OBAMA’S FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE: why I’m right, and they’re wrong!

Townhall ^ | 7/15/08 | Polarik

[pissant]

OK, it’s time to let the genie out of the bottle., and prove, once and for all time, that the images posted on the Internet are NOT true, original copies of Obama’s birth certificate (rather “Certification of Live Birth”, or COLB), that they NEVER WERE true, original copies, and if anyone tells you anything different, that they are flat-out wrong.

Period.

Exclamation point.

I direct your attention back to my main thesis – and what I said in my first post, “Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?”

I theorized that the fuzzy outline found in between the letters of the data fields on the Kos image is a dead giveaway that these letters were made by a graphics program.

All one needs to do to prove that Kos image was altered, is to view the space between the double “s” in Obama’s (alleged) middle name, “HUSSEIN,” under increased magnification, such as making the image 300% or larger.

Now, if you had a graphics program that could enlarge “HUSSEIN,” up to pixel level, the smallest unit of the image that can be seen, and look just at the pixels in the vertical space between the double “S,” you will see only FOUR (3) PIXELS, out of about 120 pixels, that are colored any shade of green.

Check it out:

Zoom in on this image. Notice how similar are the HUSSEINs?

If you are unable to zoom in far enough, Here's a close-up view of the pixels:

That second “HUSSEIN” was added by a graphics program that works with 8-bit, 256 color bitmaps. When one opens an image of a different format, let’s say the Kos JPG, it temporarily converts that image format to an 8-bit, 256 color bitmap.

Now, you can re-save your image back to JPG, but when you do, you do not get a bit-for-bit copy because JPG files are 24-bit, 16.7 million colors versus 8-bit, 256 color bitmaps. Hence, the loss of color pixels.

Why is this significant?

Because when you look at any other image that really is a true copy of an original COLB, the space between letters mostly contains green-shaded pixels. These green pixels come from the green part of the pattern that is found on the actual paper document.

As an example, compare the letters, “BIRT” taken from “DATE OF BIRTH” on image crops taken from both Obama’s COLB and DeCosta’s COLB and enlarged to show the pixels.

First, OBama's:

Now, DeCosta's

Both crops are approximately the same size, the same resolution, and the same JPG compression ratio.

Clearly, when comparing Obama’s to DeCosta’s, there is very little in the way of green shaded pixels between the letters on the Obama image as compared to the DeCosta image.

I can tell you what is NOT the cause of this difference:

Laser Printing

Anti-Aliasing

JPG artifacts

There is only ONE way for the lack of any green-shaded pixels to occur on the image.

Only ONE way for the predominance of white and grayish pixels to occur on the image.

And, that way is by importing the original scan as an 8-bit, 256 color bitmap into a graphics program and proceeded to change/add text to the image.

Don’t believe me? Then take another look at the "HUSSEINs" again on this modified Kos image right below Obama’s middle name:

Can you see the similarity at normal size? Here's a close-up:

It should be obvious to anyone seeing this that if I can add the name, “HUSSEIN,” to where it looks pretty darn close to the Kos image “HUSSEIN,” then the claim that the Kos image is a direct copy of a laser printed document is BLOWN CLEAR OUT OF THE WATER!

Now, if the forger was smarter, he or she would have altered the text using a 24-bit JPG editor and would have produced a higher-quality forgery as a result.

Here's what it could have looked like if MS Paint were used to modify the text. Again, look at the two HUSSEIN's. The one below is much higher in quality than the one in the original Kos image.

Here's a closeup of the "new and improved" forgery:

That’s it, folks. Listen, if I had the original scan to work with, as opposed to the copied Kos image, I could have produced an absolute, dead ringer for the Kos image using my 8-bit graphic editor.

To conclude: I just proved that the Kos image is not a true copy of a paper document by demonstrating why the text on the Kos image looks so differently from the text on the DeCosta image. I have ruled out ALL other theories as to how the Kos image got to be the way it is.

I have also shown that all of the images on the internet are directly related to the Kos image, so if the Kos image is a fake, then all of them are fake.

It is time to stop the fraud being perpetrated on the American public. It is time to demand that Obama produce a paper record of his birth instead of carrying on this charade.

[m4629]

I do have a question for you or anyone familiar with this type of doc.

What I find suspicious is the missing of the “hand signature” of the Registrar on the certificate. Normally COLBs or Marriage Certificates do show the “hand signature” of the Registrar.

Anyone have an answer to this?

[cynwoody]

There is a discrepancy here. Kos's alleged 300dpi scan is 2427px × 2369px, but Polarik's is 1024px × 1000px.

I think we are just seeing JPEG compression artifacts. Here is the same image twice, scanned and saved at 300dpi, but saved once at high compression and again at low:

Low compression (278.8 KB)

High compression (57.94 KB)

The two images look fairly similar, although it is easier to pick out the colored threads embedded in the paper in the low-compression image. If you now go in on a detail, say "This note...", you can see the tradeoff of quality vs file size:

Detail of low-compression JPEG

Detail of high-compression JPEG

Now, for comparison, here's some of that printing at 1200dpi:

It should be clear that the scanning and image compression add enough uncertainty that you really can't tell what went on with the image. Obama needs to authorize the Hawaii authorities to post the real one on the net.

