Posted on 04/29/2011 5:52:16 PM PDT by Nachum
It didn’t take long for some of President Obama’s doubters to claim the long-awaited birth certificate posted online by the White House on Wednesday had been altered or might be a fake.
But a leading software expert says there’s no doubt about its authenticity, and he dismisses claims of fraud as flat-out wrong.
The doubters have latched onto the idea that Adobe Illustrator — the premier program for computer graphic artists — “reveals” evidence of document manipulation in the Obama birth certificate. They note Illustrator reveals nine separate layers of the document, and claim it’s “proof” the file has been altered.
But that’s not so, says Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator.
“You should not be so suspicious about this,” Tremblay told FoxNews.com, dismissing the allegations.
Related Links Obama Birth Certificate Moved to More Secure Location Months Ago
He said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery. “I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.
Tremblay explained that the scanner optical character recognition (OCR) software attempts to translate characters or words in a photograph into text. He said the layers cited by the doubters shows that software at work – and nothing more.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Jim - just pinging you because there is a question of whether hospitals type up long-form birth certificates. I thought you had said at one point that once the official record is sent to the DOH the hospital doesn’t have any BC there any more. For hospital births, are BC’s typed up at the hospital, or at a government office?
visually augmented - Stig Waidelich has a BC they say was processed on Aug 8, 1961. But it’s not a long-form. Can’t get long-forms any more, even though the laws say certified copies of them MUST be disclosed on request to those who qualify for copies.
And of course, WAidelich’s also has a BC# that is even farther off than Obama’s, just at the time the HDOH would REALLY like people to believe that the numbers were given randomly. Would the same HDOH that manipulated their index list parameters to allow non-valid BC’s to be listed momentarily manipulate the BC# of a requestor that CNN lined up to request his record? That’s a little bit like asking whether somebody who had already murdered one victim is capable of murdering another. If the HDOH will manipulate their records on something big like an index list, what wouldn’t they manipulate?
And that’s the problem. We have no reason to believe anything these liars say or print, because they’ve already shown they are lawless, lie, and manipulate and/or alter records to cover for Obama and to cover their own complicity.
Ping
Good question. Another anomaly.
I want a solid eyewitness description from somebody who was there. Several somebodies if possible.
The fact that Obama didn’t know a BC# and “date filed” that would work together suggests that he didn’t have a valid 1961 birth certificate to copy that information from.
Would be untrue. What if Obama had that dead child's birth certificate (I do not remember her name) to work from? It is ENTIRELY possible that the dates would be messed up if he picked that certificate number, hoping not to get caught. Recording the birth would probably be out of order. It wouldn't be a priority.
Thanks. I’ll have to look at it on my husband’s computer if it’s on video. I would really like to see that.
The copies that the reporters took photos of and posted were white. No cross-hatches on them at all. No seal on them. I want to know where those came from, and what the reporters were actually allowed to see - specifically whether they were shown the original HDOH documents with raised seal.
Post 257.
Ping.
So out of all the parts of that document... Only the “1” happens to be B/W.
I think the output settings from the program, would tell us this, in any case.
Were the Nordyke twins royalty? Special?
PRODUCE:
A birth certificate : NOT OBAMA’S - listing Kapolani Hospital and UK, LEE (or whatever his name is)
Find ANY example.
Every example I have seen shows UK LEE somewhere ELSE. And shows the SAME registrar for that Hospital’s district.
How do you know who was lying?
How did that academic advisor know about Barack Hussein Obama II being born in Hawaii on Aug 4, 1961 if BHO Sr was lying to people, claiming that Roy was his only child? Did an academic advisor have standing in 1961 to get a birth certificate so he could prove BHO’s claims wrong?
That’s the trouble with these documents. They’ve suddenly appeared as supposed proof of Obama’s Hawaii birth, but what we’ve apparently got is bureaucrats telling Sr they know more about his life than he does.
Reminds me of my father-in-law telling his daughter what she really meant to say and what she was really feeling, because she didn’t know near as much of what was going on in her head as he knew.
We’ve got non-eyewitness sources who would not necessarily have access to records telling BHO he’s a liar because he doesn’t claim BHO II, and that is considered absolute, convincing proof that BHO II was born in Hawaii on Aug 4, 1961? Seems to me that this shows that maybe those “facts” were being contested by somebody who was in a position to know.
How do you determine who was lying?
The supervisor of the Passport Office, Alex Galovich, submitted a “cable” that claimed that the retention period for passport applications was changed and millions of records were destroyed. The law required a paper trail for both the change in retention period AND for the actual destruction of the records. There was no legally-required paper trail. The official records showed no changes during that time period. Records that would supposedly have been destroyed weren’t. And the Passport Office claimed that a search of records from 1978 and later conclusively showed they had no records from 1965. The only “evidence” for the destruction of those records was this “cable”; all the other evidence called the cable a liar. How do you determine whether that cable was accurate, or a forgery?
Another or the same mention from the comment section of the National Review “PDF Layers in Obama Birth Certificate”
catera
04/28/11 15:23
“The curious thing, you can open this document in Adobe Bridge and see the dates and times this document was opened, changed, etc etc.
October 2010?
Why would it have been opened, changed and resaved in October 2010.
I mean, there could be an explanation...anyone are to take a stab?”
Who has Adobe Bridge?
