His mother was a US citizen therefore he is a US citizen. WHY is he trying to make up a birth certificate?

...

Quote:

His mother was a US citizen therefore he is a US citizen.

Only if he was born in the U.S. And even then, he was a dual citizen at birth with split and conflicting loyalties and allegiances - therefore not a Constitutionally required 'natural born citizen.'

Since the evidence shows this was a cut and paste forgery, another point is that the cuts from other birth certificates would have different curvature even if from the left side of the document from different scans, while letters with little or no curvature were lifted off the center right of the document.

Looking at what I understand is the Associated Press image of the document:

http://www.delawareonline.com/graphics/2....

http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2011....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mTe_zV_Xcmo/Tb....

http://media.al.com/wire/photo/obamalong....

the words "Male" and "Kapiolani" seem to curve with the nearby lines.

Karl, you are critiquing the Whitehouse version of the document which has a layer of stuff generated by an OCR program, and you seem to think that the OCR-generated images of certain characters not following the curvature of the paper indicates that the document is a forgery. I can't understand why you would do this - the Associated Press version, or whatever it is, has no such OCR artifacts and is surely the version which should be scrutinized.

The attached image is double-sized from the delawareonline.com image, with saturation increased so the chromatic aberration of the scanner is more clearly visible.

To me, this looks entirely like a scan of a photocopy of an original typewritten document.

- Robin

If you guys are frustrated - imagine the poor sap who may have put this together intentionally leaving so many clues to prove it is a fake, yet the media has so much control.

Quote:

If you guys are frustrated - imagine the poor sap who may have put this together intentionally leaving so many clues to prove it is a fake, yet the media has so much control.

Interesting notes:

1. The White House PDF's document properties (right click on the PDF, then go down to "document properties") show the PDF was created with a Mac. The White House probably does not use Macs; the Mac used was probably someone's personal computer.

2. There is no "author" shown in the WH PDF's document properties. When I ran my experiment a week ago, I used my husband's Mac to scan my "certified" document. The PDF file's properties showed my husband's name as the author of the PDF. I didn't like that, so I went back and created a guest account to make my PDF file. It now shows the author as Guest Account. What I'm trying to say is that whoever made the White House PDF file used a clean computer with no user name or network name. I find that odd. (Usually the first thing you do when setting up a new computer is give it a name. All your documents will show that name as the author.)

I hate to stand in front of the 18-wheeler of groupthink here, but to me it looks like all capital 'M's on the document are raised. It's what gives the text in this one short word the appearance of running straight on a curved page.

The far bigger issue is the issue of change-history in the PDF itself, imho.

Look at the picture in ARW's post (above).

Note how the "4" in "August 4, 1961" and the "X" in the "Yes" checked box do not fall within the same alignment as other typed characters. This does not make sense if all of the phrase "August 4, 1961" were typed in one pass, as all typewriters allocated equal space to each character (nonproportional spacing).

ARW ... do you have a picture that shows the entire document with the vertical lines?

Gofor, there are a LARGE number of alignment problems with the document; I've already gone over most of them. This is just another part of it.

This is SO frustrating.

Clearly there is reason to belive the BC has been altered.

Why is there no way to verify that (like getting ahold of the document from which the .pdf was made)?

The penalty among "normal" people for submitting fraudulent documents (e.g. for loan approval, etc.) is stiff. Why is there no recourse in this case just because it involves the POTUS?

We are impotent to do anything.

Yep. There is no more rule of law except for us "little people". Prepare accordingly. I have. I am going Galt permanently after today.

I'll know what to do when I see the smoke clouds coming from the direction of the cities. It also means don't ever go back.

Y'all try and have fun with all of this. I'm done with it all.

Best Regards,
David

Have to say this seals it for me. I tried to discount the previous errors in the LFBC, I really did, but I have no explanation for this other then it was assembled.

Guess I was right all along by referring to him as Mr Obama and not President Obama... I never believed he was properly vetted to be president and as such never addressed him as such but I kept my reservations to myself mostly.

So now what? The rule of law has been taken out behind the wood shed and shot - does anyone truthfully expect that the king will be dethroned?

GoForBroke wrote..

Why is there no way to verify that (like getting a hold of the document from which the .pdf was made)?

