Posted on 04/27/2011 6:09:26 AM PDT by DCBryan1
Edited on 04/27/2011 6:22:09 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
(CNN) The White House released President Obama’s original birth certificate Wednesday.
The surprise release follows recent and sustained remarks by businessman Donald Trump, among others, that raised doubts as to whether the president was born in the United States.
Retread 99%.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding
A comment from the NRO article:
joefriday "I'm not going to say that the information on the document is bogus, but I can definitely, without hesitation, say that the document was originally a two-layer piece.
The top layer is the 'black' part that came from a scanner as a grayscale scan. It was converted to black and white and the white part was made transparent.
That was dropped onto of a generic green watermark background, which is what makes it look official. But that was NOT on the original document as scanned. This is very evident by the white haloing around everything black.
It is also extremely evident that a layer was dropped onto the green background because the green marks are very crisp in the areas around the edges of the image, but are very blurred where the black image block covers it.
Now keep in mind that before the green background was added, the original scan could have easily been altered.. dates or names changed. I'm not saying it was. I'm just saying it's a 100% fact that it could have been.
So, this document as we see it is still not proof of anything. I could easily recreate this document with someone else's original Hawaii birth certificate and a generic watermark background."
So Trump, Now What?
The layering issue was the only plausible doubt I had about the document, but figured there was an explanation. Thanks for the link with that explanation.
When we had the FR cruises I contacted the clerk where I was born to get my BC. She asked which one I wanted. I replied give me one of each. After I got home realized that my mom’s name, dad’s name, date of birth and my own name were all wrong.
So I went to the office with all three in hand thinking I’d have a problem. Clerk proceeded to get the big book out with original in it. I looked at it showed her where the typist had misread the original script writing and the one typo. (Dad was with me to confirm my date of birth. She proceeded to enter the correct information in her computer and reprinted the short form, long form and a credit card size copy on official paper, then stamped and signed it.
What I had in my pocket was just what the typist put into her computer.
What we are looking at is what the clerk chose to put into the computer and print out. It is NOT A PHOTO COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT. It is what BO or his minion choose to make public. It’s been stamped with the “abstract” stamp to indicate that material has been left out. He could print it on toilet paper if stamped and signed it’s a form of a BC....BUT the ABSTRACT stamp indicates that material has been condensed, is not complete.
AGAIN I ask: If he has made this public, by law is the source material that this document was created from available to the public?
Oh Boy BTTT
>>> Why can’t Zero produce the same sort of irrefutable physical (not digital/internet) document?
Because the method they used to forge the original web COLB was computer altering of a scanned image... meaning again... an original does not exist.
I think it was reported or at least speculated that the COLB used was his sister’s.
Of course you don't because it destroys your argument.
Maybe one of you can answer my question above.
Lynch was found to be a natural born citizen.
“6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”
But if you could read, you wouldn’t be a birther.
The court in WKA showed WKA qualified as a NBC to show why, in part, he was a citizen IAW the Constitution.
Obama Sr, like the Lynchs, was not here permanently. Unlike the Lynchs, he abandoned his child and left him to be raised in the USA, but Lynch was still a NBC - and so is Barry. And the court in Indiana found the same.
As will any other court, and for the same reason. Which is why no state denied Obama a spot on the ballot, and why his opponents didn’t protest his running, and why no Congressman raised an objection and why no court will throw him out.
Not because of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, but because it is established law. Unchallenged at least since 1844...
How could she marry an already married man? That's not legal, is it?
Don't get too excited about this. Way way upthread folks have noted that the two BCs for folks born a day or so after little Baracky also used the same (supposedly) anachronistic hospital name.
It must have been the nurse. She must have dated all the forms before she brought them to the tired birthing women. The 3 dates in 18b (one Obama, 2 Nordyke babies =3) are all written by the same hand, but each a tiny bit different.
Hoosiermama, you should paste this on every thread about the BC.
When we had the FR cruises I contacted the clerk where I was born to get my BC. She asked which one I wanted. I replied give me one of each. After I got home realized that my mom’s name, dad’s name, date of birth and my own name were all wrong.
So I went to the office with all three in hand thinking I’d have a problem. Clerk proceeded to get the big book out with original in it. I looked at it showed her where the typist had misread the original script writing and the one typo. (Dad was with me to confirm my date of birth. She proceeded to enter the correct information in her computer and reprinted the short form, long form and a credit card size copy on official paper, then stamped and signed it.
What I had in my pocket was just what the typist put into her computer.
What we are looking at is what the clerk chose to put into the computer and print out. It is NOT A PHOTO COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT. It is what BO or his minion choose to make public. It’s been stamped with the “abstract” stamp to indicate that material has been left out. He could print it on toilet paper if stamped and signed it’s a form of a BC....BUT the ABSTRACT stamp indicates that material has been condensed, is not complete.
AGAIN I ask: If he has made this public, by law is the source material that this document was created from available to the public?
I have always had a small photostatic copy of my BC from the early ‘50s. It has hand-written info in the boxes.
In the ‘70s, I got a county-issued BC with info edited and typed into a different form that then got signed and received a raised stamp seal.
Recently, I got a “long form” BC from the state. It is a photocopy of the same exact hand-filled document as my old small one, except enlarged on security paper with border.
Only this most recent state-issued BC is acceptable to the government these days.
“Obama Sr, like the Lynchs, was not here permanently. Unlike the Lynchs, he abandoned his child and left him to be raised in the USA, but Lynch was still a NBC - and so is Barry. And the court in Indiana found the same.”
So that ‘unlike’ would mean ‘totally different circumstance’ and therefore not the same at all.
“and so is Barry.”
Not according to the Constitution. Let’s have a trial based on that ‘unlike’ bit mentioned above and settle it once and for all.
Feel free to do with it as you choose.
You are right, that was the line in the past as was “it is missing”...so more questions to be answered.
I put it on one thread, have to run to PO but may post it elsewhere too. It’s essential for understanding what’s going on.
And because the original doofus forger used “African” they have to keep using it. They really painted themselves into a corner.
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.