'Irrefutable' proof of Obama forgery

WND ^ | July 16, 2011 | Jerome R. Corsi

[DiogenesLamp]

You’re a silly person.

As the occasion demands. When in Rome... and all that.

[DiogenesLamp]

If they respond, Keye’s office will tell you it never happened.

Then you can be certain too.

That was my thinking.

[wintertime]

Fact: It is a simple matter to provide prompt, clear, certifiable and certified, and unambiguous best evidence that would prove one’s natural born citizenship.

Obama chose not to do that. He posted a crudely composed forgery. A usurper would do that.

[wintertime]

Obama is in a tough spot now. Trump is a genius regarding this.

Before, he could have simply said, “Gee! My mom told me I was a natural born citizen.” Now he has posted a forgery and **personally** stood in front of cameras to tell the American people that it is a copy of his birth certificate.

[DiogenesLamp]

I think the story changed recently, and now that statement came after the debate during an informal discussion.

We all want certainty in an ambiguous world. When someone said it occurred "During" the debates, that could describe the entire period of time between when they started the first debate, till after they went home from the last one, depending on how the original claimant regarded their use of the term "during." That confusion could creep in to the English language due to a lack of precision is not note worthy.

At this point, (noting the comment from Obama about being Minister of Illinois) the worst case scenario is that something has been misheard or misunderstood and repeated/amplified by the internet. This establishes that there is at least a small kernel of truth to the origin of this meme.

[wintertime]

Fact: It is a simple matter to provide prompt, clear, certifiable and certified, and unambiguous best evidence that would prove one’s natural born citizenship and identity.

Obama chose not to do that. He posted a crudely composed forgery. A usurper would do that.

[DiogenesLamp]

Odd how the stories always grow and change to insulate themselves from the cruel lens of reality.

It's not odd at all that people will invoke insinuations of lying when the evidence is otherwise. As Upton Sinclair said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

In this case, your narrative.

[CommieCutter]

I believe what you’re saying. In fact, I talked to an individual the other day who said the exact same thing you’re saying. But there are also a lot of other people that just simply don’t believe the accusation. I think a lot of people would turn on him if this is even proven to be true.

[jh4freedom]

Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury,the Witness presumably did not understand the question. We are not INTERESTED in what you think a Judge will do. We are interested in knowing if *YOU* believe that a State Law should triumph in covering up a lack of ARTICLE II eligibility? This is a question of *YOUR* intellectual honesty, not whether courts can go through motions.

This is a yes or no question. Do you believe state privacy laws should be allowed to permit an individual to skirt Article II compliance?

No, I definitely do not believe that state privacy laws ever should be allowed to permit an individual to skirt Article II compliance.

However your attempt at posing a false choice fallacy is irrelevant since state privacy laws and Article II, Section 1 compliance can clearly go hand in hand under existing Hawaii statutes.

Now let me pose a question to you.
Who is it that you think should decide whether a state’s privacy laws are indeed permitting an individual to skirt Article II compliance?

[jh4freedom]

“Obama is in a tough spot now. Trump is a genius regarding this.
Before, he could have simply said, “Gee! My mom told me I was a natural born citizen.” Now he has posted a forgery and **personally** stood in front of cameras to tell the American people that it is a copy of his birth certificate.”

Except he still has “plausible deniability.”
The state of Hawaii has verified the authenticity of the document that he held in front of the cameras. Obama can put all the blame on Hawaii. If its forged, its Hawaii’s fault.

The Hawaii Director of Health said: “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai’i.
On April 25, 2011, pursuant to President Obama’s request, Director Fuddy personally witnessed the copying of the original Certificate of Live Birth and attested to the authenticity of the two copies. Dr. Alvin Onaka, the State Registrar, certified the copies.”

Barry can blame it all on Fuddy and Onaka.

[DiogenesLamp]

No, I definitely do not believe that state privacy laws ever should be allowed to permit an individual to skirt Article II compliance.

