Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

PROVEN: Barack Obama Presented Forged Certificate of Live Birth
Today.com ^ | 6/25/08 | Virginia Shanahan

Posted on 06/25/2008 8:52:46 AM PDT by pissant

Is Barack Obama a United States citizen, and is he eligible to run for President of the United States, or did he present a forged government document to verify a citizenship he does not possess? For a few weeks now these questions have been swirling around the internet. The questions have become so prominent that Obama addressed the issue on his “Fight the Smears” website. Of course, in typical Obama fashion it is becoming clear that nothing is as it seems.

His site says the following:

The truth about Barack’s birth certificate

Lie: Obama Is Not a Natural Born Citizen

Truth: Senator Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, after it became a state on August 21st, 1959. Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

There it is, the Certification of Live Birth. Case closed. Or is it? Two sources have raised what has proven to be very interesting, and troubling questions. Polarik, a blogger from Townhall.com, and the israelinsider, have both posted compelling evidence that can no longer be ignored, or brushed off as ridiculous.

Friday, June 20, 2008, Polarik, who claims to have extensive experience in the world of computers, printers, and typewriters, wrote “given a set of printed letters, I can discern what kind of device made them. Printer output is quite different from the text created by a graphics program, and even if a document looks “official,” it may not be.” He goes on to claim that anyone could have produced this document, and then proceeds to point out every flaw imaginable with this alleged certificate. Because his article is so detailed, and technical, I advise my readers to follow the link and read it for yourself. Have no fear. He has visuals to help you make sense of it.

Yesterday morning I read an article in the Israelinsider, written by Reuven Koret. Koret’s article eliminates any lingering question as to whether or not the Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery/fake.

Koret begins his article by linking to Photobucket, an image gathering website, where millions upload images to share with others, or post in various places such as websites, etc. It shows variations of the same Certificate of Live Birth presented by the Obama camp. One has Obama’s birthplace listed as Antarctica, while another shows one issued by the government of North Korea. This certainly lends credibility to Polariks argument that the Certificate of Live Birth was created by some sort of computer program, that anyone can use.

According to Koret, Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health made clear that no birth certification, or certification of live birth is transmitted electronically, and that all certificates of live birth contain an embossed seal and registrar’s signature on the back of the document.

He then compares the 1961 Certification of Live Birth, presented as authentic on the Obama website, to one certifying the Hawaiian birth of a Patricia Decosta. The similarities and differences are quite noticeable.

Both contain a green bamboo background, though one is noticeably darker. Both contain borders that are noticeably different. Obama’s is green, and Decosta’s is black. Polarik did a fabulous job of pointing out the obvious flaws on the border of Obama’s alleged certificate.

The most compelling and disturbing items of note are the lack of an embossed seal and the registrar’s signature, on the copy being presented by Obama. Decosta’s seal, even faded with time is quite prominent, as is the registrar’s signature that bleeds through to the front of the document. The lack of these two items makes it clear that the copy presented by Obama is in fact a fake.

This raises many more questions and concerns. Why would Obama knowingly lie, and present a forged government document as official? Why does Obama refuse to present his real birth certificate, for inspection – the actual piece of paper that can be handled by reporters? Is Barack Obama a citizen of the United States? Is he eligible for the highest office of this great nation? Lastly, what laws has Obama and his camp broken by knowingly presenting a forged government document?


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-218 next last
To: Lamchops

So doesn’t this clearly state that Obama is a natural citizen, no matter where he was born?


141 posted on 06/25/2008 11:13:25 AM PDT by Crystal Cove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Here is an animation I created of the two certificates overlaid and faded:

http://www.members.cox.net/gmay2/birth_cert_fade2.gif

WARNING: It’s a 3.2 meg file but I wanted to keep it large enough to examine details. Let it load fully and it will cycle between the two images.

I simply overlaid the two images and scaled one to fit the outside border of the other as closely as possible, then faded one into another.

Hope this is helpful in your research.


142 posted on 06/25/2008 11:14:04 AM PDT by cj2a (When you're pathetic, but you don't know you're pathetic, that's really pathetic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom
That being said, here are my bets for how this particular event plays out:
43.28% chance: image is an unprocessed scan of a legitimate document
22.52% chance: image is a 'touched up' scan of a legitimate document (rush job that got tweaked cosmetically)
34.21% chance: Obama is still eligible, but someone decided to cut corners and post a fake instead of waiting to get the real thing:
00.01% chance: It's a complete fake, and the real document would reveal some fact that Obama doesn't want revealed, anything from an extra middle name to an reason for ineligibility.

My theory: Reacting to a perceived need for a birth certificate, some doofus at the Obama campaign emailed the Hawaii Health Department and got some fellow commie working there to print off and scan an unofficial copy. They were careful to redact the certificate number, because that would allow bosses at the Health Department to determine who issued the out-of-school document. But they forgot to redact the June 6, 2007 date stamp that bled thru from the back of the paper. Then they published it, not realizing it would be analyzed as a possible forgery.

Now they are shaking a stick at the useless bandwidth wastage we of the VRWC are generating and having a good chuckle.

Sometime in October they will get around to posting an official copy. It will have fold marks and a certificate number and an embossed seal and be signed on the back by Dr. Onaka or one of his successors. And it will have a date other than June 6, 2007. But otherwise it will contain the same information. And they will say, See! Look at all the fuss about nothing those rascally Republicans made!

143 posted on 06/25/2008 11:15:10 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

I would if I had money and contacts. As it is, my paltry bank account would be consumed rather quickly.


