Posted on 08/03/2009 2:12:53 PM PDT by Calpernia
There are now modified photos of the COLB that broke here yesterday. The changes are so slight, that no one is noticing them.
The original one posted in breaking news:
One of the modified ones:
The changes are so subtle, you can barely tell which one you are looking at.
This modified one is showing jokes like: The Font of the Certificate=Schmutz (A Schmutz is a chump, as in you are a chump) #5733=The number of the Certificate, is code for : "Problem with Windows REGISTRY", a sly reference to your claim that Obama does not appear on the Hawaii Live Birth Registry. 47O44=Easiest of all. BOH's age=47 0=O (if you look close you can tell that that is a Schmutz Font "Oh" not "Zero") EF Lavender is ORGANIC DISH SOAP
The original one does not say EF Lavender, it says KF Lavender. The original one shows the number is: 47,644.
Be my guest. Did you save a copy of the original larger image?
I used your large clean image there to look at the folds of the Aus document and from my eye it appears that the letters are layered atop the folds, rather than being part of the fold as in the Orly doc. interesting to say indeed.
If what you claim is true, then that casts an obvious dark shadow on the document in question.
People are going to want to look this up to begin comparing what you claim to have found to the purported Kenyan bc, but I ran into this, trying to use your link:
The requested URL /worcestershire/images/DavidJeffreyBomfordBirthCertDoc65.jpg was not found on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Tick tock.
“A problem with both versions: Mombassa was not part of Kenya in 1961, it was part of Zanzibar until 1964. So a birth in Mombassa in 1961 would not have been listed on a Kenyan birth certificate.”
Actually, the document was issued on 17 Feb 1964. Mombasa on the otherhand was ceded to Kenya on 12 Dec 1963.
So it is very possible for a birth in Mombasa to be listed on a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate post incorporation.
By the way, can you explain the redirect and the change in the url name?
Check this out and tell me what you think.
Fake or not?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2307402/posts?page=1019#1019
You back, Kneepads? Long time no see.
Hee’s a smaile for you....
FROM SHIELD:
Comment Section:
Carl says: “I can’t identify myself here because I’d lose my job. I’m a low level employee of the US State Department attached to the Overseas Service and I just finished a conference call with two lawyers in London and two journalists from Politico.com who all stated that they just left a late meeting at the London Foreign Office and they were assured that “The Kenyan birth certificate is without question, 100% authentic.” I’m not surprised.”
Jason says: kitau says: “I happen to be Kenyan. I was born 1 month before Obama at Mombasa medical center. I am a teacher here at the MM Shaw Primary School in Kenya. I compared my birth certificate to the one that has been put on by Taitz and mine is exactly the same. I even have the same registrar and format. The type is identical. I am by nature a skeptical person. I teach science here and challenge most things that cannot be proven. So I went to an official registrar today and pulled up the picture on the web. They magnified it and determined it to be authentic. There is even a plaque with Registrar Lavenders name on it as he was a Brit and was in charge of the Registrar office from 1959 until January of 1964. The reason the date on the certificate says republic of Kenya is that we were a republic when the “copy” of the original was ordered. I stress the word “copy.” My copy also has republic of Kenya.” August 3, 9:04 PM
197 posted on Monday, August 03, 2009 11:28:59 PM by shield
So far sally, you haven’t torn sh*t apart
Fellating 1/2 black politicians.
bump
Saquin is right!
The two images that are in the article of this thread are mine, which is 856 x 614 = 525,584 pixels and 87,414 bytes. The second, captured by someone else which is a supposed modified copy, is 1000 x 900 = 900,000 pixels and 298,380 bytes.
The second is only 71% larger in terms of pixels, but the number of bytes necessary to provide the detail in that larger picture is 341% larger, almost FIVE times the detail data. No wonder there is a difference.
I disagree. For example, if you at the two words "description" and "Description" on the left side of the document, one on top of the other, the letters appear weathered where the fold goes through.
but everyone is really getting jumpy and making judgements about who is a troll...
Good find...I was trying to figure out the Coat of arms motto....faith and courage. Couldn’t make out the Courage part.
I hate gloating!
No, pissant, it is not. I have the original capture that first picture was made from... I know. I made the one at the top of this thread. It's an E.
I don't know the derivation for that abbreviation, but it's still used for the word "penny" in the sizing of nails, as in "10d nails", meaning "10 penny nails".
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.