Posted on 07/28/2008 1:26:05 PM PDT by pissant
Delusional obsession. What else could explain people like Dan Rather, who still think the forged TANG documents - shown to have been created using a modern word processing program - are real even though the evidence is overwhelmingly against such conclusions? I have no clue, but to take clear evidence that something is a forgery and try to create some fantasy rationale that it really proves legitimacy is the epitome of obsession.
And while the left has Dan Rather and his cult, or the Downing Street Memo Cult, the right has The Cult of the COLB (aka, Certificate Of Live Birth). Check out how this CULT leader detects forgery when confronted with solid proof of legitimacy. It all starts with one of those flashing overlays from Snappedshot showing BHO COLB (2007) and another known HI COLB (2002):
(For anyone not up on this matter you can see my previous posts here).
It is clear from this that the known update in format between the 2002 and 2007 (BHO) COLB is the border pattern, but the text stays put - as one would expect. So, what does this demonstrate to the one Polarik, a blogger at Townhall who help start this idiocy? Proof of conspiracy of course!
"OK, like what are the odds of having two COLBs, one that we know was from Sep 9, 2002, and one that was ‘allegedly’ from June 9, 2007, with different border patterns, lining up perfectly on the placements of the borders, images, headers & footers, text fields, and data fields?
Like the odds of winning the lottery.
"
This dude needs therapy. Because the Obama COLB has the same format as another COLB it is now a fake??? But before there were all these mysterious differences that made the OBAMA COLB fake - which were one by one debunked. I wish this guy would make up his mind.
Thus ends the tale of the Cult of the COLB (at least for this blogger). A strange and bizarre tale of delusional obsession.
"Solid proof of legitimacy" would be exposing the certificate number and verifying that it is on file in Hawaii, with matching information. Anything short of that is playing with web facsimiles of parts of documents.
-PJ
Not only that, he completely glosses over Polarik’s fine work and HOW he used that image to prove his point that it is a forgery. Complete and utter fraud on AJ’s part.
Well, that's about the only thing he is gooat -- talking smak -- which is what I posted about him.
I added quite a bit of additional explanation and a crucial piece of evidence to my De-Kos-Ta proof that neither AJ, nor Koyaan can countermand.
As it turtns out, Koyaan, another critic of mine provided the last bit of evidence for the use of the DeCosta COLB. I love it when my critics provide the evidence in favor of my findings that they thought would negate them.
Koyaan was trumpeting the Kos COLB as the real deal, just like AJ and his packrats, but unlike them, at least he had some images to show for his work (not that they meant anything)
Anyway, he compares an image overlay of Michele's COLB to the Kos COLB, and proclaims, "the aspect ratio on the Michele COLB is messed up. Since I got this of of Polarik's posting, he must have done something to it."
Ah, but now I that bet he wishes he didn't say it.
The comment caused me to do my own checking of the aspect ratio (the raio of height compared to width) of the Kos image, Michele's image, and DeCosta image.
The aspect ratio of the Kos image is different from that of Michele's COLB, as Koyaan noted, but the aspect ratio of te Kos image is identical to the DeCosta image.
Why is this now significant?
Because the reason why the DeCosta image has a different aspect ratio, is because of the two massive folds present in the paper document. These two big folds caused the paper to be "scrunched down," making it impssible from copying the full length of the paper document.
To put it another way, the two folds caused the HEIGHT of the image to be SHORTER than it really is.
AND...
Since we know that the Kos image only has ONE THIN FOLD in the entire image, AND...
if the Kos image was a real copy, then it should have produced an image close to its full height.
HOWEVER, the almost, if not totally, flat Kos image is exactly the same height as the "scrunched down" DeCosta image.
And, the odds of that happening are NILL!!!!
Nil is right.
Well, how do we get Malkin/Coulter/Rush/Hannity/Nat. review/Human events etc to run with this story?
However, even if Obama's mother had never lived in the US at any time before his birth, Obama acquires derivative US citizenship when his mother lives with him in Hawaii.
I’m curious; is the notary seal on the KOS certificate in the exact same spot as on the DeCosta certificate? What are the chances of that randomly happeining?
Like others who had seen hte Kos image, I, too, questioned its lack of an embossed (and inked) seal, and the lack of a signature block -- two, very prominent features on the DeCosta image. However, my assertions about the Kos image being a forgery did not hinge on the presence or absence of these features. Since I always maintained that the forger had to have used a genuine copy of a COLB for the basis of the forgery, any other features that a genuine COLB should have would be present on the forgery as well.
In other words, I was not surprised, and my theory was not impacted, when these features were revealed later on through image enhancements.
In the instance of making the Kos forgery, I had already determined that it was based on one or two real cOLB images. I also reasoned that the forger would NOT want to duplicate the size and position of the seal and signature stamps on the DeCosta image because no two of these are ever alike, and duplicating them would be a dead giveaway that a forgery had taken place.
So, the presence of a seal, "hidden" or otherwise, that was not the same size and not in the same position as the DeCosta image turned out to be the conssequence of copying the background from a second COLB, as I surmised.
There was someone who posted a blank with the same time of birth before this one showed up, I believe.
That does not change the FACT that the COLB is a forgery. We will see to it that he is held responsible for posting the forgery, and for having his spokesretard claim its legitimacy.
***If the MSM doesn’t pick up this story and start hammering away, the most we could hope for is that Obamassiah throws one of his staffers under the bus with Kos. Just another day in the office for Hussein.
The alternative is that as many of us as possible start filing suits in our own states claiming that he isn’t eligible to be put on the ballot. It only takes one state to make the difference — the smaller states would have faster moving court systems. I’m thinking some place like Nevada or Wyoming, basically pubbie country.
Someone is filing a lawsuit against Mccain claiming ineligibility. Time to go after the Obamunist.
I totally agree.
You believe incorrect. The blank and the other modified ones came after. That was the original source of confusion and reason for calling it a forgery. Those original claims were disproven.
We should be obsessing about stuff like this:http://www.thenextright.com/jeff-roberts/a-seat-we-can-win-in-arizona
You are free to obsess about anything you wish. Myself, I obsess over nothing. I post what either interests me or entertains me.
The COLB image at the top of the thread isn’t loading for me anymore. Is anyone else having trouble? Has Snapped Shot taken it down? Here’s the link: http://www.snappedshot.com/uploads/birth-certificate-throbber.gif
Please show me where. Thanks!
Um, no.
Step one is say things that are truthful and verifiable.
The world will listen if you have the truth on your side.
“I obsess over nothing.”
That’s not the impression you give when you post threads like this.
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.