Posted on 07/06/2009 8:32:09 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
(From Plainsradio blog)
POLARIK springs some startling news re; McJuan's birth certificate.
Private ping: The "other" forged birth certificate From Polarik | 06/25/2009 11:33:30 AM PDT new
Keep this under your hats until I spring it on people
I was doing research today on the eligibility and birth certificate controversy that PRECEDED Obama.
Namely, the one on John McCain. It appears that:
1. Not only was there a forged birth certificate for McCain, he didn’t produce it. SHADES OF RATHERGATE! Someone named Don Lamb in Panama forged a Panamanian BC showing that McCain was born there in 1936.
Wait! There’s more!
Not only is the typeface on it from a Selectric IBM, it has the same Rattan background pattern as is on the Hawaiian COLB! (but in black and white). No one ever challenged it. McCain did not want to publicly release his BC, but he did show it to Newsbusters and the Washintton Post, as well as the Senate.
2. The mainstream media was all over it, including CBS, NY Times {twice}, Washington Post {twice}, Dallas Morning News, Newsbusters {twice}, and HuffingtonPost. The first time that the Washington Post published a story about McCain’s eligibility was in 1998!
3. The Hollander v. McCain lawsuit was, without a doubt, the weakest, lamest lawsuit ever brought on the NBC issue.
4. After that lawsuit was thrown out because of “lack of standing,” a term already very familiar in the legal community long before Hollander brought his suit, and obviously long before Berg brought a similar suit, but one much stronger.
5. In July 11, the NYT ran their second article on McCain’s eligibility issue AFTER the Hollander suit was tossed, AFTER the Senate resolution of April 30 proclaiming that McCain was an NBC, and AFTER Obama’s own NBC status was questioned. The NYT argued that the Senate resolution was nonbinding, and they also included an analysis by U. of Arizona law professor, Gabriel Chin who focused on a 1937 law that conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, but after McCain’s birthday to make him a natural-born citizen.
So, all of this crap happened six months before Factcheck did their “Born in the USA” article that was supposed to be “the final chapter.” The Libtards were all over McCain’s ass all that time, right up until the heat was turned on Obama.
Then, suddenly WE were the wingnuts with the tinfoil hats.
“Not only is the typeface on it from a Selectric IBM, it has the same Rattan background pattern as is on the Hawaiian COLB! (but in black and white). No one ever challenged it.”
Same rattan background as Hussein’s phony COLB??
That was the exact reference I was alluding to.
Your education is complete, Glasshopper...
Hang in there. On this issue you are John Adams, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson rolled into one (or chose your favorite). One day we will look back at your work and thank God for what you did here.
In Mother and Father Birthplace the font is courier12 ( http://www.selectric.org/selectric/fonts/courier12.gif )
Why is there no artifacting on those letters?
Why are they more clear than other characters in doc?
Why are they a different typeface than other characters in the doc?
Courier is a monospaced slab serif typeface designed to resemble the output from a strike-on typewriter. The typeface was designed by Howard “Bud” Kettler in 1955
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courier_(typeface)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courier_(typeface)#Applications
12 point Courier New was also the U.S. State Department’s standard typeface until January 2004, when it was replaced with 14 point Times New Roman.
The type is different on the number “2” (Notice the difference in the arc and the radius) under “Date of Birth” and “Regristration Number”. Also, the type is more prominent under “Regristration Number” and very much less so under “Date of Birth”.
Why?
If this document was typed at the facility, on the same day, using the same machine you would expect consistency in the typeface, sizing, prominence, etc.
They are very different and I would not think they were typed using the same machine. They are just to different.
Again, the difference in type shows up when looking at Sex, Place of Birth, Name of Child, Fathers name, Mothers Maiden Name.
Look again at the narrow radius of the “a” under “Sex” and compare it all other “a”’s in the document. They are different fonts and show up again, as more prominent type than all other “a”’s in the document.
There are three typeface’s on this document and they were produced at different times. The lighter colored typefaces are consistent with each other while the more prominent typefaces under Father’s Birthplace, Mother’s Birthplace, Sex and Birth Registration Number are completely different.
Even here we have inconsistency, in that the typeface for Mother and Father Birthplace is completely different from the typeface found at “Sex” and “Regristration Number”.
That is my 10 minutes of work and that doesn’t count all the artifacts of previous document use that I can see plainly.
As far as the cross hatching, I think I have seen that on another document, from a state here in the USA. I will look for it.
Grashopper - Oh God. I don’t want to end up like David Carridene. ;-)
That's one aspect of it, but the more important one is that the type used to make the “USA” is Courier New.
