Obama's Faked Photographic Past For All To Clearly See.

Originally posted by Mike.Ockizard
reply to post by pshea38

 

The only deception and lie here is the one perpetrated by the GOP during the election cycle in order to fire up their base.

Wake up.

Are you trolling? You think the GOP is just now trying to fire up their base (lol ATS?) by a linking of something posted on the net 2 years ago?

Your post before this where you said that Obama doesnt help the rich is lol. I think thats why youre coming off as trolling (or just naive?).

reply to post by KnowledgeIsPowre


Sorry, I don't see your logic. The polls said that Obama had the best chance of getting elected. The closest opponent was Hillary and men generally did not like her. It makes sense that the Dems would pick the candidate who got the most votes. Or are you suggesting that the primaries were rigged?

Why on earth would the Dems torpedo their best chance at controlling the white house?

Remember, the Bush family is very powerful and deeply involved with secrets of our nation. Bush senior even ran the CIA for years. With a phone call he could have outed Obama. They tried many lies but only to keep the GOP in power. None of it was real. They'll make up more lies in the next cycle.

At first, responding to this ludicrous idea was entertainment but now it's becoming tiring. Believe what you want, it's a free country even if it's all based on lies.

Peace.

reply to post by KnowledgeIsPowre


Sticks and stones....

When the GOP had the reins of power and access/control over CIA/NSA, why didn't they expose Obamas birth lie and prevent him from becoming president? Why did they make up stuff instead of using what birthers call "real" evidence?

I think people are missing the point of the "three arms" picture 3 (park bench, grandfathers arm over Obama).

Look at grandpas left arm, notice the shoulder drops essentially straight down. Notice how on his right arm, the arm drops downwards and the elbow comes to rest around the lower gut. Your forearm and upper arm are about the same length, so if you drop your arm straight down and then bend it at the elbow you'd be able to clasp your shoulder. Notice how his left arm drops straight down, but still has the ability to go diagonally across obamas back and end up above his own shoulder. For his shoulder to be that way and his hand to be on Obama he would have to have a freakishly long lower left forearm.

Try it out for yourself, just stick your left arm down then see how far you can go to your imaginary obamas left shoulder while keeping the closer to vertical downward plane.

Originally posted by KnowledgeIsPowre
reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

 

[snip]

Ok, so if a person with two days of photoshop experience can say these things and you use photoshop everyday you should be able to explain why this is bunk. Ignoring nonphotoshop related points, please explain why all points made through actual photoshop technique are meaningless to proving forgery. For each photo the author says what each technique is used to reveal and what it means. The burden of proof is on you.

edit on 6/4/11 by masqua because: Off topic comment removed

You just can't be reasoned with can you? I just explained it.

It's bunk because there is NO PROOF. NO PROOF. NO PROOF. NO PROOF. Is there an echo in here?

To prove a forgery you need PROOF. Explanations are NOT PROOF. There is no photographic PROOF. It's all just assumptions made on a photo that has anomalies. Anomalies that arise because of photo compression, uploading...etc. All that quack is doing is just pointing out obvious compression anomalies, and then assuming that since there are anomalies, they must be fake. Even though he never had the ORIGINALS to begin with.

For each photo the author says what each technique is used to reveal and what it means

That's nice, the help button in Photoshop does that exact same thing. But it does not prove anything.

The burden of proof does NOT lie with me. How can I prove something that cannot be proven. I'm not the one making these claims, I'm merely pointing out the fact that you nor the OP, nor the author of the link have zero evidence. Is that so hard to understand?

I'm done with the piece of garbage thread. You people just cannot be reasonable or courteous, that would be too much to ask.

"You just can't beat stupid"

reply to post by Mike.Ockizard


Continuing to ask the same question when reasons have been given for why the question is irrelevant should not make you feel better for asking the question.

If you believe the two parties are actually at odds with each other, then GOP could let obama win the primaries. Heck they could even let him win the presidency. They have an ultimate trump card to getting Obama out of the race in the primaries, election, or even impeached. Why would the democrats run a person who could be impeached at any time? If this information is true AND they are odds, they could expose Obama at any point.

So either this information is untrue or your model for the two parties actually being at odds is untrue. I think you're hoping the Obama info is untrue so you don't have to revise your beliefs in the US political system.

You birthers just can't accept the reality of a (half) Negro, (not really) Muslim, (not at all) Commie president. So you pull any pathetic stunt to attempt to discredit him, making yourselves look like complete fools in the process.

Keep it up, please. You are completing the transformation of the Republican party into the undisputed choice of the dumbest people in America. Bravo.

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand


You are asking for proofs of what the author believes to be composite photographs? PROOFS PROOFS PROOFS of pictures that could have come from anywhere, pieced together and Obama shopped in. I'm sorry I dont have each composite photograph that was taken and photoshopped together to show. I can tell you why these pictures are photoshop constructions, amazingly thats what the entire point of this thread is!