144 posted on 06/25/2008 11:19:53 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
Also it is the current law. But Obama's citizenship is controlled by the law in effect at the time he was born, not the current law.

Which would have been the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act. The text of that act is available Here and according to that even if Obama had been born outside the U.S., he would still be a natural born citizen through his mother.

145 posted on 06/25/2008 11:23:08 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Crimson Elephant; AmericaUnited

Then ping us to the threads you post discussing the ‘real’ issues of the campaign.


146 posted on 06/25/2008 11:26:37 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
His handlers and MSM abettors knew about this serious problem, and that is why the Compost and others tried to raise doubts about McCain being an American a month or so earlier.

That's the thing that keeps me from dismissing this whole thing. There was absolutely no logical reason for Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill, a strong Obama backer, to have introduced a resolution recognizing McCain as a "natural born citizen." Even if, by some unimaginable miracle, she awoke one morning consumed with interests of fairness for the Republican Party's nominee, why the co-sponsors--Hillary, Obama, Leahy and Coburn? What would they see in such meaningless theatre? Maybe not so meaningless after all.

147 posted on 06/25/2008 11:37:04 AM PDT by Eroteme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

The law currently in effect extends retroactively back to 1952
(see post 124).


148 posted on 06/25/2008 11:42:10 AM PDT by Lamchops
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Crystal Cove
I think it is very clear. He was born after 1952 and his mother was a US citizen who was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

The document under question has no effect upon his status as a natural-born citizen.

149 posted on 06/25/2008 11:52:13 AM PDT by Lamchops
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Lamchops

I think it is very clear...good on ya. I think it is pretty murky and slightly humorous. The BHO folks should be sweating a bit over this....cuz you know how us mainland Americans don’t take kindly to furenurs.


150 posted on 06/25/2008 11:57:55 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Given the multiple threads on this, I'm sure this idea has been posted before.
IMO his mother and father may not have been married yet and his name on the birth certificate was Barry Dunham.
His whole career has been built upon "Barack Obama". So the question is, is this his legal name or have they manufactured a birth certificate to reflect this. That is my guess.
151 posted on 06/25/2008 12:01:17 PM PDT by MomwithHope (Our country sure has some slim pickin's on both sides for 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Perhaps you should change your name to “pissy” instead of “pissant”.

A little defensive are we? I think this is a red herring wild goose chase, and that is a perfectly legitimate point of view.

That has little to do with posting threads.


152 posted on 06/25/2008 12:10:14 PM PDT by Crimson Elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Crimson Elephant

It has everything to do with posting threads. If there are ‘issue’ related issues about Obama that need to exposed here, we are looking for you to post them, so we don’t waste all of our talent and brain cells on such superfluous matters as Obama posting a forged document on his website.


153 posted on 06/25/2008 12:14:49 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Eroteme
That's the thing that keeps me from dismissing this whole thing. There was absolutely no logical reason for Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill, a strong Obama backer, to have introduced a resolution recognizing McCain as a "natural born citizen." Even if, by some unimaginable miracle, she awoke one morning consumed with interests of fairness for the Republican Party's nominee, why the co-sponsors--Hillary, Obama, Leahy and Coburn?

The old "hey, look over there" (McCain) misdirection play.

I keep coming back to the fact that the Obama certificate says "Filed" and not "Accepted". THAT MUST BE ANSWERED!

154 posted on 06/25/2008 12:15:30 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Leftists across the net contradict the following statement saying that Okubo verified that the Obama birth certificate as authentic. This needs to be repeated:

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."

We see that the Obama birth certificate, on the official Obama website, is without embossed seal and registrar signature.

Someone is lying here who is it?

155 posted on 06/25/2008 12:33:08 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

The leftists, as usual.


156 posted on 06/25/2008 12:34:21 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Maybe, but maybe not. Obama's mama was not yet 19 when he was born. At a minimum, if Obama was not born in the U.S. (and I'll admit that is a big if), his mother should have been required to prove she continuously resided in the U.S. for the requisite 5 years required by this law:

From Sec 1401 -- (g) of the doc you linked:
a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: ... This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date;

157 posted on 06/25/2008 12:40:21 PM PDT by 10Ring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
<< A “certified copy” of any recorded document always has an embossed (raised) seal with the clerk’s signature - certifying that it is a faithful copy of the original.

If the document copy isn’t certified in the way described above, it is worthless as “proof” of anything. >>

Wrong. I had to get a certified copy of a death certificate with raised seal for an insurance company. WA state provides a stamped seal along with a signature.

In submitting it to the company, I explained that this is WA's versions of a raised seal and it was accepted.

158 posted on 06/25/2008 12:51:13 PM PDT by OnRightOnLeftCoast (It not for double-standards, the Left would have no standards at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: 10Ring
Maybe, but maybe not. Obama's mama was not yet 19 when he was born.

Relevance?

At a minimum, if Obama was not born in the U.S. (and I'll admit that is a big if), his mother should have been required to prove she continuously resided in the U.S. for the requisite 5 years required by this law...

Assuming such proof was necessary, there is no evidence I'm aware of indicating she lived anywhere but the U.S. from the time of her birth in 1942 until her 'marriage' to Obama, Senior in 1961. That would be a period of 18 years, including 2 years after age 14. Her parents could have vouched for that if necessary.

159 posted on 06/25/2008 12:54:27 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: OnRightOnLeftCoast
I explained that this is WA's versions of a raised seal and it was accepted.

But that's not what HI does.

160 posted on 06/25/2008 1:02:11 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-218 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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