Was Obama's Birth Certificate Manufactured? (reposted from June 13)

The Greater Evil ^ | 11/17/08 | Polarik

[Polarik]

NOTE: This is the story that started it all: the first empirical research ever done on Obama's bogus birth certificate, and one of many more to follow. The main thesisw is still valid today as it was on June 13 - the day after Obama's bogus COLB was first published by the Daily Kos and Fight the Smears." Everything else that has come along, claiming to be the "smoking gun," has been proven to be fraudulent. Only my research is irrefutable, despite whatever others might say.

You will also see a number of errors that I made back then -- the same ones that others have also made, but much later in time. As you will see, I have made no effort to remove them or change them in any way. As long as others are dredging up posts from June and making them seem from the present, I felt the need to clear the air here. My final, concluding report will be finished today, come Hell or high water. I've fully explained elsewhere why it took this long to produce. In the meantime, read on. See where this journey began, as you wait for the piece de resistance: the reports to end all reports (for me, at least)

---

---

---

Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?

Posted by Polarik on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:45:00 AM

The Daily Kos blog has posted a JPG that allegedly is Barack Obama's "Certificate of Birth." From a detailed analysis of the image and the text, it looks like it was created by a graphics program, and is not a true copy of an original, certified document.

I've been working with computers, printers, and typewriters for over 20 years, and given a set of printed letters, I can discern what kind of device made them. Printer output is quite different from the text created by a graphics program, and even if a document looks "official," it may not be.

The "Certificate of Birth," which I will call "COB," is posted on the Kos website as a color JPG. The reason for making it a color JPG, IMHO, is to induce the viewer to believe that this is a genuine copy of an original document -- something that a black & white, or even greyscale, reproduction would not convey as well.

Basically, anyone could have produced this document on his or her own computer, and I'll tell you why.

As represented by the JPG, the "original" COB seems to be a sheet of paper measuring 8.09" x 7.90" with a green "Rattan" pattern embedded in, or printed on, the paper and a "Bamboo mat" pattern for its border:



At the bottom of the JPG image, reading right from left, one can see following text:

OHSM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) Laser     This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]

There are a lot of problems with this statement, foremost of which is that the text in this document were produced by a graphics program and not a laser print, or any other printer, for that matter.

If the letters were made by a laser printer, you would be able to see the background, the pattern, through the spaces of the letters.

Here's a copy of a certified Certification of Birth from New York:



When text is entered via a graphics program, the pattern cannot be seen without noticeable distortion. However, when text is entered with a computer printer or typewriter, you can clearly see the pattern below the letters.

Here is a segment of the COB showing the letters, "Certificat" (from the "Certification" field) enlarged about: 500%:



Now, let's enlarge it some more:




The fuzzy outline is a dead giveaway that these letters were made by a graphics program. Also a dead giveaway is that the letters still retain a sharp outline. With printed or typed text, there is a clearly definable characteristic of a symmetrical shadow when the image is saved at a lower resolution,  that is, a more compressed JPG file.

Here is the word, "Certification," from my certificate of birth enlarged :



As you can see, there is virtually no distortion and no pixelation around the letters, and no dropouts from the background. The most noticeable pixelation and dropouts from the background can be seen in the Barack's father's name "HUSSEIN" on the COB:



Take a look at the area between the "S's in "HUSSEIN."  No hint of any background color. Plenty of grey and white pixels -- exactly what would result from enlarging text entered with a graphics program.

WAIT, there is an even bigger red herring here. All of the type on this document was produced by the same program.

Whatever made the text for all of the headings also made the text for all of the entries.

What's wrong with that?

Well, only that real certificates are created ahead of time by a commercial printer, or, at least, a different printer than the one used to create the data entries. This is why the headings on my certificate of birth look entirely different than the entries.

That is questionable by itself. But it is the way the text looks that gives it away.

Any text made by a typewriter, laser printer, or even inkjet printer, would NOT have the smeared, black & white pixels underneath it -- there would be several pixels bearing the same color as the paper, nor would the left side of the letters be clear and free of any artifacts or shadows. Scalable type produced by a graphics program will look about the same regardless of the magnification with a minimal or uneven staircase pattern of pixels on its sides, whereas printed text -- even laser text -- will show a clear, uniform staircase pattern of pixels on both sides of each letter that proportionately increase in size with magnification.

Here are some examples:

Here is the "Certificate" heading from Barack's COB enlarged 5 times:



Virtually all of the letters lack any shadows, and only the "A" and the "R" show only a slight, uneven staircase effect. Basically, the letters would look essentially the same -- especially letters made from straight lines like "I," "E," and "T," regardless of the magnification used to view them, and this is a key feature of scalable type produced by a graphics program.

Now, here is the "Certification," heading from my genuine certificate enlarged 5 times:


 
The double shadow appears on all letters, and this shadow grows proportionately in size as the letters are enlarged. Also, there is pronounced staircase effect on the "C," "A," and "R." Notice, too, that the "steps" are uniform in size, in contrast to the uneven staircase effect on the Barack headings.

Again, the most glaring anomaly in Obama's COB is the following:

All of the letters that appear on Barack's Certificate of Birth were made, at the same time, and by the same method -- which was the use of a graphics program and not the use of any printer.

You can also tell that this is an obvious Photochop by looking at the border patterns.

Looking at the corners of the darker green border, you can see that the border is discontinuous. In other words, the vertical border bars were made by drawing a long rectangle, copying that rectangle, and then overlaying each of them on either side:

Here is a comparison of the upper left corners of five different COLB's, the Kos image plus four others:



What is readily apparent is that the four other borders look quite differently from the border on the Kos image. Why does it look so weird by comparison??