If you think these anomalies and artifacts are due to compression, lol.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Benevolent, I will not argue with you. I never stated my stance on this issue, considering the mistakes I have found by the author of that article. But you do make a good point that this is being brought up a few days or w/e after Obama has announced he wants to go for a second term. The fact is that the author does bring up some good points to ponder in his article.

Everybody needs a good cover story once in a while and this is a doozy.

As for "birthers" having a problem with who/what and where the soul that calls himself Barry Soereto/ Barak Obama is or where he comes from. Apparently he is unable to make up his mind which name suits him. I have a feeling that as long as he keeps believing himself more intelligent than those around him, he'll simply paint himself into his own corner. Hopefully there are enough people out there that can see through the ruse that has been perpetrated on them and will make a difference at the polls in 2012...we can only hope, but I won't hold my breath.

Re the photos in the link as well as this thread...lol...yeah...they have been manipulated. But as stated, unfortunately, we do not have proof of who really changed the photos. An example missed would be in the park bench photo. Obama is wearing a scarf...it is only showing on one side. It appears not to be wrapped around his neck, but hanging over one shoulder, so why didn't it block out the wall between his arm and body? It also looks like he is wearing a BLACK sweater vest under his leather jacket...the scarf is BLUE. Being a Leo, Obama is meticulous about his appearance almost to a fault.

We do know however, there is reason for doctoring these and other photos...and further deduction would lead to being a "cover story" for someone that would be used to perpetuate "change" for TPTB...Obama most definitely fit the bill.

disclaimer: I am not a democrat, republican, liberal or affiliated with any organized political parties, religions or groups of any kind. Nor am I raciest or do I hold personal exception for any being, despite their chosen race, color, or creed.

Live and let live...but do so with some kind of intelligence, vision and wisdom.

I don't get it ATS, why are we bickering about this rather than finding the source of the originals for further analysis? This isn't the website it used to be that's for sure...

I found this photograph, shown as is, in the new york times,
dated 2008, before his grandmothers death.

well.blogs.nytimes.com...

'Obama's grandmother and the risk of regret.'
Scroll down about halfway.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7266f577a34e.jpg[/atsimg]
'I will not be big headed if i become president.'

I found this photograph, in black and white, referenced in the
MiamiForObama campaign.

www.myspace.com...

reply to post by pshea38


Dang...and the comments are all about the strokes and grandparents and stuff, or did I miss the comment saying "Is that a shopped image or what?!".

NYT are the propaganda of record, after all.

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by pshea38

 

Dang...and the comments are all about the strokes and grandparents and stuff, or did I miss the comment saying "Is that a shopped image or what?!".

NYT are the propaganda of record, after all.

Aw man. Ok, you got me.
I photoshopped out the 'Is that a shopped image or what' commentary.
My photoshopping skills must be on the up, as you didn't notice,
but I'll own up for the sake of transparency and dishonesty...oops, i mean honesty.

I'll do anything for a story, me.

You got to be kidding me, those are legitimate pictures. It is amazing how far people will let their imagination control their reality. No offense to OP but come on... Seriously!?!? lol

Originally posted by Enve718
You got to be kidding me, those are legitimate pictures. It is amazing how far people will let their imagination control their reality. No offense to OP but come on... Seriously!?!? lol

Seriously? You don't think it's strange that the few images he can cough up from his childhood are so clearly fraudulent, to those with fertile imaginations, of course. Shouldn't he have a few hundred pictures he can point to, or is that the sort of thing reserved to the little people?

It's shopped...but I can't look at the one with him on the bench anymore, all I can see his that old dude's junk through his polyester.

MY EYES!

Originally posted by Enve718
You got to be kidding me, those are legitimate pictures. It is amazing how far people will let their imagination control their reality. No offense to OP but come on... Seriously!?!? lol

I found this photograph, shown as is, in the new york times,
dated 2008, before his grandmothers death.

well.blogs.nytimes.com...

'Obama's grandmother and the risk of regret.'
Scroll down about halfway.

The new york times thought it was legitimate enough to use, i am assuming.
Maybe their imagination won the day.

reply to post by Yankee451


I visit Central Park all the time, I was there two days ago for a matter of fact. The OPs explanation on water not being in the background is invalid, there are numerous benches from that angle that water can't be seen in the background. Another reason is behind the wall there is a hill that slopes down where you wouldn't be able to see it from that angle anyway.

I would be more intrigued if someone would give me a zoomed up analysis of the pixels of the images to help prove the case of fraudulent pictures. Where are the photoshop experts at? I bet they can confirm that most of these pictures are of their normal caliber with no tampering for the time these pictures were taken.

Originally posted by Enve718


I would be more intrigued if someone would give me a zoomed up analysis of the pixels of the images to help prove the case of fraudulent pictures. Where are the photoshop experts at?

I bet they can confirm that most of these pictures are of their normal caliber with no tampering for the time these pictures were taken.

I'm fairly proficient at photoshop, but without an original copy what are we proving? My biggest suspicion is the notable lack of other photographs. Parents take photographs of their kids throughout their lives, with the majority being taken as they're growing up and still living with the parents. Where are those images? There should be dozens from his childhood.

That there are so few, and that so many look so fake, smacks of a false identity.