Posted on 09/13/2012 9:42:24 AM PDT by chatter4
Youtube user Bigone5555J found a photo of one of the Birth Certificates given to Obama's attorneys by the Hawaii Department of Health on April 25, 2011. You might recall that after Obama released his long form in a Pdf for the public to download on April 27, 2011, NBC's Savannah Guthrie boasted she was allowed to look at and feel the seal on Obama's Birth Certificate and reported that it said Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. She also took a picture of it and posted that photo on site called Lockerz.com. The photo she took can be seen here: http://lockerz.com/s/96540937 You can download a copy by right clicking on the photo and then clicking "Save Picture as...".
If you enlarge the photo, you will see in box 7c, "Honolulu, Huwaii". That's right, the word Hawaii was misspelled as "Huwaii". Also, if you look at the father's middle name, HUSSEIN, in box 8, you will see there are two different sized "S"'s, and in box 11. These errors were "corrected", before copies were made available to the press. This photo proves that Obama's Birth Certificate was altered before it was released to the public. It also proves that Obama's attorneys and those in Hawaii that saw Obama's Birth Certificate, were well aware that what Obama posted, was not what they provided to him. He posted a video about the "Huwaii" misspelling on Youtube, which can be viewed here: http://youtu.be/dL6hZRYZ6wU
Additionally, a photocopy of what was handed out to the press that day was released by the Associated Press in Pdf format. It is a much higher resolution than the Pdf version on the White House servers. You can get a copy here: http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_obama_certificate_dm_110427.pdf
If you view that Pdf at, at least 600%, you can see that the typed letters may have actually been forged by hand, or if they were originally typed, they have been written over with a pen. If you look closely at the document number, in the upper right hand corner, you can see that the numbers were actually outlined and then filled in. The last number one looks like the profile of a man's face. His ear is a question mark, and you can see what appears to be drops of sweat dripping down his neck. That was covered up, or distorted, and placed on a different layer, so it can't be seen in the lower resolution White House Pdf version. A video about the AP version can be seen here: http://youtu.be/XuyV7V853kk
What I have found disturbing, is that not only has the MSM chosen to ignore this evidence, but, so haven't nearly all of the websites, blogs, and news sites that claim to support Birthers. Can you just imagine the look on that CBS reporters face, who asked Mike Zullo, "Why should we believe you?", if Zullo had responded with Savannah Guthries' photo, showing "Huwaii"? I'd also love to see Donald Trump ask Savannah Guthrie about it right on a national broadcast.
ping
Well so what. Only when y’all understand that we live in a controlled, corrupted in all factions, nation that is no better than a banana republic will these issues become insignificant because we have no authority nor power to do a damned thing about it.
forget trying to get them to look at it as a forgery...
instead, we must try to force 0bama and crew to submit the document as proof of his eligibility... as required by the Constitution
one step at a time.
Touching up photocopier artifacts is reasonable and doesn’t mean the document was forged. To be forged implies someones BC was used as a base and then had select fields overwritten with hussein family data. I’ve seen no evidence that entire fields were overwritten.
“we must try to force 0bama and crew to submit the document as proof of his eligibility... as required by the Constitution”
That would never happen. Obama’s attorney stated to the press, the day it was released, that the short form is the document that would be used for any legal purposes. That is an admission that the long form is not a legal document.
what?
Why correct a spelling from an official Huwaii document? Maybe that’s why he has shied away from releasing his BC because he’s embarrassed it has a spelling error on it?
“I’ve seen no evidence that entire fields were overwritten.”
Well, then you haven’t looked at the AP version or watched the video about it. Bty, changing the spelling of words is not, “Touching up photocopier artifacts”.
The birth record number is odd, however. Someone pointed out that if you magnify this number 800%, the '1' disappears COMPLETELY.
“Maybe that’s why he has shied away from releasing his BC because he’s embarrassed it has a spelling error on it?”
I had that thought too, but, after viewing the video about the AP version, and then comparing the three versions against each other, it is clear that the entire document is a forgery. I really doubt that people at the Hawaii Health Department, doodled on Obama’s original Birth Certificate.
Think about it for a few seconds. Assume the forger began with a BC issued to a male born the same day and same hospital as Obama.
Field 1a would have to be changed to the new name "BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II"
Field 7d would have to be changed to reflect the mother's address of "6085 Kalanianaole Highway"
Field 8 would have to be changed to reflect the full father's name of "BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA"
Field 11 would have to be changed to reflect the father's birthplace of "Kenya, East Africa"
Field 13 would have to be changed to reflect the full maiden name of the mother "STANLEY ANN DUNHAM"
Field 16 would have to be changed to reflect the mother's birthplace of "Wichita, Kansas"
So, until I see someone show how all the above fields were changed in their entirety, I assume any identified changes were due to touchup.
See post #12
Also, note that the 'R' in BARACK is different than the other letters. THIS IS BECAUSE THE 'R' IN 'VIRGINIA' WAS RETAINED TO KEEP THE CHARACTER SPACING CORRECT FOR 'BARACK'. Trivial but interesting.
“Some of your observations are correct. However, the ‘Huwaii’ thing is an anomaly which occurs because of low resolution imaging. I have analyzed this particular anomaly and have come to the conclusion the word is indeed correctly spelled ‘Hawaii’.” Then why doesn’t the “a” in the word “Oahu”, both above and to the left of box 7c, look like a “U” too?
“The birth record number is odd, however. Someone pointed out that if you magnify this number 800%, the ‘1’ disappears COMPLETELY.”
Yes, it totally breaks up in the Whitehouse version, but, not in the AP version. Also, explain how a tiny lower case “f”, got inside the final “a” in Africa in box 11. It can be seen clearly in the AP version. I’m thinking it just might be the forgers initials-FA or AF.
“Assume the forger began with a BC issued to a male born the same day and same hospital as Obama.”
Why would a forger need to do that? Couldn’t he just start out with a blank form? Think about that.
That's a valid scenario. However, it begs the question why the selective "edits" cited by those claiming forgery?
Perhaps the forger wanted to make the image look as if it had been touched up. That may be the case but it can't be proven without the paper original.
Although the Certificate of Live Birth is a very incompetent and blatant forgery, you would never know it by this blatantly erroneous and false set of claims. For example, where it is claimed that Hawaii was misspelled as Huwaii, the word is in fact spelled correctly as Hawaii. Some folks may at first glance be misled by what seems to be a solid stroke on the left side, it is when viewed at higher magnifications with care the letter “a” which is being distorted to some degree by the camera lens and resolution of the image. In other words, it is much to do about a non-eexistant flaw.
Likewise with the claims of the handmade chracters. The document has many real flaws indicative of a forgery. Unfortunately, the claims being presented here are again generally false, with the possible exception of a few examples. Characters which are distorted due to gaps on the typewriter ink ribbon and variability in the type bar striking the ribbon against a paper document. Additionally, the digital resolution artifacts help to confound a proper interpretation of the image. Bottomliine, however, is the erroneous misrepresentations about fictitious flaws in the document cloud recognition of the genuine falws that exist in the document.
If someone wanted to discredit the genuine evidence that the birth certificate is a forgery, the sources given in this topic thread would certainly qualify as such sources of disinformation.
“I’ve seen no evidence that entire fields were overwritten.”
So, I’m guessing you didn’t watch the Arpaio press conferences, eh?
for later
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.