Good, then we can be on the same side. That is a Rubicon as far as i'm concerned.

However your attempt at posing a false choice fallacy is irrelevant since state privacy laws and Article II, Section 1 compliance can clearly go hand in hand under existing Hawaii statutes.

Assuming that complaints got a fair hearing. That isn't happening. The Issue keeps getting brushed aside with insincere assurances. Tricks keep getting played, and participants keep hiding behind lawyer arguments. They are not engaged in forthrightness, but in coverup and obfuscation. Everyone is willing to let the law work, but it is not working.

Now let me pose a question to you. Who is it that you think should decide whether a state’s privacy laws are indeed permitting an individual to skirt Article II compliance?

Firstly, the Person in charge of the Records in Question. They should certify unambiguously the truth in a legally and morally accountable way. Secondly, the Election Officials of every state should require affirmative scrutiny of all claims of eligibility, especially in the event of questions regarding it. Thirdly it should be the Voters, Fourthly it should be the Electors, fifthly it should be the Congress, Sixthly it should be the Chief Justice, and Seventhly, it should be an aroused populace.

The problem is not a D@mned one of these people did their job. Not a one of them said to Obama "I'm sorry, but this is not good enough. We need to see actual proof of your eligibility." Every one of them took a "What? Me worry?" Attitude. We just let a virus into our system due to a defective firewall.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Hawaii Director of Health said: “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai’i.

It ought to end with the words: "as far as I'm concerned."

On April 25, 2011, pursuant to President Obama’s request, Director Fuddy personally witnessed the copying of the original Certificate of Live Birth and attested to the authenticity of the two copies. Dr. Alvin Onaka, the State Registrar, certified the copies.”

Barry can blame it all on Fuddy and Onaka.

I believe it is their work anyway. I doubt they would have delegated it to anyone else.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

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?

The point of the document archiving process is to be able to search for a document by the text within it but also retrieve an exact copy/image of the document. That's why the OCR'd text is placed in an invisible layer on the PDF--the search function can operate on the text without the text getting in the way of the exact copy of the image.

So the image would still have all the letters in their original positions--it didn't "put" the 'R' in the middle of a string of text, that's just where it was on the original form. But because it was fainter than the other letters, it was left as part of the background rather than being extracted with the rest of the text. That means it was downsampled along with the rest of the background when the PDF was optimized. (It would also mean that if the father's name wasn't there, someone searching for a document containing 'Barack' wouldn't find this, while someone searching for 'ack' would.)

[Triple]

“someone searching for a document containing ‘Barack’ wouldn’t find this, while someone searching for ‘ack’ would. - HHTVL

Silliness - the WH_LFCOLB.pdf has no text at all - it is all images. OCR was not done on the WH_LFCOLB.pdf.

Why do you spread such patently false information?

HMMMMM...

[vanilla swirl]

That Obama is ineligible has been proven without a shadow of a doubt by his own words. His father is Kenyan. That alone prevents him from being a natural born citizen. Libs eyes glaze over when you bring that up. They confuse “native born” with “natural born”, and aren’t you right wingers trying to change the 14th amendment?

Trying to argue with a crazy person (liberal) is like administering medicine to a dead man.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

OCR was not done on the WH_LFCOLB.pdf.

You don't know that. All you know is that there was no searchable text in the PDF file posted online. The final PDF was apparently prepared on a Mac. It is possible--just possible, mind you--that the original scan was done in software that could read the OCR layer, but was then converted using something else that stripped that layer out.

This is all just a hypothetical exercise in how computer programs might have produced the anomalies we see without intentional manipulation. I still find that scenario easier to swallow than the idea that someone copied bits and pieces of lots of different documents--one capital 'R' from this one, a different capital 'R' from another one--and assembled them into a file that reveals layers in Illustrator but not Photoshop.

[Triple]

if you can demonstrate how all this was done through OCR and optimization, do it. It would settle many of the issues.

