Posted on 01/05/2009 1:40:48 AM PST by Kevmo
for your various CertifiGate ping lists
MHGinTN; little jeremiah; LucyT; pissant; Calpernia; Polarik; phil dragoo; ernest_at_the_beach; starwise; FARS; sunken civ
https://bb.intrade.com/intradeForum/posts/list/495/2279.page
First, I have immense appreciation and admiration for Polarik’s dedication to this issue and the huge amount of work he has poured into it.
I do believe Obama is not a natural-born citizen, perhaps not a U.S. citizen at all.
All that said, it is obvious upon reading his report—yes, I have read it in its entirety—that he’s not a forensic expert. And if Keyes or anyone else is indeed using this report in their action, it could be problematic. That’s not to say he isn’t correct, but reality is that forensic expert reports need to be carefully constructed and airtight in narrative, recitation of methodology, and presentation of findings. IMHO, Polarik’s report does not meet these needs. I wish this were not so.
MM
This troll is such an "expert" in the matter to challenge Polarik he can't even get the basics correct. At no time did the Director of Health issue a press release stating that the COLB was genuine. I challenge him to show me such a statement.
However, Keyes did submit an affidavit from a forensics expert and she concurs with Polariks findings.
“However, Keyes did submit an affidavit from a forensics expert and she concurs with Polariks findings.”
That’s very interesting, and encouraging. Not that I doubt Polarik, but the more expert confirmation the better.
However, the Keyes case isn't about proving the COLB is a forgery. It is about Obama not presenting any evidence of natural born citizenship. All Obama points to are two things. First, the scanned COLB image. Now even if that were genuine, it does not establish natural born status. This is a civil case. Therefore, all Keyes has to show is by a preponderance of the evidence ( a slight tipping of the scales ) that the COLB presented is not to be trusted. You don't even have to go into any forensic analysis for that. By their own admission, they blacked out the Certificate number. That shows an alteration was made to the document. Even if a court were to accept a scanned image into evidence ( which no court would ), just that fact that they altered it would be a slight tipping of the scales that the document cannot be trusted. But the more inconsistencies you can show , the better. The second thing they point to are the photos of the document and their "experts" declaring it is genuine. Well first off, those are photographs, not scans, taken at a distance with insufficient lighting. If they were truly honest, they would have taken a high resolution TIFF scan of the document ( both front and back ).Secondly , their "experts". No where do they give their names, their qualifications, or a report detailing how they arrived at their conclusion. No court would just let that statement form their website come in as evidence ( this is assuming there is a honest judge ) :-)Therefore the only defense Obama would have in court is to produced an actual certified copy of the BC
Good lord, can we ever get this right.
The Hawaiian officials DID say that they have verified they have a “birth certificate” for Obama on file.
HOWEVER:
What they DID NOT and have NEVER said is that the birth certificate says Obama was BORN in Hawaii. They have NEVER —to date— made the statement he was BORN in Hawaii.
This is interesting, since in the 1960s, Hawaii allowed children of foreign birth that resided in Hawaii to register “COLBs” —probably for reasons of simplified administrative requirement, ie, registering for school, special services, permission forms etc. We understand Obama’s indonesian born half-sister Maya has a COLB on file in Hawaii too.
The COLB ( Certification of Live Birth) is NOT a birth certificate and is generated after the birth as an administrative record of someone having been “born”.
The information on the COLB is *supposed* to be taken from an actual “birth certificate” but does have not the level of detail, therefore ‘proof’—a “birth certificate” shows hosptal, physician, physician’s SIGNATURE, baby’s weight, length, mother’s and father’s name and their SIGNATURES. Colbs do not have this level of detail.
Bottom line Obama wil NOT produce his BC, he will not SPEAK of his BC, he will not touch the subject with a 10 ft pole ( he would further perjure himself?). Remember McCain willing produced his and answered all questions surrounding it.
Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to block his BC release.
When the birth certificate arrived from the Obama campaign it confirmed his name as the other documents already showed it. Still, we took an extra step: We e-mailed it to the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records, to ask if it was real. “It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,” spokesman Janice Okubo told us.
But they always leave out the second part :
“When we looked at that image you guys sent us, our registrar, he thought he could see pieces of the embossed image through it.” Still, she acknowledges: “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”
Therefore they never said it was genuine.
The simplest explanation for why Obama’s COLB is a Forgey is simple math.
Obama’s COLB takes up more space in Bytes then any other COLB of the same exact size and makeup
More Bytes means it has been changed and isn’t that what Barrack Obama is all about Change.
It was changed to make it right....
In the past 20 years, I've been an expert witness in court cases, so that knock is out.
It's just another meaningless troll argument.
Kevno,
Were you going to post my reply to Polarik’s post? Or do you just show the one half of the story that agrees with your own viewpoint?
T - 15
Actually, size doesn't matter here. All COLB's scanned at 300 DPI become bitmaps of the same size, as they all occupy 24 MB of memory and file space.
When this bitmap is converted into JPG format, the image is compressed and the space requirements are greatly reduced: the more compression is used the smaller the file size, and the lower in quality is the image.
Obama's bogus COLB images were saved with high amounts of compression.
Even that statement is bogus. What Okubo said, and I quote:
"It looks just like my birth certificate."
Factcheck's false statement is like saying that because the moon looks bigger when it's closer to the horizon, it must be closer to the Earth then.
You know I thought they changed the quote a bit from when I first heard it. Notice they still put it in quotes though, as if that is exactly what she said. Factcheck loves to play loose with the truth.
Your reply is posted as a part of the main article of this thread.
There also was a statement they made which was also made by AP. This might be a chicken and egg scenario, but If I had to bet, I'd say that Factcheck issued the statement first and the AP copied it -- even though the AP has a history of ignoring the facts.
The statement was that Hawaiian officials confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Are you saying that my reply was copied to Intrade?
yeah and even after that has been shown so many times that is not what she said ( on here plus many other blogs ), they still have it up on their page, which in a way is good. When anyone calls them the arbiter of truth, we can always point to that statement and show how they are outright lying.
I was replying to our new FReeper jbeyer2. His response to you at the Intrade site was posted by Kevmo in the body of this thread.
What I’d like to see is just one of these naysaying “experts” such as jbeyer2 - provide their own expert analysis.
I mean, how do you get past the fact that the seal used on Obama’s COLB is from the wrong year??!!??
I’m techno-challenged, but even I can understand that.
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.