in the other pdf the White House released at the same time.

ML/NJ

[ml/nj]

If the images on the web are false then my theory is correspondingly inaccurate.

I'd say at least one of the images on the web is fraudulent.

ML/NJ

[jaydee770]

You may have missed my point. You can have all the evidence in the world, but who are you going to get to prosecute the case? So far, no-one at the federal level seems to give a crap and the states aren’t capable of doing anything about it either.

Unless you have someone who is in a position to do something about it (indict/prosecute/impeach/whatever), your efforts are in vain. I won’t begrudge you for pursuing it, I just don’t see your efforts ever bearing frui t — at least with the current folks in charge. The situation is truly abominable; it is a travesty; it spits on our Constitution and there appears to be no one, in a position to actually take any meaningful action, that gives a damn.

[Hotlanta Mike]

You don’t see parallels to Watergate. Congress wasn’t willing to invesitigate until the public become overwhelmed after a year of drip drip drip of tidbits from Bernstein & Woodward.

[john mirse]

If the images on the web are false then my theory is correspondingly inaccurate.

I'd say at least one of the images on the web is fraudulent.

*******

Could you tell us which image is fraudulent so that we can look at it for ourselves? Thanks.

Just wondering, if you found that ONLY one image is fraudulent, does it mean that the other images are genuine? Thanks.

[Triple]

Pound sand.

[ml/nj]

Could you tell us which image is fraudulent so that we can look at it for ourselves? Thanks.

This one:

ML/NJ

[Yardstick]

Pound sand.

That the best you got?

[Kleon]

I didn't see any pictures on page 89 of the book, but I looked at the image you offered. The lines at the bottom are simply not from a scan. They are all a uniform black (RGB=0,0,0) and are not a product of a scan. Maybe they are some frame that Google added? I don't know. As I said I didn't see the source for this.

The image I posted came from page 89 of the PDF file, not the book. The solid black portion is actually part of the illustration, not a frame added later, so it's unlikely that they went in later and added random parts of a picture.

I'm not sure why you still think uniform black pixels are evidence that they are not the product of a scan rather than the product of a well-documented process that enhances elements of the source material.

[ml/nj]

I'm not sure why you still think uniform black pixels are evidence that they are not the product of a scan rather than the product of a well-documented process that enhances elements of the source material.

Because you are full of **it.

No ink scans to black. The Obama uniform black from your "well documented process" was RGB = 26,45,31, not 0,0,0.

ML/NJ

[DiogenesLamp]

Have you seen this?

http://fleming-hayes.com/2011/05/obamas-classmate-at-columbia-raises-new-questions/

[Jeff Winston]

You have done a fine job of presenting, as usual. You have to admit that this particular entrant, while still wrong in many aspects, was very meticulous, and showed his work well.

Oh, I agree. I'll go further than that. I believe that Mr. Vogt is a technically competent man who sincerely believed what he wrote.

Even a technically competent evaluator can sometimes look at a phenomenon and put an incorrect interpretation on it. Especially on the first encounter, when no one has yet brought up an objection to the validity of that interpretation.

You have to respect that in a conspirist. Most of them just link to other conspirists. It’s nice to see someone take pride in their work, even if it is wrong.

I do agree.

[Kenny Bunk]

This is a dead conspiracy theory....

Well, no. It's a conspiracy theory that will never die because there are too many unanswered questions. If everyone else would let it die, Obama would not because it serves him very well.

The release of the "BC," is a case in point. It is not a copy of some LFBC in the dusty archives of Hawaii. It is a digitally created, new ABSTRACT. It is made with data "abstracted" from records on file in Hawaii. Or not. It may contain all the data on file in Hawaii, or not. The WH has not said that this is an exact copy of the LFBC. The HIDOH has not said that they have a LFBC on file. In fact, the Governor of Hawaii said there wasn't one, while the Director of the DOH said that not only was there one, but that she had seen it and it proved that BHO, Jr. was a "Natural Born Citizen!"

The "ABSTRACT" is essentially meaningless
unless everyone can see the original records from which
it was "abstracted."

Team Obama has pumped new life into the Birthers by releasing this document and allowing the world to assume that it is the BC. Of course, confusion amongst the Birthers is one result. Dismissal of the issue by the public that gets its reports from the MSM is the other result.

Digitally analyzing the document gets one precisely nowhere, because as a digitally created document, all you get is layer after layer of digital results proving that it was digitally created. Duh!

This is a brilliant maneuver by Team Obama. It throws the whole thing back to square 1. Where is the original, honest-to-god, Long Form Birth Certificate? It's a really excellent question. And now, asking it makes one look really crazy!

But the true brilliance of Team Obama's strategy is mis-direction. Legerdemain. The world's eyes are now firmly focused on "Birth Certificates." In the meantime, the basic question is sidetracked, "Is BHO, Jr. a "Natural Born Citizen" according to ART II of the Constitution?"

Of course he isn't. But he is the sitting POTUS. Left is Right. Up is Down. No one with the authority and power to do so cares to correct the situation. We have the theory, and plenty of facts to back it up. Team Obama has the country. No wonder we're nuts.

2012. Program. Plan to implement it. Leader. Some sign that there is intelligent life among those elected to represent us and that more than 50% of the electorate in every state has the wisdom to recognize it and vote for it.