I have scanned similar documents on a mac with many different settings, including optimize for OCR.

Nothing like the problems that show up occur on *any* of my scans.
- no layers
- no issues with character fuzziness disappearing
- no partial words falling to another layer
- no differing pixel sizes
- no solid black words/letters
(you get the point)

You claim that the process done by the WH included OCR and then somehow undid it?

You do realize that a text search on the WH_LFCOLB.pdf comes up with zero results for any text. Right?

The technical specs in the file show the programs used - if you think some crazy process was followed, do us all a favor and replicate it.

(I tried with a mac scanning and pdf conversion program - it it does not even come close.)

[CommieCutter]

I bet if it were proven—Watergate style—that he was not born here there would be a different tune. I know plenty of so called “conservative” Democrats that would turn if the above were proven.

However, the born-to-two-citizen requirement, I have to agree with you. They will never see it that way.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

Nothing like the problems that show up occur on *any* of my scans.
- no layers

Someone at the National Review already took care of that one:

I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.

You claim that the process done by the WH included OCR and then somehow undid it?

I don't claim anything about what happened. I claim that it's possible that if you use scanning software that creates an invisible OCR layer on a PDF, then open that PDF in software that doesn't support OCR, then save a PDF from that second piece of software, you could plausibly end up with a PDF that has been subject to an OCR routine at one point but no longer has searchable text.

I'm not even wedded to the OCR theory. I've read that straightforward PDF optimization can result in some areas being pure black and others still in color, and in variation in pixel sizes. I posted a link to one such discussion earlier in this thread, from a woman that WND called an "expert" when they thought she supported their case.

The technical specs in the file show the programs used - if you think some crazy process was followed, do us all a favor and replicate it.

As far as I know, they just say it was created with "Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext," which isn't a program. It's part of the native OS X PDF handling software, which means the file was last touched by a Mac program, probably Preview. But that's all we know.

[LomanBill]

>>I believe you are one of them.

 

See, there's that Delusion thing again.

 

[Do you honest think that these attorneys, who have real influence in their state, are going to let Obama skate right on through to the ballot? Really?]

 

The same legal suuuuper geniuses who evidently granted Argent "We'll invent a FICO score for you" Mortgage, immunity? 

 

Dear Mr. Lee:   I was previously employed by Argent Mortgage for two and a half years and managed, among other areas, the corporation's fraud investigation, borrower complaints and repurchase departments. There are currently over 568 open fraud investigations involving hundreds of brokers and hundreds of millions of dollars in fraudulent loans that are being covered up by top executives in the company. If a broker sustains a certain monthly volume, Argent management looks the other way and, not only does not suspend the bad brokers, but knowingly sells these fraudulent loans on the secondary market to unwitting investors.
  I was terminated today and left with just my purse in tow, but I have names of individuals in the company who need to be served with subpoenas to enable them to turn over their spreadsheets and boxes full of documentation and evidence of all the fraud they have found that is being covered up by Argent Mortgage's executive management. The state regulators need to know the truth about the blind eye Argent turns to the fraud perpetrated on innocent consumers by high volume brokers. They also need to be aware that Argent knowingly bundles these fraudulent loans and sells them as mortgage-backed securities on Wall Street, thereby compromising the SEC, as well as our country's economic stability.
  At a recent fraud seminar attended by hundreds of mortgage lenders in Washington D.C. a week ago, an attorney who works for Argent's retained law firm, Buchalter Nemer, stood up and told the seminar attendees that the wholesale lenders in the audience had better beware, unless their name is Argent. Argent is safe from investigation because the government got their $325 million settlement from Ameriquest and won't be looking into Argent, per the settlement agreement. I hope this isn't true because Argent Mortgage funded over $50 billion in 2005 and is gearing up to fund well over $80 billion dollars of fraudulent loans in 2007.

http://www.innercitypress.org/ameriquest.html

R.I.N.O.

 

Really?

 

FAIL.