Atlas Tech Expert Declares Obama Birth Certificate Forgery

Atlas Shrugs Blog ^ | 7/4/08 | Techdude

[freespirited]

 

This bombshell was made by Atlas reader techdude in the comment section (oh and btw, techdude, send the screenshots):

As a real forensic computer investigator (board certified, investigated thousands of cases, access to a full forensic computer lab, yadda yadda...) I decided to jump into the fray over the fake vs real discussion a week ago when a friend of mine challenged me to see what I could find (since according to him, the document was clearly a real one). He is what one would call a slightly rabid Obama supporter – he even has the tattoo to prove it.

First things first...I used the latest online KOS version (downloaded 6/29/2008) as it was supposedly the first released digital copy and the Decosta certificate from Israel Insider's blog (also downloaded 6/29/2008) as an exemplar of a real certificate.

Of forensic interest on the KOS version is the EXIF metadata (encoded in the digital image data) showing that the KOS certificate was modified or created with "Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh" on "2008:06:12 08:42:36". Assuming the EXIF data was added after the document was scanned (assuming it is real) and the document modified only by placing a black-out section over the Certificate Number or if it was converted and saved for web use this would not be too unusual. The Daily KOS released the story on “2008:06:12 08:44:37” which would be 2 minutes after the graphic's EXIF stamp was created.

Before I became a forensic geek I worked for [a herein nameless publicly traded company] that designed counterfeit detection hardware and software for the banking and retail industry. The company was very high profile and we received training from [a certain herein nameless department of the Federal government that knows a thing or two about counterfeiting] - but I do not claim to be an all around expert in Questioned Documents but after several years of working with them I do know what to look for to spot an obvious fake.

That being said...I too was able to see "something" that looked like a seal - however even using highly specialized software (specifically designed for law enforcement and forensic examiner use for cleaning up digital images and video) I was unable to recover anything more than what others have previously released using a basic find edges and modification of the contrast. Even when the background security paper pattern was removed there was not enough of a "seal" to view anything usable or verifiable which is a bit odd but still might be possible if the seal had been completely flattened out in the mail, etc. There is also a fold which runs vertically across the top of the certificate which is close to the same location on the Decosta certificate.

At this point I was beginning to believe the certificate was real until I resized and overlaid the Decosta certificate on top of the KOS version. All things being equal there was a 3.82% difference in the size of the KOS version vs the Decosta certificate - but again depending on the optical distortion from the scanner this too was explainable. But upon manually stretching them to match edge to edge I caught a glimpse of what I and apparently everyone else had simply not noticed. The security borders do not match. Literally. They are not even close to identical. For instance "Decosta" contains five 10 pixel wide "diamonds" per vertical row while the "KOS Obama" contains 2 to 2 1/4 36 pixel wide diamonds per vertical row. These differences can clearly be observed even with the naked eye although you may need to enlarge the graphics on your screen. Taking the measurements further - Decosta's "Certification of Live Birth" heading is centered between security diamond pattern and is 762 pixels wide @ 0% angle while Obama's "Certification of Live Birth" heading is not centered evenly between security diamond pattern and is 794 pixels wide @ 0% angle. Decosta's "Any Alterations" footer is centered evenly between security diamond pattern and is 1244 pixels wide @ 0% angle while Obama's "Any Alterations" footer is not centered evenly between security diamond pattern and is 1294 pixels wide @ 0% angle. I kept the comparative screen shots in case anyone wants them.

I am unable to explain the differences between the security diamond sizes and counts and the un-centered portions (meaning the diamond pattern ends on an odd pattern instead of even where it meets the edges of the header and footer boxes). Looking closer at the KOS certificate (magnified to 400%) clearly shows inconsistencies in the security border such as cut and paste marks and overlaying of the side borders where they meet the top and bottom. This effect is not observed in the Decosta certificate at any magnification. Another point of interest, removing the background security pattern did not remove the background area from underneath the security border on the KOS certificate. The color and hue values of the background pattern located and viewable through the security border are also not a match to the rest of the certificate background. I can not explain these discrepancies. I then noticed there were some indications that the background pattern had been duplicated and placed in various locations to clean up the document. Now at some point I just started to laugh and went out for a smoke and gave up looking for more.

I am convinced that the certificate is a fake (and not really a very good one) and I went into this with a completely open mind (something the Obamanationalists seem to have lost). I also have to say that everyone who has been looking into this federal crime (and it is a federal crime even if the certificates were never meant to be used for identification) have done a stupendous job and I wish they all worked for my lab. Talk about a winning team.

UPDATE: KOS released another birth certificate?  How funny that cigar man calls me "this Geller character" :) You know Stogie ...... he helped me design my new banner.

Stogie,  you funny

Techdude sent me the screenshots: Analysis

Analysis 2:

Analysis 3

Techdude said, "Sorry about the image quality but damn it Jim I am a geek not a graphics junkie! (sorry...trekkie moment) I believe they should get the point across. The "cut & paste" artifacts are rather obvious in the "analysis3.jpg" as are the overlapping joints and gaps in the security borders".

[Mark]

Yes, 1997. That’s how I was able to get my unique screen name. I did not know what a screen name was back then. I know, I was an idiot.

[Zevonismymuse]

I *think* FR was started in 1992 but you need to check with someone else about that - I’m not sure when FR started. I’ve ony been here since Jun 26, 1998.

I think it was 1996. I've been here since 1998...I was Zevonfan back then.

[Swordmaker]

Someone needs to show this (so-called) EXPERT the other LEGIT Hawaii BC’s that have the same border as the Obama BC.

This image does NOT have the same border as the Obama certificate.

The Obama certificate has less than two diamonds per width of border. This genuine Hawaii BC border has approximately 4.5 to 5 diamonds per width... as does the Decosta certificate. . . as do several others that have been posted. Why does Obama's have such large diamonds in a security pattern???

Strange thing. Google has buried the images. They are NOT in Google's image results when searching "Obama Birth Certificate" or "Barack Obama Certificate" or "Obama Certificate of Live Birth". They have lots of general pictures of Obama and pictures of generic BCs or joke ones, but not the ones being disputed. I've gone over 20 pages deep, 400 images, and NOT found any of the disputed images or the various post KOS posting created variations. That is very suspicious... someone is hiding something.

[pepsionice]

Lets go with a fresh scenario...his mother never gave birth to this kid and she adopted/acquired/gained a baby. The circumstances? Maybe she just couldn’t have a child...maybe she knew someone who just wanted to dump the child. So things were done to show some connection from her to this child...which we know occur on a daily basis in America everyday, where bogus certificates are made and sold.

The next question here....would be where is someone from this Hawaii period that knew her and actually saw her preg. If you can’t find anyone who saw her preg...or anyone who even saw her...then there is another direction to take this idea.

[mkjessup]

It won’t matter.
Did it matter that Bill Clinton NEVER released his medical records?

Bill Clinton's medical records had no impact on his eligibility to serve as President as defined by the Constitution.

[nmh]

Bill Clinton’s medical records had no impact on his eligibility to serve as President as defined by the Constitution.

True but he was obviously hiding something. Most likely it was his ILLEGAL drug use.

[fanfan]

Also, the top one says date accepted, not date filed, like Obama’s.

Ping.

[ckilmer]

In her remarks on MSNBC Michelle Obama says of Barak. "His own mother, she said at the beginning of her remarks, was "very young and very single when she had him." "

[freespirited]

I know what “very young” means. But “very single”? How is that different from plain ole single?

Still sticking to my story that the original birth certificate is of one Barry Dunham.

[null and void]

Also, the top one says date accepted, not date filed, like Obama’s.

Impossible.

They both have the exact same document and rev numbers. They therefore must be the same form.

[fanfan]

*smirk*

[ckilmer]

As well Michelle’s remarks that barak’s mother was “very single” when barak was born means that barak obama was born “barry dunham”.

[null and void]

This is bad because?

I mean really, who cares if he changed his name? Who cares if his mom and dad weren’t married?

It looks like somebody risked real jail time to forge a document, and someone went through considerable effort to track down and threaten one who tried to expose it.

Does a name change and/or an unfortunate but fairly common circumstance of birth rate that much effort to cover up?

[ckilmer]

I agree. The stone wall and forgeries do seem a bit over the top for a name change.

[mkjessup]

Bill Clinton’s medical records had no impact on his eligibility to serve as President as defined by the Constitution.
True but he was obviously hiding something. Most likely it was his ILLEGAL drug use.

Or perhaps whatever STDs are running rampant in his veins, we can be assured of one thing however:

If such questions, be it regarding the Constitutional question of eligibility to serve as President, to medical records, to military service records (SIGN THE 180 F'in John!!!), if the candidates in question had an (R) after their name, the lamestream media would be hammering them incessantly 24/7 for disclosure, but being that they have that (D) attached to their name, they get a pass.

[ncfool]

I just went to Ancestory.com web site and found a Stanley A. Dunham listed. It even had the SS # attached to it. I won’t post the SS # but if you contact me privatly I will give it to you. I looks like she didn’t get her SS # until later in life it says 1959-1960 (possbly to get a passport) Here is what the listing said:

Name: Stanley A. Dunham
SSN: XXX XX XXXX
Last Residence: 96826 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Born: 29 Nov 1942
Died: 7 Nov 1995
State (Year) SSN issued: Washington (1959-1960 )

[SERKIT]

I just went to Ancestory.com web site and found a Stanley A. Dunham listed.

Want to start a count-down on how fast the records get pulled from that site?

[ncfool]

I don’t think they will as they don’t say a whole lot. There is 3200 individuals tracking that name.

[supercat]

I know what “very young” means. But “very single”? How is that different from plain ole single?

Perhaps "single with no plans for marriage"?

BTW, I agree with you that the cover-up most likely concerns the name.