Well enough. Please explain what happened to this "R". Tell me why the pixel size and bit depth changed from one character to the next.
Posted on 07/18/2011 4:28:59 AM PDT by RobinMasters
NEW YORK – Unless the typewriter used to type Barack Obama's purported Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" in 1961 was magically capable of producing different size and shaped images with the exact same key, the document released by the White House April 27 is a forgery, says a professional typographer with 50 years experience.
"Steel-stamped letters do not expand to larger sizes and morph into different styles of type," retired New York City typographer Paul Irey told WND.
As WND previously reported, it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter, according to Irey.
"These are irrefutable proofs of forgery," he said.
His newest analysis suggests the document was assembled from images of letters or words taken from other documents.
"The forger who produced the Obama Hawaii long-form birth certificate may have thought that all typewriter typeface styles were alike," he said.
"To get his letters, the forger must have understood that he needed to copy the old typewriter styles," he continued. "So the forger probably scanned a bunch of old birth certificates, without realizing that the letters in the old files were from different typewriter styles. That's why the letters in the forged document do not match each other."
Irey used as a source document the Xerox copy of the Obama birth certificate the White House press staff handed to the press assembled in the White House pressroom on April 27, as seen in Exhibit 1:
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
“That’s the one that a man was found murdered after he had been known to have rummaged through it.”
I think I read about that deplorable turn of events in Corsi’s book “Where’s the Birth Certificate?”. Since I left my volume, and seven others, to be found in various public places, for others to read and pass along, I don’t have a ready reference to go back to at the moment to refresh my memory. Do you have a relevant link to that info that you could kindly provide?
Domo in advance.
“An American citizenry that willfully discards its ability to perceive the Truth with its own free mind, and to articulate it in with its own free voice -— is only vestigially American, and the bull excrement is headed for the wind tunnel.”
In layman’s terms, does that mean that when the People purposefully disable their Bravo Sierra meters, that eventually the fit will hit the shan?
Here’s the thing about delusion.
No human being can claim assurance of being 100% correct about everything. It’s impossible. Here’s a frightening thought — at any given moment, you are completely wrong about a particular percentage of things you simply take for granted. The size of that percentage of information is completely unknown to you or anyone else. This holds true for everyone, of course. Only one man can claim to have been 100% correct about everything and He lived 2000 years ago.
Now, if someone were to challenge you on one of those points about which you were absolutely wrong, you would argue tooth and nail. This wouldn’t be dishonesty on your part — after all, you would really believe that you are right on the matter given your experiences and the evidence you’ve seen. If one were to argue too aggressively to prove their point, you would most likely simply dig in deeper. We all tend to do that.
Don’t misunderstand my point — I’m not arguing that truth is relative. Far from it. It’s just that the whole truth can only be known to God and the only things we can know infallibly are those things which He has told us.
What I am also pointing out is that the human mind is a tricky son-of-a-gun, tainted by original sin, and has to be approached like a wild animal. When you’re hunting in the woods and you see a buck, you don’t just charge right after him. You’ll spook him. Instead, you lie low, approach carefully, perhaps set a trap, and, when the time is right, then spring for the kill.
I haven’t said, “Give it up.” That’s not my position. Wintertime, God love you, I did insult you but it was only because you insulted me first by calling me a liar. For my insults, I apologize. Now, let me make it clear — my position is that you folks are going about this the wrong way. You have evidence that points at BHO not being what he claims but that is a far cry from being able to prove he is not a Natural Born Citizen beyond a reasonable doubt.
If a buck hears gunshots and has an escape route, he’ll take it. Likewise, if the human mind finds reasonable doubts with a particular argument it is faced with, it will dig in and find ways to entrench itself within those doubts rather than accept the validity of an argument it finds disagreeable. People do not do this because they want to protect untruth but rather because they still believe they are right. Like in chess, you only win if you put them in checkmate or convince them to resign.
While I believe that you most certainly should continue pursuing evidence on this matter and continue building your arguments, I do not think the issue has been proven to a degree where it will bring down BHO. To the contrary, it will hurt our chances of ousting him because our opponents will be able to make the case that we are grasping for straws and that we’ll desperately say ANYTHING to get him out of office. Even worse, they’ll make the case that WE’RE the ones spreading the Big Lie. Remember, when Hitler first spoke of the Big Lie he did not do so describing the methods he would use, but rather to claim that it was a technique used by the Jews.
I make these arguments not because I want truth to be concealed but rather because I believe it has to be revealed in the right way if it is to be really and truly accepted. Don’t underestimate the power of the mind to rationalize and delude itself in the face of facts.
No, I'm not. First of all, it's foolish to be doing this kind of analysis on what is likely a copy of a copy. Second, one of those letters is on the fold of the paper.
And also absolutely correct.
Fine. Put your money where your mouth is. Show us your proof. Let us all be as certain as you are on this point. Why hold back?
The trouble with this theory is that it ended up in a string of text where a letter is supposed to be. If the program couldn't recognize it as a letter, why did it put it in the middle of a string of text?