+1

Can someone explain why this is like climbing Mt. Everest? Why can't we see the original document? I don't get it. It would be so simple to send a group of independent experts to Hawaii to view the original document, take pictures of it, touch it, smell it, and verify it.

... Unless there's something to hide ...

One forensic expert and 30 minutes and this is settled. All he has to do is:

1. View the microfilm ROLL that was almost-certainly made in the 1970s. That's a SEQUENCED physical roll of film. Ever use one? I have. Remember those big viewers? Yep. Common in the "old days" for research. Guess what - the film still exists. What's on it.

2. Now view the so-called "bound book" (which we're told exists.) Less than five minutes of forensic examination should determine whether the page in there that allegedly was copied is actually 50 years old. Among other things the ink can be tested for oxidation and chemical composition. Such a test is pretty-much non-destructive (not visibly destructive anyway) and is absolutely dispositive as to whether the page is 50 years old or not.

3. Have said examiners take a high-resolution digital image of that page and release it. That, plus (1) and (2) by say, three independent forensic examiners should put this to bed permanently.

What's that cost? $30 large for three guys (let WND pick one, let the RNC pick one, let Obama pick one) to get on a plane, fly out there, do their job and come home? Peanuts, and the issue is settled.

That's all that had to happen four years ago. Why was every attempt to do so blocked?

On the surface, this issue seems trivial.

It's not.

If we the people can not see the evidence to get to the truth for something that is so cut-and-dried, we have absolutely no hope in uncovering truth about anything else going on that we are being told by .gov.

If they get away with this, they can get away with absolutely anything.

Genesis wrote..

What's that cost? $30 large for three guys (let WND pick one, let the RNC pick one, let Obama pick one) to get on a plane, fly out there, do their job and come home? Peanuts, and the issue is settled.

That's all that had to happen four years ago.

Yes, and PLEASE let this be done before there's a mysterious fire at the Hawaii facility.

Quote:

Why was every attempt to do so blocked?

Hmmm ... The only reason would be to conceal a fraud.

Unbelievable as it is that Obama et al keep getting away with blocking access to a determination of validity of his alleged Hawaiian BC, the fact remains that Obama's admitted foreign allegiance (foreign citizenship via his father) at birth disqualifies him from the Constitutional requirement. The 'natural born citizen' clause was added to preclude foreign influence at the highest levels of our government and military.

2dogs, yep, but nobody wants to hear THAT either.

Once again Tickerman/Genesis you prove your lack of graphic knowledge. If anything, your photo, with the lines added clear makes it visible to see the curvature in the words you claim does not exist. I've added my own blue lines against your example to show this. Instead of some arbitrary red line across the whole word, I drew the lines against each letter to show the clear curvature. You can see how the horizontal angle of the top and bottom of each letter slightly rotates as you go from character to character over the first 3 to 4 characters.

You are acting like a zealot and destroying any credibility you had. Let it go. This scanned and optimized document can not be used to determine if the released long firm certificate is a forgery or not.

Absolute nonsense KC.

Here's your "K" showing the "cant" you claim makes it all ok.



That's off "Kapiolani" and shows that the letter is properly curved off the top, right?

Uh, wrong:



You have to work off the character baseline; anyone who knows anything about typewriter typography knows this, as well as the fact that typewriters also had descenders on some letters (most-notably on lower case "g", "p" and "y")

If you know the typewriter was a "basket" (sometimes called a "bow") unit with hammers mounted on spring steel if you find low capital letter strikes or high lower case ones your eyebrows should go up; capitals will always mis-strike high on such a unit and lower case letters will always mis-strike low. The latter, if it occurs not in immediate conjunction with a capital, is extremely suspicious as well.

Incidentally, this nozzle previously said:

Quote:

The process to make the document is small, 4 or 5 on a PC using Acrobat it may be even shorter on the Mac using Quark as the WhiteHouse apparently did. The subsequent 5 steps are to show how to view the results. I'm not going out of my way at all, I'm just trying to get people to use some common sense and trying to head people off from making fools of themselves over these claims of forgery based on link layers and clipping masks which are easily explainable.

