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

To: MHGinTN
"Here is what I wrote: "A government document expert has gone on court record in California attesting to Polarik's exposure of the forgery aspects, agreeing with his assessment."

"Here is your deceitful dismissive response: "This is not true. The expert did not endorse any forgery allegations."

"Below are the actual words of the document expert."

Let's see who is being deceitful.

She says, "Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm."

Great. What issues doe she mean?

"Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document."

Document Examiner 101. A scanned image can't be authenticated. Usually a document examiner will not authenticate even a paper copy. This doesn't confirm any allegation of forgery.

"Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No."

Does blacking out the certificate number mean forgery? No. It's a redaction. And the later photographs included it. She's still not supporting any forgery allegations.

"In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness."

Document Examiner 101 again. It's not the original it's a scan.

There is not one word here where she confirms a single allegation of forgery. None.

"You are an agitprop working FR for amusement and perhaps to ofuscate the actual facts..."

Since what I said was true, and what you said was not, you seem to fit the bill better than me.

907 posted on 01/16/2009 9:29:28 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies ]


To: mlo

Spin spin spin, agitprop. Expose yourself some more.


908 posted on 01/16/2009 9:37:18 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | View Replies ]

To: mlo
BTW, thanks for bumping the trhead. Here's the FR link that you seem afraid to read through: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2155990/posts .
909 posted on 01/16/2009 9:39:58 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | View Replies ]

To: mlo
Document Examiner 101. A scanned image can't be authenticated.

Which is why release of a scanned image or a digital photo, isn't good enough to prove anything. You've got to have the paper, and BHO hasn't released the paper to anyone, not even Factcheck, they just got to hold "it" and take pictures (poorly). None of them are document experts either.

943 posted on 01/16/2009 11:32:15 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | 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