Posted on 01/09/2017 2:36:31 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
An investigator who was commissioned by now-retired Sheriff Joe Arpaio to find out whether the document President Obama presented as his birth certificate is real says there’s now a 10th feature of the document that shows it’s fraudulent.
Investigator Mike Zullo, who joined with Arpaio in a Dec. 15 news conference disclosing nine other elements that experts concluded were copied to create Obama’s document, released a video to WND explaining the additional evidence.
It explains that two stamps on the Obama document not only were identical in angle to the stamps on another birth certificate – that of Johanna Ah’nee from the same time period – they also had the identical vertical relationship.
This despite the fact that the “stamps” purportedly were hand applied days apart.
“What are the odds that both the stamps in box 20 and the stamps in box 22 would have the exact same corresponding angles even though they were stamped 16 days apart?” the video asks.
That means they almost certainly were digitally copied from the Ah’nee certificate then dragged together and pasted onto Obama’s, the video explains.
Zullo explained that the fact the two stamps are an exact match vertically reveals that they were taken as a group.
“The fact that there is no vertical displacement indicates the exact vertical and horizontal alignment of the stamps are an exact copy from the Ah’nee certificate … reinforcing the claim that the Ah’nee [document] is without question a source document.”
It eliminates, too, he said, any chance that the date stamps were placed by hand on the Obama document.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
You keep posting legal smoke screens without ever explaining why he posted a counterfeit birth certificate .
I am getting paid to point out your fake arguments, but I don't have a clue why you keep showing up posting useless arguments that have zero effect on my opinion, unless you are being paid as well.
The PDF image of a birth certficate posted online at whitehouse.gov is not “counterfeit” therefore there is no reason to explain anything about it.
The Constitution of the United States is not a “legal smoke screen.” It and the statute law and case law under it are the supreme law of the land.
You’re certainly are entitled to your opinion. I have a different opinion. Neither of us are in a position to adjudicate the facts but actual and official Triers of Fact (judges) who are in a position to adjudicate the facts have never ruled that there is a forgery, however they have seen second generation hard copies of the birth certificate sent directly from the Hawaii Department of Health to make their determinations and not the digital PDF image seen online.
I base my opinion on the duplication efforts of Information Technology specialsts who are a hundred times more computer literate than I am who have been able to precisely duplicate the Obama PDF image and achieve the exact metadata (digital identification data)by using an ordinary workflow:
1. Insert a copy of the certified long form birth certificate upside down into a Xerox 7655 or equivalent Workcentre and email the document.
2. Open the document on a Mac PC and print to PDF after rotating the picture to correct for it having been inserted upside down initially.
3. Finally, save the scan as a PDF in the Mac “Preview” program, after the 180 degree rotation.
Et voila, you will have an exact duplicate of what appears on whitehouse.gov (which the state of Hawaii has verified is identical to the original document that is in their files.)
I’m not expressing an opinion. I’m stating facts. The multi-layer PDF was forged, and at least the serial number was fabricated. Not only was a particular 1 digit rasterized (opposed to stamped,) the structure of the serif was different. Any proficient member of the graphic arts could easily identify the differences.
I can’t speak to the illegality of the forgery as I don’t know what’s permissible in terms of the presentation and intent. On the other hand, currency is held to an extremely high threshold where, for example, it is illegal to posses films & plates that can be used for the production of counterfeit currency.
O.K. then, you have your facts and I have some different facts.
You are talking about the way a digital reprographics program utilizes Mixed Raster Content to produce a compressed digital image.
As long as the state of Hawaii stands by both the DATA on original document AND the DATA on the PDF reproduction, this silly debate will continue to go nowhere.
Five years ago the state of Hawaii verified the serial number and other data on the ORIGINAL birth certificate AND on the PDF.
http://archive.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verification.pdf
If anyone is skeptical about the whitehouse.gov PDF, the state of Hawaii can send out a non-digitized, analog hard copy to verify place of birth and date of birth.