[Red Steel]

It's one of many issue that that are inconsistent with the Obama's BC to a genuine birth certificate. No one can see (some think they do - Xray vision) the raised seal on the BC, unless you use a graphics program that uses a filter. Even doing that, you cannot make out anything but scratch and what looks like a circled ink-stamp. The signature does not show up at all except a rectangular discoloration area found also through a graphics filter.

At this time, the Obama campaign and KOS have refused to rescan the paper document front and back and republish it back online. But that's impossible to do if they only have an altered BC jpg image from the front. Hawaii has said that they emboss and sign the backside on their issued birth certificates.

[brushcop]

OUTSTANDING work pissant, that’s why I love FR, there’s always someone that has expertise in some area that gets to the truth. Thank you for you perseverence and diligence.

[pissant]

See polariks original analysis regarding scanned versus computer generated text and the shawdowing, which is present on both of your zoomed scans.

[Faith]

I appreciate your persistent pursuit of the truth. Thank you.

[FatherofFive]

Great work.

Which branch of government certifies that B. Hussein Obama, or McCain, is eligible to run for President? This seems like a simple question but I can't find a simple answer.

[Kevmo]

Which branch of government certifies that B. Hussein Obama, or McCain, is eligible to run for President?
***Probably the 4th branch.

[airborne]

It's a damn shame that the Dems can get away with stuff like this, with the willing assistance of the media.

And McCain is not going to say a peep about it. Nor is the RNC.

Face it - The Democrats have brass b@lls and the Republicans have none!

[Scythian]

Face it - The Democrats have brass b@lls and the Republicans have none!

Yep, and that is why in the end, the country is lost, good men doing nothing is all it takes, and we are watching it happen, my children will not have an America, and they are young and already know it.

[cynwoody]

I do not work for the state of Hawaii but to assume that they use a graphics program to put text onto preprinted forms is a ridiculous premise ,, you use a text editor... in this case it is probably a CICS or IMS transaction creating a VSAM or DB2 database entry which is then directed to a printer

Plain talk's question is not ridiculous. There are two ways you could produce the certificate we are seeing. You could laser-print the database output on stationery preprinted with the green pattern and Hawaii insignia and black border (or, as long as we're antiquing here, you could feed pin-fed forms through a 1403 with a PN train and a mylar ribbon). Or you generate the entire image in the computer, database output, green pattern, black border and all, and laser-print that on plain paper. Of course, to do the latter, you need a color printer and much fancier software. But you get out of having to keep the preprinted forms in inventory. Prompted by differences in the border details, some have speculated that Hawaii may have switched from the first method to the second sometime between DaCosta and Obama.

I wonder if the original document is somewhere. Or did they destroy it after entering its key details into the database? The last time I asked for my birth certificate, they gave me a cruddy photostat of the original, embossed with a raised seal and an official signature. No doubt it costs less to do it the way Hawaii does it.

[Calpernia]

Related:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2040486/posts
Blogger admits Hawaii birth certificate forgery, subverting Obama claims (Uh-oh)

Cliff Notes of that 3,500+ thread by BVW:

I think it’s a great thread. Learned a whole lot. The beginning of the jet age — Honolulu Airport terminal history — Indonesian politics. Hawaii birth certificates. Mercer Island High School. David led quite an exhaustive discussion of “natural born” law. Horribly unsettled, that area of law! Citizenship is a different story.
Also curious for what we have not been able to learn much about. Stanley and Barrack in Indonesia, Stanley’s travels during the few weeks around the time of Barrack’s birth. IIRC, we seem to know only that she was in Mercer Island VERY soon — not many days at all — after he was born. And that some there said she came to Mercer Island from Canada. No direct evidence of the marriage or wedding of Stanley and Obama Sr.. And no contemporaneous story from a witness, doctor or nurse, no published report in the papers of his birth. And from camp Obama, no more reliable information about or non-questionable release of the birth cert.

[m4629]

Thanks very much.

Being a low-tech man I could only look for strange things to the nake eye :-D

[pissant]

The perfect quisling candidate. Why did he travel to Pakistan as a college kid?

[airborne]

Don’t right America off just yet, FRiend.

All you have to do is look at all the brave, young patriots currently serving in the Armed Forces to know that the pendulum will swing back towards liberty.

God’s will be done!

[Calpernia]

Bringing Phil’s link over from the other thread:

http://forums.gunboards.com/showpost.php?p=396421&postcount=1
Obama visited Karachi in 1981

[null and void]

We have one...

..who can see!

[null and void]

Great job on the “background” investigation!

*GROAN*

[null and void]

I understood “of,” “and,” and “the.”

I bet you don't.

Without looking it up, what does "the" mean in Robert the Bruce?

[null and void]

FatherofFive ~ Which branch of government certifies that B. Hussein Obama, or McCain, is eligible to run for President?

Kevmo ~ ***Probably the 4th branch.

That's not a 4th branch.

It's a 5th Column...