Weak Arguments That Obama's Long-Form Birth Certificate Is Fake

Jeff Winston | 4/28/2011 | Jeff Winston

[campaignPete R-CT]

you forgot to mention that anyone who fails to agree with you should be zotted .....

[GunRunner]

That's not analysis. He's looking at one of the certified copies.

The scan of the original does not have the green background.

[Choose Ye This Day]

Thank you for your post, a drop of sanity in an ocean of nutty paranoia.

We need to oppose this clown on his disastrous issues and policies.

[DoctorBulldog]

RE: The Seal

Yes, the seal is there. I'm sorry that you couldn't see the seal in the image I posted yesterday. You had to have a good flat-screen monitor and get your nose in there and really look closely.

Anyway, Butterdzillion asked me if I could adjust some of the Photoshop setting to pull out the seal to make it easier to see. So, I adjusted the contrast and brightness levels. Here is the result of that endeavor:



Notice that circular area with the edges that look like they belong on a quarter? That's the seal.

I hope this will be of help to you. If not, it's probably about time for you to upgrade your CRT to a widescreen monitor.---Just teasing ya'. Actually, if you are still having problems seeing it, drop me a note and I'll see if I can sharpen the image a little more for ya'.

Cheers

[Jeff Winston]

Yes! I see it! Thanks for that post. :-D

[Jeff Winston]

21. The time of birth on Hawaii’s latest release of Obama’s BC, "7:24 PM," indicates a fraud because this exact time was used on the Mombassa “foot-print” Birth Certificate. It's almost impossible for this to be a coincidence.

That's because it isn't a coincidence.

The Lucas Smith/ebay birth certificate first appeared in June of 2009, roughly one year after Obama's Certification of Live Birth (COLB) was released in June of 2008.

Obama's first-released Certification of Live Birth (COLB) listed the time of birth: "7:24 PM."

The time on the Lucas Smith/ ebay certificate was therefore obviously copied from the time reported on Obama's original COLB, which is consistent with that on the long form.

[Paul Ross]

Freeper Dick Holmes reposts a Youtube comment clarifying why there's white around the letters:

Link, please.

[Jeff Winston]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711350/posts?page=121#121

[Leo Carpathian]

Why did Obama had to send lawyerette to buy certification from HI?
He didn’t have his own copy all those years that he could show?
Is all this to obfuscate that he admits having Kenyan father and being disqualified from presidency?

[Porterville]

I disagree. I believe Obama looks petty. No Republican made direct statements regarding the BC only Trump and Obama.

[bvw]

I’ve apologized for that one. I saw the 7:24 coincidence on another blog, and obviously too quickly checked the 2008 image of the COLB and missed the date stamp on it.

I have other comments on your work: The two names extant of the delivery doctor should not be so easily discounted. It is a possibility that the recollection of Reed being the delivery doctor was wrong, by still, that is a fact that has been asserted. Don’t throw it away as a data point.

Similarly do not toss out the fact that two different Hospitals were reported to be the birthplace, nor the sequence problem with the Nordyke twins.

[Jeff Winston]

The two names extant of the delivery doctor should not be so easily discounted. It is a possibility that the recollection of Reed [sic] being the delivery doctor was wrong, by still, that is a fact that has been asserted. Don’t throw it away as a data point.

I haven't thrown anything away. One purpose of this thread is to catalog what ideas have been catalogued and decisively disproven so that time and energy may not be wasted on those things; but another is to highlight the state of knowledge about any particular points that might merit further probing.

Similarly do not toss out the fact that two different Hospitals were reported to be the birthplace,

That is curious, might merit a further look. If Obama himself had given a different hospital name, that would at the least raise an eyebrow or two.

...nor the sequence problem with the Nordyke twins.

This may be the more serious issue. And if Jerome Corsi is correct, it is. See post #67.

[bvw]

Careful [sic]’s are like daggers. Use them only in justified anger.

Make the best, not the worst of what friends give you.

And do even better with what enemies throw at you.

[Jeff Winston]

Follow-up to #4: It is Freeper John Valentine who personally confirms this:

[T]he name of this facility in 1961 was indeed “Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital”.

I drove by the place two, three, four times a day or more, virtually every day from 1961 through 1969. I lived only five blocks away.

I also had two children born in that hospital in 1965 and in 1969.

I am telling everyone on this board that I know this to be factual from my own experience. Moreover I was issued birth certificates from the Hawaii Board of Health back in the ‘60’s that are virtually identical in form and content to the Nordyke twins.

[Jeff Winston]

No offense intended. The [sic] was included because the Dr's name was West, not Reed, and not including a note might result in confusion.

You also said "by still" when you meant "but still." I specifically and intentionally did not note that.

Again, the purpose was not to embarrass you regarding an error. I make plenty of those myself, and when I do, I'm likely to note them myself. If someone else notes them, that's fine by me as well.

[bvw]

You didn’t correct the error. [sic[ At least not in the original reply. [sic] by itself is not a correction, only a dagger. I wonder where the Reed-West thing came from?

