Expert: Obama doc is 'proof' – of fraud

World Net Daily ^ | June 7, 2011 | Jerome R. Corsi

[conservativegramma]

Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines

The online image of a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" was trumpeted by the White House when it was released on April 27 as "proof positive" that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

Now an expert in typefaces and typography says it sure was "proof," but not of what the White House would have wanted.

Paul Irey, a retired professional typographer with 50 years experience in his business, has says an analysis of the typefaces used in the Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate that the White House released on April 27 reveals it absolutely to be a forgery.

"My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter," Irey told WND.

"Typewriters in 1961 could not change the size and shape of a letter on the fly like that," he said. "This document is definitely a forgery."

Irey acknowledges that an IBM Selectric typewriter could have produced different typefaces in a given document, but only if the Selectric ball was changed every time a different typeface letter was struck which would be unlikely to have been done to produce the word "Student," for example, that had two different styles of the lower case "t."

[CanaGuy]

Looking at Obama's LFBC in Adobe Reader, you can use the "Object Data Tool" to check the vertical and horizontal alignment of the typewritten characters.

Assuming the form was completed on one typewriter in one sitting, then the vertical and horizontal alignment of the characters should be consistent throughout.

You can slide a vertical line (of the Object Data Tool) across the page to check the horizontal positioning, and slide a horizontal line up and down the page to check the vertical positioning.

We can give some leeway to the vertical positioning of characters because they are more easily disturbed by a typist unlocking the platen and smooth scrolling the vertical positioning of the paper and re-locking. This operation could have been done to position the "X" marks in the small check boxes, seeing that the check-boxes themselves are off-center.

Most of the typewritten characters on the LFBC line up ok. However, there are some anomalies I wish to point out with respect to character alignment:

1. The word "Male" in Box-2 does not line up with all words below it. The whole word "Male" is horizontally shifted by half a character.

2. The word "August" in Box-5a is horizontally shifted by half a character...(Going up the page: the characters in the words None, Dunham, Student, Obama, and Oahu---all line up, but not "August".

3. In Box-5a, the characters are different sizes in the Birth Date and Hour entries compared to the word "August", and their vertical alignment is oddly half shifted.

4. The "X"'s in the check boxes are randomly positioned in all cases, but they can be ignored, since typists can unlock the platen, play with the backspace key, and thus more accurately center a single character in a situation like that. The result is that the "x"s are legitimately out of alignment with the rest of the characters.

5. The offset "O" in "Oahu" (Box-6b) and the offset "K" in Kansas (Box-16), are typically achieved by only partially depressing the Shift key on a manual machine when making a Capital letter. This, coupled with the perfect alignment of the "All Caps" displayed in Boxes-1a, 8, and 13, (a result of using Caps/Lock)is pretty conclusive that it was either typed on a manual machine, or was purposely done to imitate a manual. I don't believe this particular effect can happen with an electric typewriter, like an IBM Selectric, but I may be wrong.

In a nutshell, from the very narrow perspective of character alignment, I believe there is something wrong with the "Birth Date", "Hour" and "Sex" entries shown on the document. To achieve the displayed effect, the typist would have had to have removed the form and re-inserted the paper misaligned.... Highly unlikely with only two isolated boxes out of alignment.

Of course, the other conclusion, that it was misaligned by a sloppy computer forger, is also a legitimate conclusion.

[rolling_stone]

yes agenda driven theories that are not thought through to a logical conclusion...if- then, then what also follows?

Typewriters floating around a hospital with diaper droppings and baby oil and powder and magic carpet forms flying in and out from typewriter to typewriter and person to person...yeah thats a fair assesment (for Alice in Wonderland)No wonder the P.O. is so messed up.

[rolling_stone]

all forgeries are at risk of being exposed. to place a forged document where none previously existed is far easier than replacing a good document with a forgery.

Destroying a document is also easier than forging one. hmm.

[MHGinTN]

I don’t happen to believe you. You spend too much energy running defense for barry the bastard. To deny the obvious composite nature of the thing your pResident released is a huge clue that you are working this for an agenda not related to ‘saving conservatism’. Your alinskyesque techniques are also a huge clue, ridiculing honestly offered posts related to the term natural born citizen. So, no, I don’t even believe your hollow assertion.

[UnwashedPeasant]

Wow! This is a SMOKING GUN equal to the TH in Rathergate. The pixel distortion in the two 1's is IDENTICAL.

Get a close-up look:Full BC from whitehouse.gov

Even a flaming liberal who has ever used PhotoShop will know this is fake by looking at the duplicate 1's.

Another smoking gun pixel-perfect duplicate!:

[Eastbound]

Thanks for the info. It's a good fake, I'd say.

So are you implying that it was wrong to post it?

[cynwoody]

Baloney if what you say is true then a forged document in state records could never be challenged. It can and it can be inspected by forensics experts.

That's a perfectly valid line of argument. But you can't do it based on the crappy rendition put out by the White House. You have to stipulate that Obama didn't forge anything whatsoever.

Instead, you have to prove that forgery happened in 1961, not sometime this millennium. You have to prove Toot pulled a fast one somehow. Good luck with that!

E.g., you could start out with UK Le Lee being an obvious joke. Except the same sig appears on unrelated contemporaneous BCs. Oops. You could argue about the serial number sequence, but you have no way to prove it wasn't just a consequence of how the filing clerk did her/his work. You could make the racist case that BHO, Sr. was not African but a nigrah as they were classified then, and get laughed out of court (if you're lucky). You get my drift?

Same goes for all the other apparent anomalies cited. You would have to conduct a study of the contemporaneous birth certificates and prove that Obama's is different in a significant way. You would have to show that the sorts of things cited in the article occurred only on Obama's BC but not others of the period, and that that therefore it's fraudulent (but then what would the court replace it with?). You can't prove much of anything by comparing letter shapes within the document.

[sforkjoe57]

“If said child was born in a US Hospital, then yes, he/she would be eligible for POTUS under current law.”

Sorry. I must have missed the post where you cited the law of which you speak. Could you please remind FReepers of relevant laws or legal precedents that support your claim.

Thank you.

[Hotlanta Mike]

4 Supreme Court Cases define ‘natural born Citizen’:

http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/2011/04/executive-summary-re-natural-born.html

[cynwoody]

But you think he can be convicted for these things?

A convictable offense is whatever a majority of the House and two thirds of the Senate can agree on. There are no other rules and no provision for appeal or review. If I were in the Senate, I assure you either of the things I cited would work for me. And I'm sure there are plenty more possibilities. But I'd be too embarrassed to remove him on eligibility grounds. Because he's eligible!!

[TigersEye]

Duh. The State of Hawaii is the Source of the source documents.

Duh is right. If I had more patience I would explain the difference between the source document and a copy.

[TigersEye]

LOL

[freedumb2003]

No, you are wrong. If you look upthread, we have legal experts who say that not only are there no USC cases to ever address the specifics of "Natural Born Citizen" but that to suggest that there have been any, including Ark, makes one a liar.

Clearly, you are mistaken and, by extension, lying.

We are no longer discussing the underlying issue (and, I note the gymnastics applied to Ark). We are just dealing with the simple statement that there are no SCOTUS cases that have ever addressed the "natural born citizen" issue -- not any conclusions.

I reiterate: there have been no SCOTUS cases addressing this. You are, therefore, mistaken and lying

(/do I really need a sarc tag?)

[Hotlanta Mike]

Why don’t you simplify the copy ... how about “Room temperature IQ (Celsius)”?

---

Okay, for those in Rio Linda...Compare each set of letters which are derived from Obama’s LFCOLB released on April 27th.

When the data was typed into the form the type should be the same, not appearing as originating from different typewriters.

More visual aids at the link...

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=308397

[Aliska]

I got it early on before they could change it lol and been following along what people are finding. I mentioned the two boxes in a post somewhere up the board but the 1's are mirrors, too. There's a new video out where three u's in the first and second Honolulu and Oahu are exact matches.

There's no logical reason for or against to copy paste identical u's. The 1's perhaps and the boxes if one of the twins' was used for a template, had to have the X taken out. Also possibly Female had to be changed to Male, just wild speculations on my part.

But then someone comes along and says they have a graphics program that will produce identical characters down to the pixel like that. Baloney, someone else says the AP version doesn't show identical characters. It's lower resolution, zoom it up to enough magnification to compare, and it's all blurry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvALmxLZQBA

If they are alterations, some of them make no sense one way or the other at this point. I'm no expert and all the "discoveries" were found by others, not me. I just double checked what I felt like and with what I do know how Photoshop essentially works; I can't find the layers people are finding with Illustrator, and some of those make no sense one way or another either, just that they would put it out that way and makes it appear like it is a composite.

Is it possible a scanner would read the H in THE as an X? It's supposed to be a stamp. My cheapo scanner wouldn't have done that. Makes no sense.

[TigersEye]

If I were in the Senate, I assure you either of the things I cited would work for me. And I'm sure there are plenty more possibilities. But I'd be too embarrassed to remove him on eligibility grounds. Because he's eligible!!

So, your entire argument comes down to projecting your feelings about it on the Senate!?! LOL

Wipe?

[bobby.223]

Dead on the money Auntie! There are pair of those muslim boy hussein lovers posting on this very thread while claiming allegiance to FR. More like DemocRAT trolls for sure. “Give up”, “don’t fight this”, “get over it” they say on various threads and on and on and on. Anything to get FReepers to let the Constitution of our country to continue to be trampled on by the unsurper in chief is their goal. Oh well, I believe most true FReepers can see thru their ‘RAT propaganda just as you and I do.

[Tex-Con-Man]

The pixel distortion in the two 1's is IDENTICAL.

The 2 examples you posted are NOT identical.

The 2 “1’s” in 151 are similar, but not identical. (PhotoShop zoom to 500...differences are obvious.)

Same thing with the 1st and 2nd “boxes” similar...not identical.

[cynwoody]

Your problem is, you're looking for a magic bullet to remove him. And you are willing to embarrass yourself intellectually by advancing the most absurd theories in support of your magic bullet.

But I'm telling you, if you had the gun with which to shoot the magic bullet, you wouldn't need the magic bullet. You could use a base metal instead, such as two thirds of the senate that you don't have. And are not going to get at the rate you are going!

[TigersEye]

Your problem is, you're looking for a magic bullet to remove him.

No I'm not. You embarrass yourself making wild assumptions about people you don't know anything about. Nothing in my entire posting history would support a ridiculous conclusion like that.