HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh my GOSH!! This is the hang nail in this thing. That is what I get from libs “did they go back in time to put a birth announcement in the paper?”
Thanks pissant. You know I love ya!
Ping to the list my new listmaster!
Fonts and type styles did Dan Rather in... Let’s hope it does the same to The-0.
But it would be very relevant if the Obama announcement was fraudulent. I'm not sure where the images of the announcements come from. I would have thought from some years old microfilm someplace. But if not then that years-old microfilm if it exists might be interesting.
ML/NJ
I need a new roll of tinfoil. We’ve been saying for weeks that the birth announcements were forgeries because of missalignment, etc. And this is just now risen to the fore? ... God have mercy upon America.
obama is a “horrible forgery” of a man.
Are these newspapers still in existance?
Can someone contact them directly to see if they can provide old copies?
How many people have their birth announcements in the paper the SAME DAY THEY WERE BORN?
interesting
Put out the call for someone who might have saved that page for some reason. Maybe the other folks on that page saved it for their announcements.
Anyway, I called mother about this story and she (who I am ashamed to admit votes RAT) said it's possible to have the columns and rows at an angle only if someone took the time and effort to re-pour the spacers and to fill in the blank corners with lead. Everything is done by hand. Yes, it's possible if one wanted to emphasis something but would really serve no purpose in this instance. It was more expedient to never move the columns from issue to issue and you already knew which font to use for a particular section of the paper. Everything was at 90 degrees for a reason.
I would like to see other copies of the newspaper from the week before and the week after to see if there was similar goofs in other issues.
This is an easy issue to resolve. There will be microfilm or microfiche copies of both Honolulu papers at one or more public or college libraries on Oahu and possibly some of the other islands in Hawaii. A quick trip to the library for any conservative in Hawaii could resolve that.
I’ve never put much stock in conspiracy theories and do not buy into the Obama ones. Nobody has proved he was not natural born, and until and unless that happens, we are stuck with him until January 20th, 2013. God help us all...
What's wrong with this statement? Oh, let me count the ways:
1. Pam Geller did not post her "exclusive" until July 4, and it was not an "exclusive." Three weeks before she posted anything, I posted my exclusive on The Greater Evil.
2. I was the first one, and the only one, who provided genuine evidence that Obama's COLB was a forgery. I still am the only one.
3. The person who wrote her "explosive exclusive," is a guy named "TechDude," WHO I EXPOSED as an identity thief, a liar, and a fraud shortly after his "explosive exclusive" was posted on July 20. Of course, I've always suspected his work. Not only did Techdude steal the identity of Adam Fink, a real forensic document expert, he lied about his research and totally fabricated his evidence, beginning with the clearly fraudulent claim that the border patterns on all COLBs issued between 2005 and 2008 were identical (which I proved was false given that I had received genuine scans of 2006, 2007, and 2008 COLBs. The border pattern on 2008 COLBs was totally different from both 2007 and 2006 COLBS which shared the same border pattern).
4. Pam Geller has NEVER acknowledged that TechDude is an identity thief, a liar, and a fraud, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary -- nor has she ever quoted a single finding out of my 160-page Final Report which summarizes my four months of empirical research.
There is a lot of Geller's work that I admire, but the fact that she continues this charade unabated is puzzling, as it only serves to undercut her integrity and credibility.
NOW, about the birth announcement, what in the world is her "expert" talking about? Here's what he says (followed by my comments):
1) Line spacing: the mechanics of a Linotype Machine in building the column which will be set to the bed of the printer are mechanically restricted to have the same amount of "white space" between the lines. The first one does not; it is crunched into the announcement immediately above it.
It seems like this expert does not understand that what he's looking at is a photostatic copy of a section of microfilm. Microfilm is photographically reproduced from a sheet of newspaper, and not from a bed of type. Consequently, if there were any folds in the paper, they would show up in the microfilm. If there were any other distress marks on the paper, as there are in the Star Bulletin photostat, then they would show up in the microfilm.
