State programmer identifies template for Obama 'forgery'

“They are *NOW*. They were NOT then. You overlook the strength of this argument. Hawaii is put into the position of having to argue that a document it previously considered inadequate for it’s own use, must now be accepted by everyone else because THEY SAY SO. You are putting the “change by whim” policy of Hawaii over the constitutional obligation to secure the truth. Any Judge that thinks a State Bureaucrat ought to be able to decide The Nation’s qualification’s for President on their say so, is an IDIOT. (Probably a Clinton or Carter appointee. Those are ALL idiots.)”

The state of Hawaii has stood by the documents that they have released since 2008. They have consistently stated that the short form COLB is the official birth certificate of the state of Hawaii since 2001 when they digitized their birth records.
I know of no state’s election officials (Secretary of State or other Chief Elections Official) who has requested an original copy of Zero’s birth certificate, do you know of any such request?

“The Judges have blocked every attempt to get the matter into court by asserting the ridiculous notion that No individual citizen is injured by a false President. These activities convince me that they are DESPERATE to avoid this issue, mainly because they are terrified of where it will lead. By the way, Hawaiian law says a birth certificate can be provided to any election official who requests it for the purpose of an election. Of course if the state won’t certified it as original, that is a pointless exercise.”

When Judges (including the Supreme Court of the United States) deny or dismiss a civil action or an appeal on pre-trial motions, the issue was still “in court.” There have been 41 state and federal Appellate Court rulings and the Appellate Courts have operated in every instance in the exact way that Appellate courts operate to adjudicate all appeals.

“And neither one will tell you that you are seeing the real thing. THAT is the entire problem. Hawaii WILL NOT assure anyone that what they are seeing is genuine. They keep certifying it with lawyer “cop-out” words rather than a punishable by perjury statement. Till someone puts their neck on the line and claims under penalty of law that it is a “true and correct copy of the original record...” as far as i’m concerned they are wasting everyone’s time. Proof that isn’t proof is useless.”

Well that’s one point of view. Another is that the four statements issued by the state of Hawaii are definitive and exact. That doesn’t mean that everyone will accept them.
The former Director of Health issued two statements including one that pronounced Zero a “natural born American citizen,” the former Governor announced that he was born at Kapiolani Hospital in Honolulu, and the current Health Director announced that she has released two hard “certified copies of his original Certificate of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a ‘long form’ birth certificate.”
Hawaii Health Director Loretta Fuddy also stated that: “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawaii.”

Now all of the above may not be proof enough for you and some other people but it obviously is proof enough for those folks who could intervene officially into this issue.

“The state of Hawaii has said that he was born there. That’s good enough for me.”—John Boehner, Speaker of the House

“I don’t think it’s an issue that we need to address at all It is not an issue that even needs to be on the policy-making table right now whatsoever.”—Representative Eric Cantor, House Repubican Majority Leader

“Do you question his(Zero’s) faith and citizenship?”

“I don’t, and those are distractions. What we’re concerned about is the economy. And we’re concerned about the policies coming out of his administration and what he believes in terms of big government or private sector. So, no, the faith, the birth certificate, others can engage in that kind of conversation. It’s distracting. It gets annoying and let’s just stick with what really matters.”—Governor Sarah Palin (R-AL)

“So, is it your opinion that a anchor baby can be president?
Just for example sake, Say a Mexican couple cross the border and have a child. They go back to Mexico. The child grows up to be a wildly popular sports star and then settles in California.

He Then runs for president.

Is this Mexican man, born of Mexican citizens and raised in Mexico, who will surely have Mexico’s interests in mind, qualify? Why shouldn’t Obama qualify if he doesn’t?

If this Mexican is elected, and then allows complete uncontrolled immigration, and the Mexican army crosses the border into California, would we be surprised if he did nothing? We have Turkish women coming here from the Islamic world, giving birth. Their intent is to bring Sharia law here one day. Do they qualify?

Common sense tells us that Neither qualify, and neither does Barak Hussein. The sons of foreigners are not natural born citizens for Obvious reasons.”

There is an additional Article II, Section 1 requirement for the presidency: “14 years residence in the US.” The Founders obviously believed that if a person lived here long enough, their allegiance came to be to the United States regardless of their parents’ original nationalities and also, even if born to American parents, if you live a significant portion of your life out of the country, you should not qualify.

A second generation anchor baby named Alberto Gonzales was George W. Bush’s Attorney General. The Attorney General is number 7 in the line of presidential succession, so yes, in the case of another “9/11” that might have taken out the people in line above him, Alberto Gonzales could have been President of the United States between 2005 and 2007.
Three of Alberto’s four grandparents had no Certificates of Naturalization or Green Cards although both of Alberto’s parents were born in Texas. His grandparents who were illegals might have received amnesty in 1986 during the Reagan Administration.

Actually, it's images like that that make me think the BC's anomalies must just be computer artifacts. The 'R' there is clearly of a piece with the background, while the other letters are separate from it somehow. So if it were a paste-up job, that would have to mean somebody pasted in a bitmap 'R' from one source and merged it with the background, but pasted in other letters from a different source and didn't merge them with the background. The idea that someone would create a document that way is, to me, way more improbable than the idea that the scanning, optimization, and PDF'ing process created some inconsistencies.

The easiest way to paste something is to grab the pixelmap image of the entire word. I'm pretty D@mned certain that the word "Barack" is not likely to be found anywhere in Hawaii's entire database with the exception of Barry's birth certificate if he has one that actually says that. In other words, the word "BARACK" would have to be fabricated by pasting together at least two words. "BARbell" and "attACK" would work, but I doubt they'd find either word in their database either. Just as likely, it might be difficult to find two words with the appropriate components to do it as a two word paste. Most likely it would require pieces of three words.

Modern image software is capable of operating on multiple file formats with multiple documents open at the same time. A non knowledgeable user might not know the difference between a bmp,tif,pdf, or some other proprietary format because the software nowadays makes moving between them appear seamless. Since Hawaii's old stuff has been digitized, probably in multiple stages, it is possible that the database is stored in multiple file formats. In the example, All letters but the "R" are in binary bitmap form with small pixels, while the "R" is in Color with larger pixels.

Now you appear to be arguing that " The 'R' there is clearly of a piece with the background, while the other letters are separate from it somehow." "Somehow" is not much of an explanation. I can think of no reasonable way for the "R" to be converted to Color with larger pixels, and that the rest of the characters would all be binary with smaller pixels, EXCEPT for the explanation I have offered.

It is strange that the Obama birth narrative skips Washington completely. Why hide Washington if there's nothing to hide?

Stanley Ann Spending a Year away from Barack Sr. just didn't fit the narrative of the book. It contradicted it. No book, no money, No fame, and Barack is a "No-body."

The easiest way to paste something is to grab the pixelmap image of the entire word. I’m pretty D@mned certain that the word “Barack” is not likely to be found anywhere in Hawaii’s entire database with the exception of Barry’s birth certificate if he has one that actually says that. In other words, the word “BARACK” would have to be fabricated by pasting together at least two words. “BARbell” and “attACK” would work, but I doubt they’d find either word in their database either. Just as likely, it might be difficult to find two words with the appropriate components to do it as a two word paste. Most likely it would require pieces of three words.

Modern image software is capable of operating on multiple file formats with multiple documents open at the same time. A non knowledgeable user might not know the difference between a bmp,tif,pdf, or some other proprietary format because the software nowadays makes moving between them appear seamless. Since Hawaii’s old stuff has been digitized, probably in multiple stages, it is possible that the database is stored in multiple file formats. In the example, All letters but the “R” are in binary bitmap form with small pixels, while the “R” is in Color with larger pixels.

Now you appear to be arguing that “ The ‘R’ there is clearly of a piece with the background, while the other letters are separate from it somehow.” “Somehow” is not much of an explanation. I can think of no reasonable way for the “R” to be converted to Color with larger pixels, and that the rest of the characters would all be binary with smaller pixels, EXCEPT for the explanation I have offered.

Wouldn’t there need to be an examination of a hard copy of the original document as opposed to third or fourth generation digitized scans of copies in order to make a definitive analysis?

I can’t imagine that any court of law would accept a scan of a document into evidence when hard copies of the original document are available. The “best available evidence” rule is still in effect.

The word “Barack” did appear in the 1961 Honolulu newspaper announcements for a son born on August 4, 1961 and the entry “Obama, Barack Hussein II, male” did appear in the 1961 Index file at the Hawaii Health Bureau listing of all children born in 1961.

“Some of Barack Obama’s birth records have been public for years”

HONOLULU — Lost in the renewed scrutiny into President Barack Obama’s birth records is the fact that anyone can walk into a Hawaii vital records office, wait in line behind couples getting marriage licenses and open a baby-blue government binder containing basic information about his birth.

Highlighted in yellow on page 1,218 of the thick binder is the computer-generated listing for a boy named Barack Hussein Obama II born in Hawaii, surrounded by the alphabetized last names of all other children born in-state between 1960 and 1964. This is the only government birth information, called “index data,” available to the public.

So far this month, only The AP and one other person had looked at the binder, according to a sign-in sheet viewed Wednesday in the state Department of Health building. The sheet showed about 25 names of people who have seen the document since March 2010, when the sign-in sheet begins.

Those documents complement newspaper birth announcements published soon after Obama’s Aug. 4, 1961 birth and a “certification of live birth” released by the Obama campaign three years ago, the only type of birth certificate the state issues.
(excerpted)
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/04/some_of_barack_obama_birth_rec.html

Stanley Ann Spending a Year away from Barack Sr. just didn’t fit the narrative of the book. It contradicted it. No book, no money, No fame, and Barack is a “No-body.”

Zero was a nobody when “Dreams” was written in 1993-1994 and published in 1995. He hadn’t even run for the state Senate in Illinois then. He was an associate in a Chicago law firm and part time lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.

I can think of no reasonable way for the "R" to be converted to Color with larger pixels, and that the rest of the characters would all be binary with smaller pixels, EXCEPT for the explanation I have offered.

The other explanation is that the 'R' on the original was fainter than the other letters, so it wasn't black/dark enough for the OCR or optimization routine to "recognize" it as a black letter. It would therefore leave it as part of the background rather than extract it like the other letters. I've read the graphics experts' arguments on both sides of whether that's possible, and the ones that say it is are at least as persuasive as the ones that say it isn't. Your explanation requires me to believe that it was so hard to find the letters 'B', 'A', 'R', 'C', and 'K' in other documents that they had to use multiple sources in different formats. I'm sure those letters would have been available on other birth certificates all digitized the same way at the same time--why would they not just use those? They found an all-black, small-pixel 'R' for the father's name--why not just use that one?

Your theory provokes an "oh come on, nobody would do it that way" response in me, while the computer processing theory get a "hmm, maybe." So far #2 wins.

I am not going to go through another thorough explanation to you regarding fallacy of authority, or the pronouncements of bureaucrats not being of equal weight with a Constitutional article. You keep trying to pass off that confederate money and only a fool will buy it.

Wouldn’t there need to be an examination of a hard copy of the original document as opposed to third or fourth generation digitized scans of copies in order to make a definitive analysis?

Not regarding the characteristic I pointed out. The Digital pdf file is just fine to notice the difference in pixel formats and size.

I can’t imagine that any court of law would accept a scan of a document into evidence when hard copies of the original document are available. The “best available evidence” rule is still in effect.

Ah, but it a media war in the court of Public Opinion, a PDF file is just fine. You are right about a court not giving it any regard. (except perhaps that of a Clinton or Carter appointee.)

The word “Barack” did appear in the 1961 Honolulu newspaper announcements for a son born on August 4, 1961 and the entry “Obama, Barack Hussein II, male” did appear in the 1961 Index file at the Hawaii Health Bureau listing of all children born in 1961.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but your pointing it out just made me think of an interesting aspect of it. Let us say for the sake of argument that the PDF file is a pasted together document. Let us say it was created by State of Hawaii officials as a replacement birth certificate. It begs the question. Why would they need to Fabricate the word "BARACK"? According to available information, the State of Hawaii acknowledged the birth of Barack Obama II, so they should have a record of it from which they could easily cut and paste the word "Barack."

How to explain this? If his original birth document were a "Born at home" affidavit, it might not have a type written version of the word "Barack." It might be hand written, as Fukino (If I remember correctly) admitted in one statement.

In my mind, this possibly strengthens the circumstantial evidence for a "born at home" certificate. In any case, it doesn't preclude it. Since we don't know what an actual "born at home" birth certificate affidavit might have looked circa 1961 Hawaii, it is something else to wonder about.

Zero was a nobody when “Dreams” was written in 1993-1994 and published in 1995. He hadn’t even run for the state Senate in Illinois then. He was an associate in a Chicago law firm and part time lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.

I guess I didn't make my point clear. Had he made everyone aware of the fact that his father was in fact just a sperm donor who skipped out on his family shortly after conception, people would ask the obvious question. Why the H3ll did you write a book about an @sshole like that? And why should we read it?

Had he put that stuff in the book, Bill Ayers would have stripped it out as being contra-purpose to the entire theme of the book. The book would have been better entitled: "Wet Dreams from my Father."

Your explanation requires me to believe that it was so hard to find the letters 'B', 'A', 'R', 'C', and 'K' in other documents that they had to use multiple sources in different formats. I'm sure those letters would have been available on other birth certificates all digitized the same way at the same time--why would they not just use those? They found an all-black, small-pixel 'R' for the father's name--why not just use that one?

What did Sherlock Holmes say? "Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

I don't think you understand the significance of both the different sized pixels (impossible on a single original document) and the difference between binary bitmap and color bitmap. In computer graphics, whatever is being rendered to MUST ALL HAVE THE SAME PIXEL SIZE AND FORMAT. Meaning the Destination file is a specific defined format and pixel size. The variations we see can ONLY be caused by taking a binary image file, and converting it to the destination format while still retaining it's tell tale characteristics as a binary format.

Let me try to make this clear. All modern software will render in something like a 1024X768 (or better) 24bit or 32bit Color format. We don't do low resolution or black and white anymore. The destination file on a modern computer does not use binary images. It uses the above mentioned format, but it can easily represent binary images using this format. It simply creates Black by turning all the RGB components of the pixel word to 0. In a 24 bit word the bits would look like this: R=00000000 G=00000000 B=00000000 To produce white, the bits would look like this: R=11111111 G=11111111 B=11111111. Thus an original black and white (binary) image file can be represented by a high resolution color display system. (Other colors are created by varying the binary value of the color component intensity.)

Depending on the resolution, each black pixel from the original can be represented by some number of finer pixels on modern graphic displays, say 4 fine resolution pixels equal one original pixel. Or it can be 1 to 1. (but that would probably make it too small to read nowadays.)

What makes it obvious to anyone that is familiar with how graphics displays work is that in the letter "R" the pixels are FOUR TIMES LARGER than the pixels in the other characters. Sure, they can be reproduced by the graphics system, but to do so it required 4 times as many pixels. This makes it dead certain that the letter "R" was stored with a different original resolution than the rest of the letters. Take a look at this image to see what I mean. (Note the difference in size circled in red.)

Your theory provokes an "oh come on, nobody would do it that way" response in me, while the computer processing theory get a "hmm, maybe." So far #2 wins.

I think that's only because you don't understand theory # 1 that well. I have done a LOT of Graphics programing. That particular image of the word "Barack" is sourced from different original formats combined onto a standard destination format. That is the ONLY reason of which I can conceive for how it could possibly have different pixel size and color data information.

If you want to learn more, download Microsoft's DirectX Software Developers kit and read the information in the tutorial or help file.

I guess I didn’t make my point clear. Had he made everyone aware of the fact that his father was in fact just a sperm donor who skipped out on his family shortly after conception, people would ask the obvious question. Why the H3ll did you write a book about an @sshole like that? And why should we read it?

Had he put that stuff in the book, Bill Ayers would have stripped it out as being contra-purpose to the entire theme of the book. The book would have been better entitled: “Wet Dreams from my Father.”

The whole point of Dreams From My Father is “look at how great I am and see what I had to overcome to become great.” The worse his parents look, the better “the One’s” “remarkable achievements” in becoming President of Volume at the Harvard Review look.
Bill Ayers didn’t edit the book, Henry Ferris edited the original version and Deborah Baker edited the first paperback edition.

If you want to know the story of how Dreams From My Father came into being:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/us/politics/18memoirs.html

Good point. So, your saying Alberto Gonzales was born to two US citizens at the time of his birth? There's a problem with that?

Good point. So, your saying Alberto Gonzales was born to two US citizens at the time of his birth? There’s a problem with that?

No problem that I know of.
It was his grandparents who were the illegals. His anchor baby parents were legal.
Some folks have a problem with extending natural born citizen status to anyone with an illegal ancestor but obviously not you or me.

There are some who question Chester A. Arthur’s natural born ciitzen status and his father, William became a naturalized American citizen from Northern Ireland when Chester was 14 years old.

What is that?

