Xerox 7655 Overview Picture (Obot claims to replicate Obama LFBC pdf w/floating signature)

Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored ^ | August 6, 2013 | NBC

[Red Steel]

The underlying HI statutes make birth certificates from Hawaii dubious or suspect that is susceptible to fraud.

Hawaiian 'vital records' can be fraudulent amendments that anyone can submit to the state to Hawaii, which they have accepted at face value. Hawaii would accept the word of anyone who claimed to have knowledge about an Hawaiian birth to produce vital records. The "legalities" of the Bennett letter are BS legalese.

This is what Onaka signed.

"I certify that the information contained in the vital records [for Obama] on file with the Department of Health was used to verify the facts of the vital event."

Onaka said nothing about that the "vital event" or "facts" are true or true copy or abstract.

The only thing that Onaka verified is that he has a record. Onaka has no confidence about what he signed is true.

[Red Steel]

Prominent Fogblower “Reality Check” is doing a major “happy dance” over NBC’s claimed findings and today he put up his own blog post (offensive Obot snark alert) which does, at least, include basic instructions on how to try to replicate NBC’s replication at home:

Anything coming from those lying clowns including NBC say are always in the opposite.

This is the output of the Xerox 7535 scan of the printout of the LFBC:

Nope OBots. Tsk tsk lying again. I saw the image being built from top to bottom, as sequentially, as the image bits were being added to the image from obscure to a higher resolution. No duplication here.

I did not see the base image or background being built first with the numerous rectangular white boxes that would be filled in with many distinct layers of data as the White House, Obama birf certificate so clearly showed.

Epic failure OBots.

[little jeremiah]

Is Big Guy a fogblower or something else? Apparently he posts only on “birfer” stuff but on the side of the usurper in chief.

[Red Steel]

Is Big Guy a fogblower or something else? Apparently he posts only on “birfer” stuff but on the side of the usurper in chief.

Yup, not much doubt Lj.

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

"Is Big Guy a fogblower or something else? Apparently he posts only on “birfer” stuff but on the side of the usurper in chief."

Absolutely a fogblower. I checked their entire posting history and every single one back to their signup in 2009 is on the subject of eligibility, and every single post is on the side of the usurper. Every. Single. One. I reported such to Admin Moderator.

Unfortunately, apparently the mods have decided that jungle rules now apply in the naturalborncitizen forum, and don't zot anyone at all, even for defending the so-called "bona fides" produced by Team "Obama."

Alex Okrent unavailable for comment.

[thecodont]

Thanks for doing the homework on this crowd.

[Kenny Bunk]

Carp, I tire of your attacks on the sovereign state of Hawaii over this BC thing.

Yes, it is true that an Hawaiian BC could be created by anyone walking in off the street and claiming that the kid in question was born at home with two aliens (possibly illegal themselves) as witnesses.

However, Carp, many other Hawaiian records are perfectly OK! Most, in fact. No one can quarrel with a Honolulu dog license, or a Hawaii DMV-issued car or boat title. Their library overdue book records are invariably maintained in impeccable order. Ditto, parking permits, park passes, etc.

So, fellow birthers, IMNVHO it is time to cut the surfer guys and hula gals of Hawaii some slack. OK, there is no "Birth Certificate" in their records. So what? There's a ton of other data in digital format that can be cut and pasted into a Birth Certificate matrix by practically anyone, and which from 10-15 feet away looks darn convincing (to me anyway).

As far as Kapio'lani Hospital goes, I can also see what happened. In the aftermath of the Pearl Harbor attack, many records were undoubtedly lost, not mention the odd tyfoon and very high spring tides the year BOH, Jr (or II) was born.

What difference does it make? The Birth Certificate the folks over to the WH made from whatever has been very educational to study for people who are interested in DIY car titles, debentures, stock certificates, real estate titles, etc. This is "Power to the People," with a cap "P!"

[Seizethecarp]

“Why should the background be treated differently than the foreground, if this is just a simple scan?”

I don’t know, but NBC claims: “That is the whole point of Mixed Raster Compression, the colored background is compressed differently than the foreground ‘text’.”

NBC is claiming that the Xerox did NOT do a “simple scan” but a compressed scan using industry standard algorithms (MCR) which NBC claims can result in replications in foreground shapes (mostly but not always text or numbers, IIRC...could be box shapes for example).

[Seizethecarp]

“I did not see the base image or background being built first with the numerous rectangular white boxes that would be filled in with many distinct layers of data as the White House, Obama birf certificate so clearly showed.”

That was what Fogblower, Reality Check, claimed was a replication.

Do you see that same lack of claimed replication in the pdf that NBC provided in comment #147?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3052270/posts?page=147#147

The NBC claimed replicated pdf:

http://nativeborncitizen.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/wh-lfbc-scanned-xerox-7535-wcpreview.pdf

[Red Steel]

So, fellow birthers, IMNVHO it is time to cut the surfer guys and hula gals of Hawaii some slack. OK, there is no "Birth Certificate" in their records. So what? There's a ton of other data in digital format that can be cut and pasted into a Birth Certificate matrix by practically anyone, and which from 10-15 feet away looks darn convincing (to me anyway).

LoL Nevah! Not even after their 10,000 lie. I always thought they called them 40 footers. ;^)

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

"Thanks for doing the homework on this crowd.

You're most welcome, FRiend. They may not draw ozone these days, but I'll still point 'em out when I see 'em.

