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

To: TheNewPundit; Polarik
Pay attention for the first time in your life. No one has PROVEN anything to be a fake. Tell me why the state of Hawaii hasn’t pressed charges if the cert is a fake.

No one has proven that they were real.

For starters, no one accepts any CoLB with the C.N. concealed. And Polarik his listed a wealth of evidence of to show how the CoLB's on the sites differed from actual CoLB's from the Hawaiian DoH.

As for why the DoH hasn't gone after anyone, the privacy laws prevent them from acting in a proactive manner, so long as the "bone of contention" is between "private parties".

For example, I can't call up Hawaii's DoH and have them confirm that the number on the FactCheck CoLB is the one actually assigned to Obama's certificate. He has not given me that kind of authorization. It's the same reason I can't acquire my own copy of Obama's CoLB from Hawaii.

So long as the folks at FactCheck keep the CoLB in their grubby little hands, and simply display it to select group of individuals, the DoH can't actually come after them. Unless, of course, Obama decides to file a complaint (or pursue legal action through the courts).

268 posted on 09/06/2008 11:37:25 PM PDT by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies ]


To: Cyropaedia

Someone has proven they were real, you refuse to believe them.


269 posted on 09/07/2008 5:51:09 AM PDT by TheNewPundit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies ]

To: Cyropaedia
For starters, no one accepts any CoLB with the C.N. concealed. And Polarik his listed a wealth of evidence of to show how the CoLB's on the sites differed from actual CoLB's from the Hawaiian DoH.

Thank you, Cyropaedia.

If FactCheck really had nothing to hide, then they would have posted another scan of their photographed, both front and back. Instead, Their photos raise far more questions than answers.

For starters, why is the Exif data in FactCheck's photos screwed up?

Exif stands for "Exchangeable image file format" that consists of specific photo, image file, and camera information. Virtually all digital cameras add this information to their photo images.

The Israel Insider noted, as I did, that according to the Exif information in the FactCheck photos, all nine photos were allegedly taken on March 12, between 10:40PM to 10:47PM. The date is problematic because FactCheck said on August 21, that they "recently spent some time with Obama's COLB (in Chicago) and took some photos."

When they asked FactCheck about the disparity in the dates, they said that the photographer "forgot to set the correct time and date."

By now, you should know that it was FactCheck (along with the Obama Campaign) who posted what was allegedly a scan of Obama's "original birth certificate," and who also refused to make any additional scans of it, including one or more of the COLB shown in these photos.

Israel Insider did not know what to make of the nine photos allegedly taken in less than seven minutes. They said that they were taken "in suboptimal lighting conditions" with very little time for proper positioning.

My take of these photos is that they are as bogus as the phony image scan they posted on June 16. Does anyone else see the irony here?

It's not exactly the DaVinci Code, but it cannot be just coincidence working here.

Stay tuned. I am preparing a thorough debunking of these photos, which will only serve to compound FactCheck's fraudulent actions.

It should also come as no surprise that FactCheck has refused to return any of my calls or emails to them, challenging them on their authenticity.

345 posted on 09/08/2008 10:30:21 AM PDT by Polarik ("The Greater Evil")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies ]

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