ping for later ....
Thank you. It’s glaringly obvious that this document is a fake. Obama knew he was going to announce about OBL - so he just threw this out to “put the birthers in their place”, and make the issue now seem petty compared to the Bin Laden story.
Scary times, what is he doing while everyone is talking about Osama Bin Laden?
“This isn’t the birth certificate you’re looking for.” (Jedi hand wave).
Notice how fast the BC issue disappeared once OBL story broke? Wonderful timing to make people forget!
What, if anything, do we know about the state official who certified this document?
Whatever the facts are, I think that absent a bombshell (and the pixelation issue might be one) it will be hard to get a lot of people to focus on this any more.
I could be wrong!
ping to the bc
You can’t write about this!
He just led the charge in killing Osama bin Laden.
Trumps the story. “/S”
More Big and Little Pixels (Simple Picture Shows 0bama BC is Bogus)
Addendum.
"When one examines the signatures on the 0bama abstract, why is it that instead of the 1961 era black ink business pen in a thin crisp signature, that instead the signatures are velvet smooth and wide like a felt tip pen of a much later date........... as those pens and ink structure gels did not appear until..."
"It is not the same font, but the same pen which is questionable on three different signatures and dates."
http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2011/05/barack-hawaiian-obama.html
. . . . # 5 , too. .
Since Dr. Sinclair’s widow is currently working in connection with the Hawaii DOH, it would make sense that the doctor’s signature came from a document in his widow’s possession; in other words, it came from a source different than Dunham’s signature. Hence the need of the forgers to piece together the document from different sources and some telltale signs of that.
I think the truth can be found in the differing serifs of the 1 digits in the serial number. But what the hell do I know, “I’m just a balding, middle-aged white guy that hates health care reform”.
1. ORIGINAL: Is the original in a bound book like former health director Fukino said, or is it on microfilm or microfiche? That is, is the long form birth certificate that Obama displayed at his April 27, 2011 press conference taken from a certificate stored in a bound book, or was it taken from microfilm or microfiche?
2. NORDYKE TWINS: They were born one day after Obama on Aug. 5, but they have lower numbers.
3. Would the Nordyke twins' certificates be in the same bound book that Fukino said Obama's long form birth certificate was in?
4. I am having trouble understanding how they transferred Obama's long form birth certificate image from a bound book to a piece of paper that was sent to Obama. Did the certificate have anything on its back?
5. Could someone explain to a non-technical, average computer user like me how they did it?
6. For instance, if the certificate is in a bound book, how did they lay the book in a scanner? What type of scanner did they use? Is the scanner like one people have at home except much bigger?
7. If, for instance, Hawaii officials allowed reporters to examine the certificate in the bound book, what color would it be?
8. MICROFILM: The long form birth certificate seems to be bent downward on the left side. Does this mean that the image came from microfilm or a bound book?
9, If it came from a bound book, why isn't the certificate arranged and attached in the book in a way so that a person could easily slip it out of the book to scan it? Why do you have to carry the WHOLE book to the scanner, when one piece of paper would do?
10. GREEN BACKGROUND: Why is there a green background?
11. June 2007: Date stamped on Obama's short form we see on the FactCheck site.
12. June 2007: Why did Obama order a new Hawaii birth certificate in June 2007? Did he simply lose his long form in 2007 or earlier? People lose birth certificates all the time, but I find it strange that the President of the United States got so careless with his long form birth certificate that he lost it. And if Trump had not forced Obama to order a new long form birth certificate in April 2011, then Obama would still be without a long form birth certificate today.
13. Stanley signature: I have a problem believing that Obama's mother signed the document because of the way "Stanley" is clumsily placed in parenthesis above the main signature. It looks to me as if the person who signed it forgot the name "Stanley" and clumsily tried to add it to the main body of the signature, but for some unknown reason put it in parenthesis, even though "Stanley" was Obama's mother's legal first name. That is, why not just write "Stanley" WITHOUT parenthesis, because the parenthesis makes it look as if the name "Stanley" does not really belong there.
14. Stanley signature: I have looked at several signatures of Obama's mother on the internet, and it seems that she usually wrote out "Stanley" or used "S" when signing documents. Also, I didn't find that Obama's mother put parenthesis around "Stanley" in any of her signatures. NOTE: To me, for anyone to put parenthesis around their first name on a birth certificate would be bizarre.
15. Stanley name: Maybe when Obama's mother was growing up she came to resent the Stanley first name because it is normally a boy's name, but it looks like when it came to signing documents, she had no hesitation in signing "Stanley."
16. So, as I said, Obama's mother's signature just does not look right to me. To be honest, it looks like someone else signed that long form birth certificate.
Just because you don’t understand some obscurity doesn’t mean it’s proof of malice.
By this point, that image has gone thru a great deal of repeated copying, scanning, rendering, compressing, scaling, processing, etc each of which leaves some odd artifacts which multiply and magnify with each iteration.
You want to make your allegation convincing? File a FOIA on the facts about the fiche, scanner, document processing software, etc ... the actual chain of media, hardware, and software used, then demonstrate how your allegation differs from what the actual processing should produce.
Are you guys trolls from the left or just divorced from reality?
This is a question for you or anybody who knows more about computers than me (which would be just about everybody. lol)
What editing capabilities does OCR allow? Suppose a person scanned an image of an advertisement from a magazine. If it was with optical character recognition would it allow them to change the words in the ad? If so, how would they get the new words in there? Would they cut and paste them from someplace else, matching fonts the best they can? Would it matter whether what they pasted was text or a graphic?
Trying to figure out how this works. Any help I can get is greatly appreciated. =)