But the purpose of this was to reproduce the text only. (Example here - I believe that the OCR-ing at the link was my work.) It IN NO WAY represents itself as a copy of the original. OCR-ing in Adobe, whose entire business is based accurate graphical representation, is for searchablity. And not even a single character is searchable in the WH PDF. There is no evidence, NONE, that that document was ever OCR-ed.
ML/NJ
LOL !! Very true.
ML/NJ
I found the Birth Index Article!
Going to try to make a thread of it. This I believe is big time proof of HI complicity.
What an Intentionally MISLEADING assertion! You are arguing that because no court has ruled they've violated the law, they must not have violated the law? This is true of EVERY criminal prior to conviction! One might so rule if the d@mned issue would ever make it INTO court!
Constitution Party candidate Alan Keyes sued Governor Lingle and Hawaii’s Chief Elections Official, Kevin Cronin in Keyes v Lingle and made the argument that Obama’s Hawaii COLB was forged. He included an affidivit with a forensic analysis of the COLB but the Hawaii courts dismissed the lawsuit.
With the faulty reasoning I see continuously emanating from the various lawyer types, I should not be surprised to find them shared by a Liberal Hawaiian judge. This does not constitute proof to me that the case has no merit, rather it is evidence that politics are at work.
A quick check on this case confirms my suspicions. First of all, it was in State Court when it should have been in Federal Court. (But I suppose you have to at least TRY to get remedy in State Court first.) Secondly, it was dismissed on a technicality, (Like every other case so far) rather than on it's merits. So you present this Lawyer Trick as proof of something? The only thing it proves in my mind is that Law Degrees ought to require an Engineering degree as a Pre-requisite so as to eliminate stupid and dishonest people from getting into the Justice System.
Leo Donofrio also made that claim in New Jersey and in Connecticut and appeals went all the way to the US Supreme Court (Donofrio v Wells (NJ) and Wrotnowski v Bysiewicz (CN)). Obama eligibility attorney Gary Kreep made the same argument in California in “Keyes v Bowen” which went all the way to the US Supreme Court but was rejected.
The Fact that it couldn't get four Judges to agree to hear it doesn't make it merit-less. It sometimes takes FOREVER to finally get a case on a serious constitutional issue to be taken up by the court. McDonald v. Chicago comes to mind.
What I find highly amusing is that YOU aren't discussing the case on the merits either, but merely pointing towards courts who you expect to do your thinking for you. Lawyer types have raised the "fallacy of authority" to the level of dogmatic orthodoxy! I suppose they must wonder why other people don't want to worship their god.
ML/NJ
And besides, Hawaii’s privacy laws allow for a confidential birth record to be inspected or obtained via “a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction.”
You and I obviously have a difference of opinion regarding the word "Honest."
Assuming (for the sake of argument) Barry is born in Canada to an Underage Girl, yet gets a Hawaiian birth certificate created by an Affidavit from his Grandmother, and is subsequently adopted by same Grandmother, you think it's perfectly reasonable for a Hawaiian privacy law to cover up the fact that he would NOT meet article II requirements?
And then you have the GALL to cite the 4th amendment, thereby asserting that it would be an ILLEGAL search for a document to prove the President is legal? SERIOUSLY?
Let us get you on the record so that no one need waste any further time with you. Please tell us that you honestly believe that a state law of Privacy has more legal weight than Article II compliance.
Your answer will be reposted to you every time you try to engage in this discussion just to show people that you have faulty judgement and/or are dishonest.
It is now nutcracking time. Make your words sweet and tender because I assure you that you will be eating them later if they are not.
But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time.
-No video of BHO saying that exists. The video of the debate doesn't support that it was ever said.
-The transcripts of the debates do not include that line, but one transcript includes a very similar line leading to the strong suspicion that this line is simply being misrepresented.
-Keyes has never claimed that BHO made such a statement, even during his effort at pursuing legal action.
Any other three year old, easily debunked birther myths you want to discuss?
Well enough. Please explain what happened to this "R". Tell me why the pixel size and bit depth changed from one character to the next.
Yup, he sure did. Right after he had repeated it constantly on several radio stations. So was he lying in the beginning when he presumably spoke without concern, or later, after pressure from his good buddy (Neil) was applied?
I for one couldn't believe he wouldn't expect blow back when he first made his pronouncements. Ah well, the nail that sticks out gets hammered down.
I wouldn't use the "T" word just yet. People with cognitive dissonance believe stuff that isn't true. I would regard it as more of a "mentally disabled" condition. :)
Still people shill for that form that was released. It’s mind-boggling.
Yup. People's reactions often tell you more about what they think than whatever it is that they say.
A man with his head up his bunghole should not see much that surprises him. His world view is pretty consistent. :)
It's from memory for me as well, but I think I can find a link pretty quick. Found it. The Washington Times ought to be a credible source right? :)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/19/key-witness-in-passport-fraud-case-fatally-shot/
Were it an actual "COPY" it would not have the peculiar characteristic of changing Pixel size and bit depth between a string of text characters.
Note the circled pixels?
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.