[butterdezillion]

My analysis has never depended on anything computer related. The security paper that the HDOH used in May 2011 is different than the security paper on the White House image. And the HI state registrar was asked point-blank to verify that the White House image is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”. He would not, nor would he verify the birth facts submitted on the actual verification application. He was legally required to verify upon request any submitted claims that he could verify as true. He wouldn’t verify any of the facts or the genuineness of the White House image. We’ve got our legal answer, and it doesn’t take any computer skill to see that answer for what it is.

[ctdonath2]

Don’t misunderstand. I do believe there is something very very wrong with the Obama’s BC narrative - and “photoshop conspiracy” isn’t it.

[cynwoody]

He would not, nor would he verify the birth facts submitted on the actual verification application. He was legally required to verify upon request any submitted claims that he could verify as true. He wouldn’t verify any of the facts or the genuineness of the White House image.

Not true.

In an official statement presented in court,Dr Onaka did confirm that the facts asserted by the CoLB that the White Housse published match what the original on file with the DoH contains:

As for scanners doing funny things to documents in the interest of compression and OCR, they do it now just as they did in the eighties, only now its subtler and more insidious. See #279 for a weird example involving equipment similar to what the White House used.