Years ago I made a decision to not overly edit my posts.

The reasons I decided not to edit-review are complex. Most authorities I respect do advise doing so. I did not do it because of the general lack of review and self-editing we see in the IM, texting, blogging and twittering era.

I’m old school. I saw from reading original letters and correspondence from the 1700’s that great men with ink pots and feather quills made plenty of mistakes, and yet their messages — the ideas and ideals — were clear.

I came to see, too, that when one stays honest and earnest, even one’s mistakes are valuable and informative.

[EternalVigilance]

Bump.

[Red Steel]

11. The Nordyke births occurred the day AFTER the Nordyke births. Why aren’t their certificate numbers AFTER his also? I smell a rat.

World Net Daily speculates that stacks of forms were placed in different places. One Freeper likened it to a checkbook. There are groups of forms, number (for example) 1-24 and 25-49. When you can't find the 1-24 checks, you use the 25-49 ones.

Actually, this is the kind of minor discrepancy that's actually a pretty good argument FOR legitimacy

Different places? In a willy nilly manner? No, too many chances to screw up. I see haven't worked in a place were tracking and assigning control numbers has to be run like a tight ship.

And actually, you're using very old information, and WND have now corrected themselves. I see you didn't do that.

This is what WND says now, which is correct:

- - - - - - - - - -

"In 1961, the birth certificate numbers were not assigned by the hospitals.

Instead, the numbers were stamped to the birth record by the Hawaii Department of Health at the main office in Honolulu. This is the only place birth certificate numbers were assigned.

At the last step of the process, the documents were accepted by the registrar general, with the date of registration inserted in box No. 22 on the lower right hand corner of the long-form birth certificate.

The date the birth document was accepted by the registrar general was the date the birth certificate number was stamped on the birth record.

The birth certificate number was stamped on the form by a rubber stamp that automatically increased by one each time a birth certificate was stamped.

The question, therefore, is how was it possible that the Nordyke twins had their birth certificates accepted by the registrar general in Hawaii three days later than the registrar general accepted Obama's birth certificate, when the twins' numbers are lower than Obama's number?"

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=292457

- - - - - - - - -

Most forgers would probably iron out such little wrinkles. Real life is seldom 100% straightforward. Offices have 2 or 3 different people who fill out certificates, and there's a bit of variation in how things are done. Someone rips off a small stack of forms and puts them in one place, or hands them to one person, another small stack of forms goes somewhere else. A piece of paper sits on someone's desk for a day instead of being filled out immediately. When it's filled out, they use yesterday's date stamp, then notice later that they need to change the date.

LoL. Speculation. Obama's paperwork should have gotten there way ahead of the Nordyke twins. How many babies were born on the same day Obama was allegedly born in Hawaii?

And here is what the Hawaiian DoH have said it is done, and according to Janet Okubo in early 2010:

"
The correspondence, excerpted from the Hawaiian DoH.

In regards to the terms “date accepted” and “date filed” on a Hawaii birth certificate, the department has no records that define these terms. HISTORICALLY, the terms “Date accepted by the State Registrar” and “Date filed by the State Registrar” referred to the date a record was received in a Department of Health office (on the island of O’ahu or on the neighbor islands of Kaua’i, Hawai’i, Maui, Moloka’i, or Lana’i),and the date a file number was placed on a record (only done in the main office located on the island of O’ahu) respectively.

The correspondence, excerpted from the Hawaiian DoH.

HISTORICALLY, most often the “date accepted” and the “date filed” is the same date as the majority of births occur on O’ahu (the island with the largest population in our state). In the past, when births were recorded on paper they may have been accepted at a health office on an island other than O’ahu, such as Kaua’i. The paper record would then need to be sent to O’ahu to have a file number placed on it, and the filed date would then be sometime later (as you know, the state of Hawai’i is comprised of multiple islands with miles of water in between). The electronic age has changed this process significantly, and it was determined some time ago that one date would suffice.

Janice Okubo
Hawaii State Department of Health

- - - - - - - - -

As we see again, the Hawaiian DoH didn't assign numbers to hospitals or give out pre-stamp birth certificates with the control numbers on them at anytime as they where added at the MAIN office after the paper work was completed. "

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2457491/posts?page=588#588">

Furthermore, birth certificate numbers that are assigned in a chronological ascending order by birth date, furthers the ability to ease the tracking of paperwork. That's something that the DoH should have strived to do.

[Jeff Winston]

You didn’t correct the error. [sic[ At least not in the original reply. [sic] by itself is not a correction, only a dagger. I wonder where the Reed-West thing came from?

That's because in my mind, honestly, a small [sic] was less obtrusive than saying something like, "the name you mention here is incorrect - it's supposed to be West."

Honestly, no offense intended.

[Jeff Winston]

And actually, you're using very old information, and WND have now corrected themselves. I see you didn't do that.

I can't hold myself to a standard of keeping up with every possible development, because frankly I've spent way too much time on this already. However, in this particular case you've missed a couple of posts. See posts #67 and 152. In this particular case, I was on it just a few hours after the new information was posted. :)