For argument's sake, let me take an approach where SAD and BHO, Sr. are the biological parents and BHO, II is born on 08/04/1961 in Hawaii. Can you help me answer these questions:

In the summer of 1960, SAD, at 17, graduates from Mercer Island High. She is happy and plans to attend the University of Washington in the fall. Why is her father "restless" and why does he move all the way to Hawaii to take a furniture sales job? Why would he insist that SAD come with them—leaving her friends and community—to attend the University of Hawaii? Who did they know there, if anyone? What job did he take and how long did he end up keeping it? Did they own their house in Mercer Island? Did they just, "up and move" leaving furnishings or was all that shipped over (would take time, it seems). And wouldn't such a move be expensive? Why would Madelyn leave her job in Seattle to take a lesser one in Hawaii? How difficult would it be for Ann to enroll, and would she have had to pay out-of-state tuition for at least the first semester? What did Ann do in Hawaii during the summer months before school? How did she get back and forth to school? Did she have her own car? BHO, Sr. started classes in Fall 1959. So was he in his sophomore year in Fall 1960? Why was SAD taking a Russian language class and was that class even offered to Freshmen at that time? Did she ever take Russian again in college?

Ann becomes pregnant in early November of 1960, still 17. What other black men were enrolled at the University or living in proximity to the Dunhams or the college (again, how able was she to get around the island on her own?) Did SAD perhaps arrive in Hawaii later than her parents, thus leaving her on her on in Seattle, perhaps with a relative? Would she have known she was pregnant by that Christmas? She might have only been late by a few weeks. When did she notify University of Hawaii that she was not going to attend the Spring semester? And what prevented her from attending? If the family—and BHO,Sr.—knew in January that she was pregnant and arranged for the wedding to be held February 2, 1961, she was still only a few months along: What did she do in Hawaii for the six months? Wouldn't she write letters to some of her high school friends? Hadn't she made any other friends in Hawaii during her first semester? Was she cooped up in the house? Isn't that unusual for a bright, active, married and pregnant young woman, especially considering her obvious independence? Didn't anyone see her or remember her? Was she in trouble with her parents under house arrest? Did BHO, Sr. go on with his life and Russian studies, stopping by every Sunday to have an awkward dinner?

Or, did they send her back to live with relatives in Seattle? And when the baby was born, the birth was phoned in by Madelyn.

The Seattle Times: Obama's mother known here as "uncommon"

Atlas Shrugs: How Could Stanley Ann Dunham...

(And when did phone directories list where people worked and what their positions were?!) ((LOL, you don't have to answer any of these!!))

Thanks for the explanation, but believe me, I understand graphics and pixels quite well enough to get the point you’re making. I still think the idea that the ‘R’ has bigger pixels because it was copied from a lower-res source than the ‘R’ in the father’s name was is highly improbable—and I don’t think we’ve eliminated the effects of OCR and optimization as “impossible.”

The child WAS her grandson. Her flesh and blood. Were he born in Canada by the idiotic action's of her daughter, she would have a powerful motive to fabricate American citizenship for him.

Sorry, but no. Under the immigration laws at the time, as the minor child of a US citizen, he was eligible for naturalization. Hence there was no need to fabricate anything if he indeed was born in Canada, as you speculate.

Me: It doesn't matter. The only items that can change on a BC upon an adoption are the parents' names and the child's name, none of which is relevant to a candidate's eligibility for office. The only items that matter are place of birth and date of birth, and those don't change.

You: And you know this how?

Because I looked up the Hawaii statutes that govern changes in the BC that result from an adoption. I already forwarded you the links before. Here they are again.

For a child born in-state, the law onlys allow for the names of the parents and the child to be altered upon adoption:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0020.htm

For a child born out of the country, the law clearly states that the BC will list the child's true country of birth as the place of birth:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0020_0005.htm

If Obama has a "born at home" affidavit as his original record, followed by an adoption (By Lolo Soetoro OR his Grandparents) it will create a fake replacement birth certificate that looks exactly like what we see.

No, it would not. Since the law only allows for changing the parents' names or child's name, the new BC would still indicate he was born at home if he really did have such an affidavit. Since the current BC lists a hospital as the birthplace. we know for sure his original BC included no such affidavit.

((LOL, you don't have to answer any of these!!))

Whew! Thanks! That's a lot of questions. Question's we got. Answers would be nice.