Posted on 06/25/2008 7:58:32 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
It is now a certainty that the "birth certificate" claimed by the Barack Obama campaign as authentic is a photoshopped fake.
The image, purporting to come from the Hawaii Department of Health, has been the subject of intense skepticism in the blogosphere in the past two weeks. But now the senior spokesman of that Department has confirmed to Israel Insider what are the required features of a certified birth document -- features that Obama's purported "birth certificate" clearly lack.
The image became increasingly suspect with Israel Insider's revelation that variations of the certificate image were posted on the Photobucket image aggregation website -- including one listing the location of Obama's birth as Antarctica, one with the certificate supposedly issued by the government of North Korea, and another including a purported photo of baby Barack -- one of which has a "photo taken" time-stamp just two minutes before the article and accompanying image was posted on the left-wing Daily Kos blog.
That strongly suggests that Daily Kos obtained the image from Photobucket, not the State of Hawaii, the Obama family, or the Obama campaign. Photobucket is not generally known as a credible supplier of official vital records for any of the fifty states, and the liberties that other Photoshoppers took with the certificates confirms this.
Some of these oddities surfaced in Israel Insider's previous article on the subject, but new comparative documentary evidence presented below, and official verification obtained by Israel Insider from a senior Hawaiian official, provides the strongest confirmation yet.
An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.
Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."
Compare the top image presented by his campaign as evidence of Obama's 1961 birth and the other certifying the birth of one Patricia Decosta.
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg
http://www.valeehill.net/genealogy/documents/doc_decosta_pat_birth.jpg
So if he were registered as being born in Hawaii, Barack Obama -- because only he or another member of his immediate family could by law request a "Certification of Live Birth" -- must have a certified paper copy, with embossed stamp and seal, or he could request one. But what his campaign has put forward as genuine, according to the senior spokesman in the relevant department of the State of Hawaii, is not in fact a certified copy. It is not valid.
Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date "filed by registrar", the certified DeCosta document provides the date "accepted by the registrar." The difference between filing an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.
The Obama campaign, however, continues to flaunt the unstamped, unsealed, uncertified document -- notably in very low resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth." Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal and signature.
The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.
Until now, it has been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document as being certified?
There is one possibility, however, which alone might justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive. Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should they be lacking.
Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.
But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to "tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof. He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one will go away, too.
Because the consequences were he to admit, or should it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.
But now the State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth certificate image lack.
The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the consequences of waiting.
There is one simple way for the candidate to clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license. Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest office in the land.
The issue is not whether Obama is black or white, Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.
If proof of citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.
Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.
I’d give that scenario a 33% chance of what is @ play here.
“Heck half the people on this thread don’t think it matters so why would anyone else care if it is proven not to matter?”
Because the other half is being incredibly vocal all over the net and talk radio.
You may be right. Maybe I’m just over reacting. I’d still feel better if we were hearing more calm, sensible arguments from the right and less “Larry Sinclair said...”.
The document is on the official Obama website
Is Sinclair the person responsible for the fake document?
True, which is why it's weak & fake nature fits right in with the rest of his bile.
placemark ping
Seems “Tin Foil Hat” has met an early demise. Banned or suspended - LOL!
BTTT
Oh..........Ok.;))
**Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his “natural born” American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.**
And the Clintoons will be there to pick up the pieces!
They didn't care where you were born, just that you could prove that you had at least one Swiss citizen in your ancestry.
I think it's the same place that is the hardest place in Switzerland for immigrants to gain citizenship.
If he has the real birth certificate or certification, why would he release it now?!?
The smart thing would be to rope-a-dope conservatives into making a big deal about it...then produce the original and make them look like fools.
It will play well with those out there on the fence...who need that push to convince themselves that the deck is stacked against him.
>>50%
You can’t in CA either. I tried to get a copy of my dil’s birth certificate for her and couldn’t. Has to be her, her husband, her parents or a sibling.
Obviously, jellybean, you forgot that the candidate opposing Sen. Obama is named "John." I think that it's likely that The Tin Foil Hat made the obvious assumption that you were referring to John McCain when you said "John," not to someone who posts on a website under the handle "Congressman Billybob." (Note that to get to John Armor's first name, you have to go a few clicks deep, through his FR home page, praying that the often-down and out-of-date webpage of his Exploratory Committee opens and reveals his name and history before the SCOTUS. I would venture to guess that many FReepers haven't read John's columns or know his real name--remember that this is a big place.)
Also, note that The Tin Foil Hat wrote: This is where John refers you to his lawyer. Rest assured, though, that John has a lawyer, and the John made sure that he was eligible to run before he spent several hundred million dollars and months of effort trying to win office.
If you thought that John Armor has gone through (or will go through) several hundred million dollars, well, wanna make a donation to me? :-)
My point is that if this post is why The Tin Foil Hat was suspended, then I think there might need to be a reinstatement and apology...especially if we find out that this was all a rope-a-dopes strategy by BO.
You are very right, however, on John McCain's hesitancy to challenge Barry O.
Well, well, well!
Barack “Milhous” Obama could actually just drop out
at the last second, ya know!?!?
bttt!
If The Tin Foil Hat was suspended/banned (he's reinstated now), it had nothing to do with anything I posted.
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.