I had one of the lawyers on the Keyes case make a photostatic copy of two slides of microfilm: one made from the birth announcement that appeared in the Sunday Advertiser AND the other one made from the same birth announcement that appeared in the Star Bulletin. I asked him to look for any signs of the film being spliced, or any other telltale signs that would distinguish this slide of microfilm from those of the preceding and following days.
He found none.
Here are the copies he made of both:
One of the downsides of microfilm (that does not affect microfiche) is that the more it's viewed, the more frequent will be the scratches that the film collects as it is rolled in and out of the viewer. Those long, vertical streaks you see in the Star Bulletin copy are these scratches.
Notice how there are horizontal lines visible in the Sunday Advertiser copy, but are not visible in the copy shown on Atlas Shruggs. I believe that her copy was one circulated a few months ago, well before the ones I had made, so I cannot vouch for their place of origin or authenticity. I can for mine.
Her expert continues:
2) Likewise the "white space" between adjacent columns is mechanically fixed; the "6085" intrudes leftward into that space.
Again, I do not see any differences in the horizonal layout of the address. The kerning between letters (the white space) on a line of type is adjusted so that it fills the entire space, regardless of the length of the street address. Such words as "Highway" and "Boulevard" are abbreviated whereever necessary to make it fit on the line. With short street addresses, the reverse is true: more kerning between letters is used to spread the address out.
If you see something that I don't, then please let me know.
3) Unlike all the other announcements, there is no "period" at the end of the line after the date of delivery/birth.
I see a period at the end of the line. It is identical to the Asing announcement right below it -- it even has the same date.
I miss the significance of his last point,"Most Front Pages back in the 50's-60's were either six or eight columns wide, with the internal pages usually narrower, 8, 10, or 12 wide. Humans love symmetry. Any realignment of the various headers, illustrations, advertisements, etc., would be set by hand, not by the LT machine...Seems to me those "Birth Announcements" must have come from the same or similar source as Dan Rather's 'Bush National Guard' documents!
Beckwith would disagree. This explanation does not provide any facts that would substantiate the claim that both the Sunday Advertiser and the Star Bulletin would have laid out their birth Announcement pages as six columns wide.
These birth announcements share space with in-line ads that very in size. They are not like the typical classifieds section of today where print space is at a premium and the more columns one can fit on a page, the more profit can be made.
At one point, I, too, was convinced that the birth announcements were forged, but the more likely scenario - the one substantiated by fact -- that birth announcements were routinely sent in by telephone, and were not solely and exclusively reprinted from reports provided by Vital Statistics.
In other words, either Ann or Madelyn Dunham telephoned in a slightly bogus birth announcement.
Found this little gem on the TD link from above:
on July 23, 2008 at 1:23 am | Reply Philip_B
Get your researchers checking shipping records. There is a good chance Obama’s mother went to the mainland by sea and given that Ann Dunham was know to be in WA when Obama only a couple of weeks old. Either she left immediately after Obama was born, which I think unlikely, or he was born onboard ship prematurely. Which would mean he was born outside US territorial waters and not automatically a US citizen.
Has anyone ever followed up on the born on a ship idea, checked the shipping records? Interesting. . .
Did somebody mock up a page to look like an old 1961 page with a birth announcement, or did someone actually find the 1961 paper, or its microfiche copy, and print that out?
Is this story suggesting that there was no announcement in the actual archives, and that everyone assumed it to be so because somebody forged an announcement to look like the real thing, thereby dissuading people from actually traveling to Hawaii to research it for themselves?
-PJ
What is being done — by individual Republican-leaning states — to make sure they can’t “pledge” their state electoral votes in 2012... WITHOUT seeing a valid vault-copy birth certificate for the candidate?
We didn’t have time to build that roadblock for 2008, but we have time to build it before 2012.
Anybody working on this, and how can we help?
This whole thing is stupid. Can’t some Freeper in HI just go to the microfilm at the library and scan the relevant page? I’d do it myself but I’m nowhere near.