Why would an attorney have to be involved at all? A person can request documents online even, and have them sent to whatever address they choose.
Looks like it’s a program from Adobe CS3.
I think CS3 is the all inclusive program: Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver; all the great webdesign and graphics programs.
yeah like the note in soetoros immigration file born in hawaii it doesnt mean squat without a statement that the II checked with Hawaii vital records or that he examined the bc and had a copy in hte file,,,,that is what should be in the file if it was verified.
This article says the WH gave out a six-page packet to each WH reporter.
That’s likely where they got those white copies. The WH Communications Director probably made B/W copies because he had to make so many. I’m still looking for his video segment. I want say that aired during Bill Hemmer’s show. It was definitely before Obama spoke because ME said he would be speaking shortly.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/27/obama-birth-certificate-r_n_854248.html
I’ll post more if/when I find it.
Mike Emanuel, one of the Fox News WH correspondents, said they were shown the actual document. I’m guessing that there were over 100 reporters. So it’s unlikely they were able to make their own individual copies. But they were supposedly allowed to see it, touch it, etc. The article above included what it purports to be a photograph of the BC.
This guy reports at 6:30 AM that morning that the WH Press Corp was shown the document and says Obama will speak in the WH Briefing Room shortly. That early-morning briefing is not attended by many.
That makes no difference at all. And Yes, I know this.
Only two possibilities exist.
1. The BC were handed out to more than one area, and each registrar did the forms in his area.
2. The BCs were in one place, where all the registrars were, and each registrar did some forms.
In EITHER case, you'd be able to PRESENT me a Kapaloni BC with UKLEE's name on it. *IF* he ever signed any from that hospital. OR are you going to say that he only signed Obama's?
I’ve read that. What Obama showed the public was a PDF that was in a format that allowed manipulation and had green cross-hatches, and something that resulted in reporters posting a white copy that had no cross-hatches or seal.
So which of those actually came from the HDOH? The only way we know something is from the HDOH is by the authenticating marks - the registrar’s stamp/signature and the raised HDOH seal. Who saw those authenticating marks? The one that can’t be photoshopped is the raised seal. There isn’t one of those on the white copy, and there’s just a faint circle of distortion in the cross-hatches on the green copy. Who did Obama showed the raised seal to, and which document was it on?
He is most certainly using the BC# from somebody else. But even somebody else couldn’t have that combination so he either didn’t see the “date filed” for that other person, or he thought he’d fudge the “date filed” and nobody would notice.
Oh boy...here we go again...
Freepers, getting all carried away with letters, markings, OCR, layers, spacing, extraneous marks and blotches, colors, backgrounds, curls, and on and on and on...
...buried in the trival...
...all the while ignoring the one substantive thing that lies at the tip of their noses:
The purported document has no required embossed, date and signed seal of the DOH of the state of Hawaii.
It has no value whatsoever. It certifies absolutely nothing because it can’t.
It certifies nothing for Obama...and it certifies nothing against Obama.
Folks, Obama still has not released his certified BC or COLB. If Trump continues to be silent on this fact in the next day or so - then Trump is suspect in this whole charade.
=8-)
EXCELLENT.. I had the same conclusion
From an earlier thread....
Okay, I think I figured out what bugs me about the Obama BC.
I first learned to type using a old mechanical typewriter. Anyone who has ever used one of these knows how they work. You insert the paper, or pre-printed form, and roll the form until you get to where you want to type the first line. I learned during class that the first thing you do is set the left tab and then hit the carriage return so that the carriage returns to the first far left column. Then you start typing. Each letter you type takes up the same amount of space. The letter “i” takes up the same space as capital “W.” Even the space bar moves the carriage one space. After you finish the first line, you hit carriage return again. The paper advances one line and moves the carriage back to the left tab position.
Now, why is this relevant ?? For anyone who has tried to fill out a form on a manual typewriter, its not easy. But there are simple things that a good typist does to make it easier. First is to always make sure the left tab is inside the form. Why? Because, with very few exceptions, you will always start typing in the first column. Look at this BC from Edith Coats http://news.webshots.com/photo/2859969810100435330YKAfiF and also the Nordyke Twins. Whoever typed the information always started at the left tab. Not so with Obama’s BC. There should be no reason why the typist would purposely indent lines 10, 13, and 15.
Another thing a good typist does is set another tab to move the carriage to a position that is frequently used. The precludes the typist from having to hit the space bar over and over again to get to that position. In the two example BCs, sections 9, 12b, and 14 appear to be a tab setting. Not so on Barry’s BC.
As I mentioned earlier, the carriage return moves the form forward one line at a time. This is a gear that clicks once for each carriage return. Its a constant distance between each line. Witness the first line of the two example BC. Every line after that starts in the same position. You can clearly see that the horizontal position of each line is the same in all of the boxes. The exception is the Obama BC. The first line starts higher than the subsequent line. This is not possible because the carriage return is a gear... unless the typist released the form and the re-positioned it lower, again for no apparent reason.
However, the most disturbing observation with Barry’s BC is the ‘X’ in box 3. As I mentioned earlier, each character (or blank) takes up the same space. That’s why all the characters line up through the entire document. However, the ‘X’ that indicates Single Birth is off by half a character. It should line up with either the “B’ or the “A” above it, or the “t” or “e” below it. Like Barry’s entire birth story, it just doesn’t line up.
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.