Posted on 08/06/2009 11:53:16 AM PDT by lonewacko_dot_com
It’s looking more and more like the forged “Kenyan birth certificate” released by Orly Taitz on Sunday was a prank by a supporter of President Obama. Politijab points to an anonymous blogger at FearlessBlogging, who has uploaded four photos of the original forgery and a mocking declaration:
Fine cotton business paper: $11Inkjet printer: $35
1940 Royal Model KMM manual typewriter: $10
2 Shilling coin: $1
Pilot Varsity fountain pen: $3
Punkin’ the Birthers: Priceless
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonindependent.com ...
But it also has E.F., didn't the original have E.K.?
Don't know what to believe anymore, too many images floating around, but I guess that was the whole intention.
“If you compare the three, the known fake has 47,044 as the number and E. F. Lavender as the name. Both of the others have K. F. Lavender as the name. The only difference I see between the two I uploaded aside from the background being edited out of the Mombasa_Copy version is that the Mombasa on has 47,044 as the number while the OriginalKenbig has the number as 47,644.
The Mombasa_copy was the one that was from the OP, and is allegedly the hacked version, while the OriginalKenbig version is the one that came to light after it was reported that Taitz site was hacked and is allegedly the real picture she has. I misspoke when I said they both came from the OP, I meant to say that one came from there and the other was from a post from SO where he had uploaded it which he posted around the time he updated the OP.”
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread487621/pg104
I think we need to start PUNKING them.
WITH PICTURES
I think that the folds are different on Photo 2 than on Photo 1 and on the Orly Photo. I also agree that the rust spot is missing on Photo 2 — or is different. But - blow up that area and what you see is a typo! (Maieen) On the Orly photo, the “typo” area is covered up. Statistically possible? Yes, but hard to swallow.
So the key is in the first photo. That looks identical to Orlys. The folds appear the same, the stain’s the same - everything looks the same. Is it? And, if so, how can one tell whether that photo is (a) the exact same as Orlys and (b) not copied from somewhere else on the web?
Thanks,
I think what can clear this up is to compare the stamp in the bottom left to a 2 Shilling coin. If you negative the color, it should stand out and then google a 2 shilling coin to see how similar.
Guess it a waiting game until the results from Orly.
I sure fear for her though if she does have something in her possession or if she ever busts this thing wide open, I have the distinct feeling these people don't play nice.
Dream on.
Someone already posted the fact that it was “layered” or digitally altered from the original.
Photoshop layering? LOL!
Photoshop uses layers only during the image editing process. When you create a finished image from a Photoshop document, it lays down the layers on top of each other in sequence. There are no layers in the finished image. You cannot recover the layers from the finished image. To see the layers, you need the original Photoshop document file the digital artist used, not the JPEG (or whatever) that it was used to create.
There’s a legal requirement for that?
There are penalties for that?
Thanks,
I think what can clear this up is to compare the stamp in the bottom left to a 2 Shilling coin. If you negative the color, it should stand out and then google a 2 shilling coin to see how similar.
WOULD YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU FIND OUT?
The funny thing is that Dave Weigel is neck deep in this fraud.
The antidote to this the “discovery” a full form Hawaiian BC showing 0 really was born there.
Not if he/she just gave her an image
Yes, but you cannot just file something in federal court and ask for subpoenas to be issued to see if what you filed is real. You have to, at a minimum, explain where you got the document (Orly's motion doesn't say anything about that), and present at least some evidence suggesting that it might be real. If it turns out that Orly got this in the mail from some anonymous sender, and ran to file it in court without doing any due diligence, the judge will not look kindly on her.
Because I have been a skeptic about all of this, I think it best if others see this for themselves instead of someone just saying it. If the stamp in the original one was made with a coin that the person in this blog claims to use, it should close the book on this one.
You are talking about Obama's internet Hawaiian BC, aren't you?
Yes you appear to be logged on. I must say that boiling thousands of often detailed posts are hard to boil down to one word. Having followed this for the last few days I can attest that many questions were asked and answered multiple times with comprehension skills in short supply. So if you want one heck on an interesting education it’s there to read. Otherwise considered it some more of O’s work which is to take us down.
God Bless,
Mc
Does that mean that we "rule" our country by emotions and not by our Constitution???
Click the cert.
Rule 901(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence says that when you file a document wirh a federal court you have to establish, at least prima facie, that it is what it purports to be.
There are penalties for that?
A lawyer who files a motion with a federal court without conducting sufficient investigation to determine that the facts stated are accurate can get sanctioned under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
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.