Posted on 05/28/2011 8:54:29 AM PDT by Tex-Con-Man
Troublemaker.
Dr. Neal Krawetz gave Inspector Polarik a humiliating public spanking...it’s not surprising The “Love Doctor” Ron would throw a temper tantrum and blog about it.
The front side of an embossed document would be raised and read normally, but the back side would depressed and read in reverse.
I'd have to go and look at it again though.
*groan*
I don’t know anything about computer stuff so I have no way of knowing whether to believe what this guy says about that or not. But the stuff I do know about, I see problems with what he said. If he’s not right on the stuff I know about, it doesn’t give me a lot of confidence on the stuff I have no way of knowing about.
Check the link at my comment 45. He thinks all the MSM is biased against Democrats.
Ha Ha Ha Ha!
None so blind as he who does not want to see.
Check out what I found out about the unbiased Dr. Professor Krawetz, document expert extraordinaire - comment 45.
..
For some reason, TF accused me of “blowing smoke”, even though all I did was correct a bad link.
The bad link you corrected was a link in 2008 that said that HI had authenticated his previous short form COLB. But what they really did was play Legal Weasel Word games. They did not authenticate the new forgery. That is the smoke.
Bingo, we have a winner! And late filing applications that were never approved.
I suggest you read his 31 page PDF entitled “Digital Image Analysis and Forensics”, you might learn something relevant to the point.
http://www.hackerfactor.com/papers/bh-usa-07-krawetz-wp.pdf
His opinion of media bias is not within his claimed area of expertise, and therefore, wouldn't carry any more weight than James Cameron's opinion on global warming.
WTF???? is this true????
If so then this who "fake" -vs- "REAL+ controversy is moot.
If they can just create one NOW and call it an 'original; then all bets are off. They can create anything Obama WANTS IT TO SAY.
And what the hell were THE WAIVERS he had to sign?????
Isn't there any JOURNBLISTS in the USA??
Hawaii. What's your prediction?
But you posted to me, and I quote, “You are blowing smoke.”
Since I never mentioned the Hawaiian officials, and simply corrected the non-working link, I'm still not sure how I could be blowing smoke.
I must have upset the delicate sensibilities of someone with my derisive criticism. So this time I will merely post a link and a couple of quotes of the Famous Document Expert Extraordinaire Neal (oops, Dr!!!) Krawetz, and how he expertly determines that the MSM is heavliy biased - against Democrats. He does admit that some are not strictly anti-Democrat. But the fact that he finds so much anti-Dem bias in much of the MSM is pretty darn funny. And Google is equally pro-R as pro-D. Interesting.
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/404-Clear-and-Present-Danger.html
While USA Today has a few pro-Democrat statements, the vast majority of the headlines are swayed toward pro-Republican viewpoints. (I think I got everything; I’m sure someone will let me know if I missed anything.)
Notice how, of the two statements that are not pro-Republican, both focus on anti-Republican and not pro-Democrat statements. There is not a single positive statement about Democrats on CNN. CNN uses slogans like “The Worldwide Leader in News” and “The Best Political Team on Television”. However, CNN is clearly even more biased than USA Today.
While the CSM [Christian Science Monitor] does have more pro-Republican headlines, they have a decent number of unbiased headlines and many pro-Democrat entries. This is very different and much more balanced than the one-sided slant offered by CNN and USA Today.
For clarity, I’m not trying to voice a political opinion here. I am only pointing out that the news, opinions, and views offered by CNN and USA Today are clearly one-sided and aimed toward a specific political agenda.
This same experiment can be done with the New York Times (stories slanted pro-Democrat), Washington Post (pro-Democrat), NPR, AP, and other news outlets. For example, the story about the stock market is covered in USA Today as “Fed aids investors, not savers?” and in CNN as “Stocks are waiting for the Fed”. However, the Washington Post reports it on the front page as “Fed’s moves aim to jump-start economy” — a much more positive spin.
Interestingly, I also looked at Google News. Google News harvests from a variety of media outlets. In my sample (I saved a PDF but couldn’t get Browsershots to create a PNG of it), I found no neutral headlines. However, there were nearly the same number of pro-Republican and pro-Democrat links.
This bias is clearly not coincidental. For example, News Corp. donated $1 million to the Repubican Governor’s Association.
Butter, looking these over, one looks like a direct copy, and the other is an electronic version. Might that have something to do with the header differences?
I was trying to say that since you defended the authors analysis on the tech side of the newly released COLB (long form) you were endorsing his article.
When I questioned the link relating to the HI Dept. of Health authenticating the COLB and you gave me the working link it was obvious that it did not do what the article said it did. It was not a statement concerning the authenticity of the new COLB. It was a statement concerning the “authentication” (NOT) of the previous forgery. At that time the HI Dept. of Health played the Legal Weasel Word game, and made it appear that they certified the COLB, but in reality if you examined their wording they did not.
No tech analyis can convince me that a document that was simply scanned and .pdfed will have 9 images in the document without being edited. We simply do not know what the HI Dept of Health gave to Obozo’s lawyers or what Zero’s Minions did to that document.
It is a forgery. Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation works. If it had been that easy, it would have been done long ago. The “Won” lies again.
That would be a perfectly acceptable BC, as long as Dr Onaka sees fit to sign it, date it, and seal it, and thereby certify that its facts are a true representation of what Hawaii has on file.
Don't waste your time barking up that tree.
He has always officially been Barack Obama. However, sometime between Occidental and Columbia he went from being Barack just call me Barry to Barack.
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.