Someone else posted a link to the NR pdf, you can view the same affect on that PDF as well. Are we all forgers for optimizing our scanned PDFs?

No they're not. The National Review PDF that was posted displayed no intelligence in the selection of layers. The WH copy does. Hours upon hours of my time (along with many other people who have tried various optimization settings) have been unable to produce anything that looks like that in terms of intelligent election of layering.

This is twice you're run utter, complete and intentional crap, and that exceeds my tolerance.

Scratch another Obot.

While it is obvious to those who look that the BC is a fraud, you guys are making a critical mistake in drawing lines under letters as if they all must have the same baseline. Any college freshman graphic design student will tell you that lowercase letters with rounded shapes - o, e, s, a, g, c - are DESIGNED by typographers, (yes, a real profession), to drop slightly below the baseline when compared to letters that have a serif, or flattened, bottom. This is done to visually "weight" the letters as equals and the practice goes back even to the Greeks and their chiseled-in-stone letters that are our heritage. There is not a widely used serif or sans-serif typeface in existence that doesn't do this.

Look at the lines you are reading now and see for yourself: "entire" - see how the "e" on each end is clearly below the baseline created by the flat (or serif) letters in the middle.

So, when drawing lines under words, your lines must only connect those flat or serif bottomed letters for a true result. All type designers know this though apparently Obama's forger and the guy in the video never took a freshman graphic design class.

The alignment problems aren't limited to the horizontal. Every letter and symbol and number of a monospace typeface, as is produced by a WWII era typewriter, fits into the same space as every other letter, symbol, number, etc. KD explained this in his "kearning" post. An important point to also remember is the spaces are the same size and location throughout the document and they all align vertically from one line to the next...IF...the carriage is constant. There's little else to explain that "August" is not in in the correct vertical spaces, nor the further misplacement of the "ust" in August, nor the "4". Which doesn;t even begin to address the dropped commaand the fact the 4's don't align at the base.

The entire document has vertical alignment problems of the letter spaces.

Obama's making money on it now for campaign. Hot off MSNBC.

Quote:

The Obama reelection campaign is raising money off of the controversy surrounding President Obama’s birth certificate.
With a donation of at least $25 to the Obama campaign, donors can get a long-form birth certificate T-shirt.
The “limited edition” T-shirt on the front proclaims, “Made in America” beneath a picture of the president. On the back, is a picture of the long-form birth certificate.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/201....

First, let me say that I don't care if Obama is run out of DC on a rail tomorrow. He re-appointed Ben Bernanke, appointed Tim Geithner, and not a single major Bankster has been prosecuted by his Administration. That's more than enough for him to go, in my opinion.
Now, can I prove that this birth certificate is either real or fake? No. I'm just a guy with a laptop and Photoshop Elements.
But some of the alignment problems have alternative, reasonable explanations, having to do with how the old typewriters worked and the typists who used them.

Goforbroke wrote..

Note how the "4" in "August 4, 1961" and the "X" in the "Yes" checked box do not fall within the same alignment as other typed characters. This does not make sense if all of the phrase "August 4, 1961" were typed in one pass, as all typewriters allocated equal space to each character (nonproportional spacing).

As for the "X", look at what happens when it is typed in the same alignment with the previous characters (per Susan Nordyke's certificate). The "X" is almost completely out of the box, into the line above. So, a good typist might change the alignment slightly down here, to center the "X" better in the box. (Like in Obama's)

As far as the shift between "August" and "4", (in the Obama certificate) there is a shift down of about 1/4 space for the rest of the line "4, 1961" then becoming more pronounced into the next box "7:24 P. ". This does not occur in the Nordyke one.
With the manual typewriters of that day, if the typist wanted to check the spelling or even correct an error (at the end of "August" for example), it was necessary to roll the paper up several spaces to be able to see it. Then, when scrolling it back down to continue, it was possible to overshoot by 1/4 of a space or so, and then not to notice or either not to give a damn. Like in the old saying "close enough for government work".
The typist may have been in a hurry to go on a lunch break.

It's not necessary to use pixel and software analysis to explain some of these things. Some might just be due to human error and/or sloppiness.
Just consider all the reasonable alternatives, then come to your own conclusions.
Until the forensics testing occurs as outlined by Genesis above.