Kenyan document ignites firestorm over authenticity (Let's Discuss Bomford HERE)

WND ^ | 8/4/09 | Staff

[pissant]

A document unveiled by a California attorney in her quest to determine President Obama's place of birth has been condemned as a forgery by critics who deride as nonsense the challenges that have been raised to the president based on the U.S. Constitution's demand that the Oval Office occupant be a "natural born" citizen.

But those on the other side, who would like to see the original documentation of Obama's birth place revealed, say there are factors that indicate the Kenyan birth document could be real.

WND reported when the document was submitted to a California court by California attorney Orly Taitz, who has managed several of the high-profile cases challenging Obama's eligibility to be president.

Then yesterday, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., raised the dispute to the floor of that august body, protesting in a speech added to the Congressional Record that the dispute was not worth one minute of time.

[truthfreedom]

I think I have that part figured out.

1 is the first book, then 2, up to 999
then
1A is right after 999, then 2A, up to 999A
then
1B is right after 999A, then 2B, up to 999B

Anyway, we have the method to find the answer.

Book / Page does or did work in South Australia

The District Code for HINDMARSH is HIN.

if 44B 5573 is Bomford, then the Kenyan doc is fake.

The following link gives 63 matches for South Australia and
Hin

http://boards.ancestry.com/SearchResults.aspx?db=mb&gss=ancMB&hc=10&rank=0&adv=show&p=localities.oceania.australia.sa&psrch=on&gskw=%2BHin+&_F00029CB=&_F00027E2=&_80004003=&_F0002BF1=&period=

44B 5573 is not found in ancestry.com, but I assume that it
would be fairly easy for someone in Australia to find it all out.

So, you know, that’s how you find out the answer. No more guessing at fonts.

Either 44B 5573 = Bomfort, and the Kenyan doc is fake or
44B 5573 does not = Bomfort, and the Aussie doc is fake.

So, you know, somebody with some money should get the answer today.

[mad_as_he$$]

That has been chewed to death. See the very long thread.

[truthfreedom]

http://boards.ancestry.com/AdvancedSearch.aspx?p=localities.oceania.australia.sa&cst=category&csn=South+Australia

that link should work I think

[conservativegramma]

O gee then that settles it. Our Declaration of Independence must also be a forgery by your reasoning since we dared to call ourselves the United States of America before while we were still under British dominion.

[mad_as_he$$]

I was thinking the same thing. Could it be just flipped or rotated. i do not have software to test that.

[InterceptPoint]

Well I was persuaded by the rudman explanation but I decided to rethink that position - I might have been too hasty in doing so. While it is true that .jpg files do not preserve layers it is certainly true that they can preserve artifacts from layers that don't quite match up for some reason. So the Photoshop Elements processing could be OK.

For those who have Photoshop as opposed to Photoshop Elements you can run the experiment on the Bomford BC yourself via Photoshop's File menu (at least in CS4):

File/Automate/Crop & Straighten Photos

As a test, I used this method to process a recent scan I did of two documents: a sales receipt with many folds and wrinkles and a nice clean U.S. Postal Service Receipt.

What did I get:

Photoshop pulled out the U.S. Postal Service Receipt without a glich. Perfect.

The wrinkled and folded sales receipt came out in little pieces just like you get when you process the Bomford documents.

So based on that experiment I'm going to stick with rudman's view. I think the Photoshop Elements' or Photoshops division of the Bomford Document is just the sort of thing you get when you scan a .jpg with folds and wrinkles. Anyone doubting that should try the experiment themselves.

[mad_as_he$$]

http://www.australiarecords.net/?&ss=aurecords&hop=6241961

[Jacksonian Grouch]

sorry if my following seems dated, but with today’s technology being so easily and quickly manipulated added to the ease with which so many false positives or one-off fakes can be introduced into the comment stream, the only thing that’s absolutely certain in this drama is that the Freep will dedicate vast resources and minute examination of EACH document.

Which - to put it mildy - would look like a disorganized pile of ants rushing around.

imho, that’s what the enemy wants, to sow confusion amongst us, then pick’n’choose comments which they paste into their DU threads as they trumpet how they yet again, “saved” the country from the extremists.

Seems to me that ground zero is Orly on this; specifically that she posted a pic of this document on her website, and this represented a hackable target for the enemy to manipulate at their leisure.

This isn’t a criticism of Orly; she’s trying her best - but this isn’t about noble intent. She’s up against a great number of people who see no irony in the statements and actions they make or take, declaring America safe for Americans from us RightWingers, leading the way in the fight for Truth and Justice, even as they work to prevent the truth about obama from being revealed.

Does anyone have a comms line with Orly’s team? Would it be too much to ask them to not post any more web images of source documentation pertinent to this usurper until these have been conclusively proved true, documented & notarized before a court of law as such? Long, short, Orly - stop giving the bastards from the left all this ammo!

Else the enemy will continue to press and hound her, looking for every opening in order to paint her as unbalanced and a fringe lunatic.

JG

[bvw]

Too many attack the honest and guard the criminal.

[Uncle Chip]

Thanks — bookmarked

[browardchad]

In the district of Hindmarsh
in South Australia

They passed book 44 way way back in the 1800’s.

I’m calling it, the Aussie doc is a fake.

And the media just had to do a little bit of research on ancestry.com to find that out.

I think you'd have to be familiar with Australian genealogy, and how the records for South Australia are organized into "Books" from the individual registration districts. I have no familiarity, and there aren't any online indexes to give a hint.

Simply noting that there are higher number books in previous years isn't conclusive, I'm afraid. And it was Book  44B, by the way -- that may also make a difference, but, again, I don't know.

[InterceptPoint]

And there is a header in the image file showing ‘Lead Technologies Inc. V1.01’.

I'm thinking that could simply be what you get if you use a photoediting program to do a scan of an otherwise perfectly legit document. If so, it doesn't mean much. OTOH, it could mean a lot. Maybe someone who really understands this sort of thing can give us a lesson on what actually happens to the .jpg file header, if anything, when you scan a document and generate a .jpg.

If we don't get an answer, I'll try to run the experiment myself with Photoshop.

[spacejunkie01]

If you meant the Bomford doc was similar to yours, why do you keep posting another document of yours that you now say is different from the one you REALLY meant was similar, that you can’t find?

[Uncle Chip]

If Kenya was known as the "Republic of Kenya" from 1963, why did their own constitution not refer to the country in this way, anywhere in the document?

How did they refer to their country in that document??? as a dominion??? a state??? a democracy??? or what???

[InterceptPoint]

Not to throw salt on a wound, but I suppose it is possible he used that software to scan his BC into the computer and then post it on the website which might account for the ‘signature’ in the header.

Unfortunately, there is no way to tell.

See my post above. I decided to run an experiment on a document that I scanned with Photoshop. It's a .png not .jpg but the word Photoshop appears in the file header when viewed with a Hex Reader. So I conclude that seeing Lead or ULead in the header of the Bomford document is not really a clue. It just tells us that the document was scanned with some imaging software.

[Genoa]

The numbers matching on the Obama and the Bomford are astronomically unlikely. Therefore, one of them must almost certainly be a fraud designed to discredit the other. Other threads on FR have discussed the fact that typing does not undulate with the folds on Bomford. For Obama to be the fraud, someone would have had to be able to deceive Taitz, or someone higher up the chain than Taitz, about the provenance and genuineness of it. (Orly, what does the raised seal actually say? That would be hard to forge.)
Concerning Bomford, I am skeptical about the radio interview with “Bomford.” Was it really him? He might be in on the fraud. At any rate, he did not provide positive identification, only saying that it “looks like” something that would be his BC. Head hurts, must stop.

[InterceptPoint]

why was Mr. Bromford’s requested in 1964?

The likely explanation: he was starting to school and they needed to prove his age.

[InterceptPoint]

We need to be focused on defeating Commie care and cap & tax and the rest of his Marxist agenda.

With all due respect I don't buy that argument. We can walk, chew gum, look into BC issues and fight like the devil to kill the Dems Socialist/Marxist agenda and not miss a beat. The whole "focus" business is a bunch of bunk. I don't buy it.

[Genoa]

This interview sounds fishy to me. “Bomford” is looking at the data and saying, in effect, “Sure it’s mine. Look, there’s me mum’s name, and me own name. And it’s old, innit? Must be me own BC.” And the Obama BC? “Well, must be a copy of mine.”

[spacejunkie01]

Why would ANYONE post their birth certificate on a public geneology site??? Has anyone heard of that before? It sounds utterly ridiculous to me.

And yet, the idiot that allegedly ‘discovered’ the ‘fraud’, says he was searching for hours and hours on the internet and found this ‘thumbnail’ picture of a BC on a geneology site and blew it up and VOILA!! perfect match.

Unbelievable. Literally and figuratively.