Courier was originally designed in 1956 by Howard Kettler for the revolutionary ‘golfball’ typing head technology that IBM used for its Selectric typewriters in 1961: the first typewriter to use this technology.
In the early 1990s Microsoft, locked in a legal dispute with Adobe over its font format. Microsoft hired Monotype Typography to design a series of core fonts for Windows 3.1, many of which were intended to mirror those in Apple's default font group.
Thus, Courier New, a font that was lighter and crisper than Courier, was born.
So, whoever typed that “USA” on McCain's BC was using a technology 25 years more advanced than when he was born.
Given the fact that this BC is an altered computer image, with parts of the original image still visible, it is no surprise to find a modern typeface on there as well.
Well, that’s what I originally said — about the typeface being IBM Selectric. I only highlighted the “A” because it was the most distinctive letter of the three (although the other two looked quite differet as well).
There looks to be two, maybe three lines, of written something under Mothers Birthplace and a handwritten notation.
To the right of “Canal de Panama” there is a handwritten notation. What is it and why is it obfuscated?
Across the entire top of the document there is writing, in hand. What is it and why is it obfuscated?
In name of child there is some handwriting and all across it and there is a small “v” next to III.
Ditto for father and mother. In fact, under mother, next to her first name, it looks like someone used, maybe, Microsoft Paintbrush to “spray” and obfuscate whatever is there, so it no longer visible.
Where is the whole document? There is something odd about this to my naked eye.
Well, I don't see any reason why McCain would have made a forged birth certificate showing him as being born outside the Canal Zone.
Conversely, for McCain's enemies, the motivation for making this would be to prove that he was born on Panamanian soil and not inside the Canal Zone.
What other reasons could there be?
Well I thought you might the following usefull. It is a “periodic table of fonts”. How cool is that?
http://www.behance.net/Gallery/Periodic-Table-of-Typefaces/193759
and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_typefaces
Enquiring minds want to know!
You wouldn’t be confusing this with the marriage license that McCain obtained in March 1980, would you?
That’s what I thought. I just pulled out some contracts that were written with an IBM Selctric in the 1980’s and the font looked similar. I know it was an IBM because I am the one that typed and remember thinking “I like the sound of this thing and the letters look better”.
The reason the letters looked better is because the pressure exerted by Ball was consistent each time as opposed to typing on a manual typewritter.
I have typed alot over the years and I always tried to make my documents crisper and more eye pleasing. This was a small competitive advantage in my selling process but to me each detail mattered then, as it does now.
Disclaimer, I don’t get hung on spell checker or grammer here at Free Republic and it is not that kind of community/forum. It is an open air meetin place where communications is very fluid and quick. Mistakes will be made in spelling and grammar but, we can clean them up if it becomes necessary. Kinda like notes attorneys and doctors make.
Post on.
That short form BC is a fraud.
There is no way you can (3) different fonts on the same document.
If was produced in 1980, as a short form, it would have been typed on on machine, that had the font, and the spacing would be the same.
In fact the spacing on all three fonts is as different as the font.
Why would you use “Paintbrush” next to the mother’s name anyway?
Is there another short form BC? This thing is useless?
Thanks for sharing your experience.
I still must be misinterpreting something here:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-.html
because if your parents were American Citizens at the time of your birth, and had spent the requisite amount of time in the US, you should be considered a natural born citizen. Whether born in the CZ or on Mt. Everest. But then I’m not a lawyer [not even a Mango Tree Laywer ;-) ], and my interpretation of US Code doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
Still and all, I’m not sure why it was decided you and your siblings needed to be “naturalized” other than the “some nut in congress”, which can be used to explain a lot of things. To me, you are a natural born citizen (see disclaimer above).
:-)
Wow! Now that’s impressive. Great detective work.
Where have you been all my life?
(At least for the past year, that is)
No, I'm talking about your image in reply 32, bottom right hand corner. Registrar and Date Issued: E. Durfee 26 marzo 1980. That's Spanish for March 26, 1980. That's got to be when this document was created
Again, thanks for exposing the creative but childish bs of the left.
The use of Blather’s choice of bs, the old IBM
Selectric, in this case of fraud, just about ruined my keyboard with a spew of coffee.
Well hung?
};^P>
That short form BC is bullshit. It is so marked up it isn't funny. And yet, it appears to have newer typing placed on it, in a couple of areas. With inconsistent fonts 3 times.
Any kid with freeware could do this and prove it is altered and fake.
In terms of the cross hatching, this doc was produced in 1980 and I think I have seen it before. So it may have been sold as security feature.
Clearly, someone has altered these docs. violate the integrity of the document.
Think of it as a wax seal on a closed door. The wax may be re poured by some professional but you can tell someone altered the seal and something inside is missing.
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.