[edge919]

Yeah, it just looks an overly defensive reply, which helps reinforce that NBC is just blowing smoke. He calls his convoluted series of posts a “simple processes,” which of course is nonsense.

[4Zoltan]

As I understand it, MRC was developed for things like magazine pages. Things with images, text and line art. The BC is not the type of document that was intended to create.

Here is what one of the developers of MRC told John Woodman:

“The question is whether all these artifacts we see after rendering the PDF of POBC are signs of forgery. I do not see that. I see them more likely as a result of inadequate processing.”

“The document has poor quality and it has been aggressively processed, no questions about it. The question is whether the corruptive processing was individual with the intent of forging it, or if it was automated within regular MRC segmentation.”

[skip]

“MRC is about separating the single-image document into multiple layers, hopefully each one with a given characteristic. This has to be done automatically, in what we call segmentation. What I see in the document are signs of MRC segmentation consistent with strategies in line with the techniques pioneered by DjVu. I (and my students) do not advocate doing the segmentation that way, but that is not the point either. In fact, I would not be surprised if the software which segmented the WH document was derived from some DjVu tool.”

[skip]

“I took a birth certificate which has a similar background pattern, scanned and compressed using an older DjVu tool. It has shown the same problems as POBC, like text letters that were missed and sent to background, and multiple text styles. It didn’t have halo, though, because its algorithm decided to obliterate the whole background pattern. Perhaps if I had time to toy around with packages and parameters I might find something very close to what was used to generate the document shown by the WH, but I unfortunately do not have the time right now.”

“In summary I can only say I see much stronger signs of common MRC algorithmic processing of the image rather than some intentional manipulation.”

Sincerely

Ricardo L. de Queiroz

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/09/genuine-world-class-computer-expert-evaluates-obamas-birth-certificate-pdf/

[Red Steel]

That's better. All I know is that they could have brazenly used the same copy there as the White House birf certificate.

Until someone with real credibility on our side creates all the anomalous stuff that is wrong with it in a peer review that it was all innocently created by mistake, I won't take their word for it.

From The "Israel Science and Technology" website ...as for instance this? Something is clearly missing here:

- - - - - - - - -

"Long-Form Birth Certificate of Obama is a Forged Document

Reservations could be raised about the results of imaging by Foxit Reader noted above. As an independent test of the composition of the "Long-Form Birth Certificate" of Obama, the PDF file was also examined by an open source freely available Inkscape (version 0.48.1) graphics software.

Instructions to check the document:

Download the document from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf Import the PDF document using Inkscape. Unmark the two options in order not to modify the document.

In vector graphics software, an image is composed of elements. If the "Long-Form Birth Certificate" of Obama was a photocopied document then it should not be composed of separate parts. To reveal if the document has parts, click on the image opened. The status line at the bottom of the software reports that the image is composed of "2 objects" that have been grouped.

To "ungroup" image components click Ctrl-Shift-G or select Object>Ungroup.

For a second time, again click on the image and to "ungroup" image components click Ctrl-Shift-G or select Object>Ungroup. The status line at the bottom of the program reports that the image includes 9 objects.

Again click on the image and for a third time to "ungroup" image components click Ctrl-Shift-G or select Object>Ungroup. This time you see the outlines of nine rectangles marking the boundaries of the 9 objects. The most important object among the 9 objects that are revealed is shown below.

Comparing the object above with the original document, it is seen that in the top right-hand corner of the document the last digit "1", of the serial number of the form "61 10641" is missing. This repeats the same observation as seen in the simple magnified view of the document in the PDF Foxit Reader (see above).

These are just a few of the problems with this document. There are many other problems with this document. "

http://www.science.co.il/Obama-Birth-Certificate.htm

- - - - - - - -

-end snip-

[Red Steel]

“...on our side creates all the anomalous stuff that is wrong with it in a peer review ....”

Make that multiple duplications in multiple peer reviews on our side.

[butterdezillion]

How long do they have, to counter the presumption of regularity? When new evidence comes up are they able to present it to the court?

It was when I was going to help Terry Lakin’s counsel counter the presumption of regularity that the sheathing on the wiring on my husband’s van was either cut or decayed uniformly all of a sudden, causing sparking next to the engine that could have killed him.

But shortly after all that Judge Denise Lind decided that the lawfulness of combat orders have nothing to do with whether they were issued by a Constitutionally-acting Commander-in-Chief, who alone is authorized to order lawful combat operations by the Authorization to Use Force...

[butterdezillion]

Looking at the MDEC letter of verification, what specific birth facts did Onaka verify as TRUE? Even claims on a legally non-valid BC would “MATCH” so the “matching” language means nothing. What are the specific birth facts that Onaka verified as true? Show me the words where Onaka verified each fact as TRUE.

[butterdezillion]

When a reporter at the gaggle asked if the BC would be available for them to look at everybody laughed. Even Obama was not allowed to hold the BC. Why have Guthrie and Applewhite not told us the stories of when, where, and under what circumstances their photos were taken?

And most of all, why - when asked point-blank by Ken Bennett in a legal request - did Onaka refuse to verify that the White House long-form image is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”, the standard language used to verify the authenticity of a legal document? He was basically asked under oath and he would NOT verify the genuineness of the document even though required to do so if he legally could. We have our legal answer already.

[Red Steel]

Hey Obot, did Xerox and MRC give Alvin his smiley face and nose? LoL.

[butterdezillion]

The truth of the information they contain? Onaka’s non-certified letter of verification to MDEC contains no “information”. What fact does it verify as TRUE?