Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: edge919; mojitojoe
"Why would a hard copy of a newspaper be more conclusive?? Newsprint can be faked too. You’ve give no rational reason for discounting microfiche."

I don't recall if this source ever got debunked, but this might be of interest:

"OK, so now that we have all of that out of the way I will put up the PDFs containing images of the copies for Aug. 13, 1961 Honolulu Advertiser, and the Aug. 14, 1961 Star Bulletin that I have from the Library of Congress, both of the Hawaii Libraries. You can do the math yourself. These are kind of huge, so just adjust the size. Some are copied in sections so that the top of the page including date, page number, ect. are included.
...
[Note: all of the links below are PDF's.]

Library of Congress, DC, Honolulu Advertiser0001
Library Of Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001
Library Of Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002
University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0003
University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001
University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Advertiser0001
State Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0001
State Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002
Honolulu State Library, Honolulu Advertiser -1 of 20001
Honolulu State Library, Honolulu Advertiser-2 of 20001

OBSERVATION: The PDFs for the Library of Congress-Honolulu Advertiser shows no “periods” after the A M Hatchie announcement (two below obama’s). At 400% blown-up there are no “periods”. In the copy from the HI University Library they are crystal clear at the size the PDF opens in. In the HI State Library Honolulu Advertiser, the periods appears to be there as well, though harder to make out. Since that is the most “degraded” of the microfilms, if those are visible there, they should be on the Library of Congress copy also. AND: in the first ever posting of the obama announcement-the last name is spelled Hatchle, NOW in every copy I’ve seen it appears as Hatchie. So, again-clear differences between the copies at different locations. All aspects of the text should be the same in all papers/microfilms.

Here’s where I throw a monkey wrench into the wheels turning in your mind. I will post PDFs of these next images. See how quickly you pick up what you are looking at. This is page 23 from the Star Bulletin on Aug. 14, 1961. Tip: obama’s birth announcement appears on page 24, Aug. 14, 1961 in the Star Bulletin.

University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin0002
University Library, Honolulu, Honolulu Star Bulletin 230001
Library Of Congress, DC Honolulu Star Bulletin-23-10001
Library OF Congress, DC, Honolulu Star Bulletin, 23-20001

YEP, you got it in one. The film shows that page 23 was imaged twice. What is most notable about this is that the same exact page was not imaged twice, but page 23 was laid out twice as you can clearly tell from the images in the copies. It is this way on the Library of Congress copy and the University Library in HI, I do not know if the film in the other HI library has the same occurrence because my friend did flub that copy….not sure he was looking at the instruction page that day. Sigh. Now, remember that this is the page that appears immediately before the page obama’s birth announcement is published on.

Remember back when I highlighted this statement in the article from WND: A comparison of the Obama birth announcement in the two newspapers shows they are identical in every detail, including the order of other announcements preceding and following the Obama listing.” ???

OK Kittens, now I will explain why I highlighted that snippet.

It has been advanced that both papers printed identical lists as the general rule. As I mentioned before, this was pointed out to add more “weight” to the (ahem) proof these newspaper birth announcements lend to obama’s birth story. As it turns out it was done more or less sporadically. You see, when I decide to research something I don’t do a half- assed job of it. So I pulled a sample size of ten days from each paper. I began the splendidly tedious process of comparing the incidence of the same birth announcements being listed in both papers. Mainly with an eye towards how often they matched in exact order.The only time this occurred in that particular way within the ten days that I researched, was on the dates that had obama’s birth announcements.

And I even took the extra steps of comparing editions to a three day range (edition before, same date, edition after) of the sister publication. So, I tried to cover all the bases in a fair comparison.

OK. The ONE and ONLY time that the two papers published the birth list, beginning at the first announcement, in order, was in the editions that obama’s birth announcement appeared. This was indeed the only time that these announcements were printed this way, as the closest the papers came to doing this again never had all the same names listed in the exact same order. I figured the ten day sample would give conclusive data as to if this was uncommon.

7/7/10 I added a new post with the images of the copies that were used in this comparison process, there is also a “Page” in the column on the right with these same PDFs which will open to a much larger, easier to read size:

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/07/07/the-wheat-and-the-chaff/

And I must mention, I didn’t forget the Nordyke twins birth announcement. Remember that it was given to this blog by a Citizen Investigator, and this is the first blog that published that image for public view. http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/01/07 While I was looking at my newest Library of Congress copy of the Aug. 16 1961 (the date the Nordyke twins announcement appears) I happened to notice that off to the side a few columns over was what looks to be a fingerprint. It’s in scale with the newspaper, not the viewer. It’s NOT in the copies from each location. The theory is that these came from a master reel-all of the microfilms. When a “fingerprint” is in one, it should be in all. Yes?

Aug. 16 19610001

Ponder this over: No one can access the Certification Of Live Birth (COLB) presented as proof of obama’s birth in HI. But they cannot restrict the public’s access to these microfilms.

It is truly remarkable how these are morphing since first being discovered, allegedly, at the State Library in Honolulu HI, is it not?"

There is a LOT more (with images) at the site:
http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth/

169 posted on 11/11/2010 11:07:02 AM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]


"[Note: all of the links below are PDF's.]"

Well...the links regarding the newspapers, by name, are to PDF's.

170 posted on 11/11/2010 11:10:16 AM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies ]

To: rxsid
I don't recall if this source ever got debunked, but this might be of interest:

I mentioned earlier about the possibility that the microfiche (or microfilm) had been doctored, but Beckwith said, "I never suggested that the microfilm/microfiche was doctored." Evidently he and mojitojoe just don't like that format as a source of evidence.

174 posted on 11/11/2010 12:37:45 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies ]

To: rxsid

WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;)


180 posted on 11/11/2010 2:01:31 PM PST by mojitojoe (In itÂ’s 1600 years of existence, Islam has 2 main accomplishments, psychotic violence and goat curr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson