Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Yosemitest
Look at her signature. Notice how it sits on the line.

Now compare that 1972 signature to her signature on the 1961 birth certificate where the signature does not touch the line, especially see how the last half of the name "unham Obama" does not touch the line.

Not only does the signature not touch the line on the long form birth certificate, but the signature is perfectly aligned along the line , that is, the tiny space between the bottom of the letters and the line are almost perfectly the same from beginning to end.

A person who claimed to be a computer expert wrote on World Net Daily that such a perfect alignment on the long form birth certificate was almost impossible for a human to do when writing his signature.

The computer expert said that the space was only one pixel wide between the letters and the line, which, the expert claimed, was impossible for a human to do when writing his name to any document.

On the other hand, the computer expert said that setting up such a perfect alignment of letters in the signature was no problem for a computer to do.

So to me, the Stanley signature on the 1961 long form birth certificate looks like a forgery when I compare it to Stanley's signature on this 1972 document.

76 posted on 03/25/2012 9:29:44 PM PDT by john mirse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: john mirse
Everyone knows Obama's long form is a forgery, the same as the other two short forms were forgeries.
What would the LAME Stream Media have done if Bush had tried that?
79 posted on 03/25/2012 11:25:27 PM PDT by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson