‘Punkin’ the Birthers: Priceless’ [pictures supposedly from forger of Kenya BC]

Washington Independent ^ | 8/6/09 | Dave Weigel

[lonewacko_dot_com]

It’s looking more and more like the forged “Kenyan birth certificate” released by Orly Taitz on Sunday was a prank by a supporter of President Obama. Politijab points to an anonymous blogger at FearlessBlogging, who has uploaded four photos of the original forgery and a mocking declaration:

Fine cotton business paper: $11

Inkjet printer: $35

1940 Royal Model KMM manual typewriter: $10

2 Shilling coin: $1

Pilot Varsity fountain pen: $3

Punkin’ the Birthers: Priceless

[MEGoody]

What jurisdiction would he be in Kenya, the US?

It was a joke.

It's ALL due to bammy’s recalcitrance.

Yep. ZerO claimed he would have the most open administration ever. Then he has proceeded to keep more secrets than any administration ever. He's evil.

[Sibre Fan]

In the original article it never said they only had a photo, it was always discussing the document.

Oh, so WND said she had it. The OCRegister said she said she had it. Interesting.

Well, as stated, Orly's website published the actual pleadings -- in which she clearly said that she was in possession of a color photo copy. If she had actually had the document, she would have said that she had the document itself and was providing the court a photo copy of the document, not a copy of a photo of the document.

In her various pleadings, she has attached dozens of exhibits. Those exhibits are copies of documents. Orly did not attach photos of the documents as exhibits - she has attached copies of the actual documents. If she had the actual document, she would have attached a copy of it (after putting the original she received in a safe deposit box or something). There is no rational (or even mildly irrational) reason to attach a PHOTO of a document in a court pleading -- unless that is all you have.

However the media may have reported what she had, it was very easy for people to go read the original source - the pleadings she filed. This is why I contend that it's far better to find and read the "original source" rather than relying on what someone says the source says.

[MEGoody]

What is the crime?

It was a joke.

[MEGoody]

What is the crime?

It was a joke.

[OldEagle]

Consider for a moment, or pretend that the Kenyan certificate is genuine. What would Obama do?

First he would have someone say he forged it?

[pissant]

Yes, and then was appointed Prime Minister to quell the violence.

[pissant]

John McCain

[pissant]

Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh and the video of the gal browbeating the hapless RINO at the town hall meeting.

Axelrod decided it was time to astroturf the subject, and they are doing just that.

[Bikkuri]

Best educational I’ve had in a long time and it was enjoyable.

Definitely :)

[dalight]

In her various pleadings, she has attached dozens of exhibits. Those exhibits are copies of documents. Orly did not attach photos of the documents as exhibits - she has attached copies of the actual documents. If she had the actual document, she would have attached a copy of it (after putting the original she received in a safe deposit box or something). There is no rational (or even mildly irrational) reason to attach a PHOTO of a document in a court pleading -- unless that is all you have.

If this is indeed the case, we all would have been far better served to know that all she had was a picture. Anyone would have known this was equal to exactly zero.. just like the COLB at FactCheck.

[cvq3842]

So, if I create a forged long-form birth certificate for Obama and it is proven false, does that mean that Obama is definitely not a natural-born citizen? No..

And this forgery proves no more than that one would.

All I can say is that Obama is clearly hiding something in his past. I have no idea what it is. But we should find out.

[I am Richard Brandon]

Wasn’t the timing different? I thought Dobbs and Rush reponded to the libtard fuss.

[Bikkuri]

   I then realized that this nation has now passed something
   of a point of no return between left and right. We will
   not educate them. They will not listen to us, and in fact,
   mean to destroy us, and I do mean literally.

   Some awful times are a'coming. 

I agree 100% .. being out of country, I didn't realize the depth of this whole situation (even beyond the BC) until I became involved in trying to decipher the BC.. Really scary...

[VictoryGal]

> Why did the libtards suddenly, all in unison, drop their total disregard for the BC issue, and start pushing the ‘birthers are idiots’ argument IN PUBLIC - everywhere - all at the same time?

Because it is the perfect way to marginalize the revolt happening now in town halls (”Oh it’s just those whack-a-loon Birthers! They’re craaaazy! They’re a dangerous mob! Lock ‘em up!”) By your credulity on obvious fakes like the Kenyan BC, you have handed a powerful weapon of ridicule, Alinsky-style, to our enemies.

And by the way, how many sane, reality-based people on this forum were screamed at, kicked off, posts deleted?

Nice job.

Before you all shrilly squeal at me and demand my expulsion, I am no Obamabot newbie or DU plant. I am a rock-ribbed conservative that’s been on this forum for almost 6 years. I am disgusted by the depths of credulity and non-logic many on this forum have sunk to.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going back to my daily regimen of calling and faxing our worthless Congress about issues that matter.

[Sibre Fan]

And, I appreciate your response too!

As for I believe Orly claimed to have a paper copy (a photo of the doc), dalight pointed out statements from WND and OC Register to the effect that she had the actual document. However, as I noted, she told the COURT that she had a photo only. The "original source" court documents say the following:

"The undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs has acquired possession of a color copy of one certain document (attached as Exhibit A to this motion), regarding which there are no ready means of authentication except by recovery of the original document."

"Exhibit A: Unauthenticated Color Photocopy of Certified Copy of Registration of Birth...." (Exhibit A is the photograph.)

I don't see how one can read into that that she has anything other than the photograph.

As for wouldn’t that be conspiracy of some sort, there can only be a "conspiracy to commit a crime" if there is a crime - and a conspiracy requires at least two people. So, if (a) "producing" a photograph is not the same as producing a document and/or (b) giving someone a photograph (as oppose to selling it) does not affect interstate commerce, then there is no crime and there is no conspiracy.

If you're referring to other comments that Orly may be in trouble, she's not in criminal trouble for submitting the document. And since the motion and document were stricken from the record, she's not going to be in Rule 11 trouble either. Had it not been stricken from the record, she could possibly have been in trouble, if it turns out that she conducted no investigation of the validity of the document before submitting it. I think that that would have been a long shot.

I mean, I don't think she would have received Rule 11 sanctions for submitting it. I think that the motion would have been denied, and the reasons for the denial would have been that she provided no evidence to indicate that the document shown in the photo might be "real." (And, the fact that she wanted it to be real just isn't enough.)

[Bigh4u2]

“This is just someone who owned the same rug or quilt and figured he could claim responsibility for the document.”

Possibly, but at this point, I wouldn’t trust the first one is real either.

[Sibre Fan]

That graphic is amazing! How did you do that?

[Lundy_s Lane II]

Is the only reason to doubt the Orly 1964 certification photograph the background cloth?

Couldn't this have been photoshopped by this alleged forger?

Isn't it verified that E.F. Lavendar was the Registrar in 1961? So does that not lend validity to the Orly certification.

And the real value of the certification is that it points to the book and page in an official birth registry.

[El Sordo]

Yep. I do believe he’s the only other one.

[Sibre Fan]

Is the only reason to doubt the Orly 1964 certification photograph the background cloth?
No. There are multiple reasons specific to the Hoax Pics, including:

Hoax Pic 1, which matches Orlys pic exactly, shows that a coin was made to create the "seal." See ForGod'sSake's great graphic at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2309830/posts?page=548#548

Hoax Pic 1, which matches Orlys pic exactly, is of much higher resolution and detail. You can always resize a photo to make the file larger, but you can't add in details. When you resize a low-resolution photo, you lose detail. Hoax Pic 1 has much greater detail.

Hoax Pic 2 shows the coin with a copy of the document (probably not the same document as Pic 1). As noted above, it is clearly an imprint of a coin.

Hoax Pic 2 & 4 show the "typo" in Maieen name, which is covered up by a stain on Hoax Pic 1 - and Orly's Pic.

I'm sure that there are several more points, but these are the easiest ones to see.

Isn't it verified that E.F. Lavendar was the Registrar in 1961?
If there was actual verification of an E.F. Lavendar as Kenyan registrar at the time, I missed it.What I saw verified was that there were Lavendars in Kenya at the time, and there is a picture of an Eric Lavendar on the web. I saw speculation that that Eric Lavendar may have been the E.F. Lavender.

And the real value of the certification is that it points to the book and page in an official birth registry.
Except that the book and page number matches up generally to the books that were used in Australia. If people have uncovered similar evidence regarding Kenyan registrations, I missed it.