For example here’s a link to a photograph of the birth certificate taken by J. Scott Applewhite of the Associated Press. This image was not scanned to PDF. The work flow was original birth certificate photocopied in its binder onto security paper and certified by the Registrar. Hard copy given to Judith Corley, White House attorney, hard copy photographed by Mr. Applewhite.
I’m not discussing the digitized end product. My point concerns the fabricated serial number regardless of the assignee. I don’t recall the number value, but I recall three 1 digits of which two were machine stamped and the third rendered via lithography (complex and unlikely) or digitally via software during composition. The motivation for the fabrication isn’t clear to me, and there’s certainly the possibility the number was properly reconstructed for legibility reasons.
I appreciate the references you provided. Thanks.
This admittedly may be WAY more than you are interested in signing on for, but several years ago a colleague made several You Tube videos to refute the original claims of forgery:
Part 1:
Part 2:
I’ll check them out. Thanks!
And there is the problem, yes it is counterfeit all the cr@p you post is an attempt to ignore that fact. I made hundred and twelve dollars so far, what have you made?
A digital image of a birth certificate is not a birth certificate. Its a picture.
I post just for the fun of it, not to make money. I’ll retain my amateur status!
Barry Obama was very lucky that seven years ago the Republican Governor in Hawaii confirmed his birthplace and was the first person to name Kapi’olani Hospital as the actual place of birth. That was a full year before the long form birth certificate was released.
There’s only one black hole in Stanley Ann’s hustory: the period corresponding to her pregnancy. Biographers and others have located ample witnesses to attest her whereabouts at all other periods of her life.
SA did not give birth in HI and almost immediately relocate to Seattle. There would have been no upside to such an upheaval, and countless downsides.
Stanley Ann gave birth in the general vicinity of Seattle. That is why she remained in the area until the baby was older/not at risk of flying.
Here [as noted by Jack Cashill] is the insurmountable hurdle your theory cannot overcome:
‘The Arpaio report, for instance, noted that “the INS records for foreign flights arriving in Hawaii during the week of Obama’s birth were missing, not only on the microfilm reels examined, but also in the primary database itself.”’
There is no explanation for the criminal destruction of these records other than the foreign arrival in HI, during the critical week, of a person whose identity, were it known, would destroy Obama’s birth narrative. In fact, it was Granny Dunham arriving back in HI from her trip to Canada. First she joined her daughter for SA’s first delivery, then Madeline returned to HI to register her grandson’s birth, so he would have US citizenship.
You can defend the pathological liar, obama, to your dying breath, but you can’t overcome facts. Obama had a foreign birth; the evidence supports no other conclusion.
http://www.cashill.com/intellect_fraud/will_wa_po.htm
“Obama described his birth at Queen’s Medical Center in Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961, to a young white woman from Kansas and a father of Luo ethnicity from Nyanza Province in Kenya, as an ‘all-America’ story transcending orthodox racial stereotypes and experience.”
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2009/07/103306/#hYZ2WhOMw9F8ldrI.99
If anyone can uncover proof of birth in British Columbia, Canada between now and next Friday at noon there’s still time for impeachment.
Peace Arch Hospital in White Rock, British Columbia is 26 miles from the border at Bellingham, Washington.
‘A November 2004 report from the Rainbow Edition News Letter, published by the Education Laboratory School in Hawaii, noted in its lead sentence:
“Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961 at the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.”’
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2009/07/103306/#q7m2QixQT4s6gh0y.99
I don’t credit you with being able to add two plus two and get four. For anyone else reading this thread, the truth is obvious.
You totally discredited yourself with the ignorant and false claim that Stanley Ann upheaved her life so as to be with her Seattle “support group.” After such a monumental falsehood, I’m frankly surprised to see you still posting.
I noticed a longstanding member of FR wondering why you hadn’t been banned by now. Perhaps the policy has changed, and Obots are now welcome.
Or else you’re living [on this site] on borrowed time.
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.