OK...so where is the certification by the department, which consists of both an embossed seal and signature block on the reverse side?

If there is a department certification, then why not show it? Did it get lost in the scanning process? Doubtful. The background where the seal should be looks the same to the naked eye.

A certified document must have a signature (or signatures) from individuals within the State's Department of Health who are authorized to reproduce the document, and an embossed seal to certify that the document is genuine.

Nothing like that appears anywhere in this JPG.

In short, there is nothing in this copy to indicate that it is, in fact, a "certified copy."  As I have shown above, there is a whole lot of evidence that it is a manufactured copy. There certainly is a very strong motive for creating one.

Unless the voting public is given a real birth certificate to examine, the question of Barack's birth is still up in the air.

[Please read the updates to this article that are also listed in my blog]

[Polarik]

One more time...with feeling.

[TexasCajun]

Quick, before we let a Kenyan in the White House!

[Star Traveler]

Well, we should *settle it* — with the *original birth certificate*.

OF COURSE, if the original one shows that one is not qualified to be President... the *only way* that one could remain President, would be to fight and fight and fight to never show it.

AND..., that’s what is happening...

Otherwise, there is no reason for a person to ever fight showing their own original birth certificate.

[missnry]

Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?...

YES!

I sent emails to Claire McCaskill and Kit Bond before the election on this. Both of the cowards have refused to reply!

[mikelets456]

I admit, great article but now what? Unless this is brought to the attention of a committee, court or something then it’s a mute point. Oh, I forgot, if it’s going to a committee, court or hearing they are all radical socialists and will throw this “claim” out and call it “preposterous”. Also, then you’ll be labeled a “racist” and a radical.

Like I said, great work you did and I am convinced even without your research, but all is in vain.

[DCBurgess58]

Why is "Mothers Race" Caucasian, but "Fathers Race" is African? African is the continent where he came from. In 1961 the racial terminology used was Negro. Why would someone who proccesses birth certificates for a living enter African here instead of Negro? It doesn't make one iota of sense. All day long they fill out birth certificates and enter the official terminology. If a white person is a Caucasian, then in 1961 a black or African person is a Negro... PERIOD!!! Apples and apples.

From Wikipedia: Negro is a term referring to people of Black African ancestry. Prior to the shift in the lexicon of American and worldwide classification of race and ethnicity in the late 1960s, the appellation was accepted as a normal neutral formal term both by those of Black African descent as well as non-African blacks. Now it is often considered an ethnic slur although the term is considered archaic and is not common as a racist slur.

Not only is this document forged, it was (A) not created by a government official, who would have used the correct terminology "Negro" and (B) It was created after use of the word "Negro" by someone who's mindset uses the terminology "African-American". They just dropped the "-American" part.

[Wisco Con]

Tin foil hats for everybody!

[deport]

Tin foil hats for everybody!

---

LOL ...... or a few shares of ALCOA

[Doug TX]

DC....you’re correct and these points have been brought forward.

There is a huge story here for an enterprising journalist. I know I’d pursue it. There will be epic hell to pay for those who dismiss this story and that includes the biggest radio talkers.

[DCBurgess58]

EXCUSE ME? This is the COLB Barak Obama released via “The Daily KOS”. Are you suggesting that this is a real laser printed document which has been scanned? Re-read the pixilization comment in the post. This document is CLEARLY FRAUDULENT, no question about it. Why would Barak Obama release a fraudulent document?

[frog in a pot]

The “election” is not over! As a matter of fact, O hasn’t even been elected president yet and it is not too late to interrupt this fraud! It isn’t close to being over until the elector’s votes are accepted in the Joint Session of Congress on Jan 6, 2009.

American voters must demand that their Senators and Representatives take action by no later than January 6 or it may well be over.

See the draft of the letter in my About page that I sent to my politicians. I am not an English major and you can likely do better with your draft. But I encourage you and all like-minded folks you know to send such a letter!

As a nation, we need to raise hell over O’s apparent disqualification instead of going passive!

[Uncle Chip]

Was Obama's birth certificate manufactured???

It sure was and proof of such is that this manufactured certificate will never be presented by his team of lawyers in a court of law because they don't want to face the charge of perjury that such presentation will bring.

In our system of justice?, it is perfectly fine for them to lie to the masses on a website, but not to the judge in the courthouse. The former gets you into the White House, the other into the jail house.

Come on, Obama, just once include it in one of your court filings -- just once.

[FreeAtlanta]

lol, you have a great point.

Look. Our leaders are either spineless or they hate our Constititution and would prefer an elite ruling class through a "socialist" or communist form of government.

If Patriotism is defending the U.S. Constitution, they are all un-Patriotic.

[STE=Q]

“Why is ‘Mothers Race’ Caucasian, but ‘Fathers Race’ is African?”

Good question.

The Father would no more be classified as ‘African race’ anymore than the Mother would be classified as ‘European race’... It’s ridicules!

Also, if it is legally determined that Obama’s campaign knowingly published a fake COLB — in order to mislead the public — it may be a prosecutable crime.

And, of course...

A Forgery is Unacceptable:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2076357/posts

STE=Q

[mel]

As eager as Messiah is to get in White House, it would seem he would be waving birth certificate around everywhere proudly

[Gemsbok]

Yep, my race is now German and yours could be Italian, Iceladian or Grecian.