Obama's NEW Birth Certificate proven to be fake hours after release

I just love the way this man puts it all together. He says it so well as usual. More to ponder on all of this and it still has a long way to go before it's over.

reply to post by esteay812


One theory I've heard is that if this provoked an impeachment process, an impeachment of an illegitimate President would actually provide a basis for legitimacy that he does not actually have.
Here is the statement from Ann Barnhardt

Why? Because if Obama is impeached, the impeachment proceeding ITSELF would establish a legal precedent affirming his legitimacy as POTUS. Impeaching him would actually give him the full rubber-stamping of legal affirmation by the Congress AND the SCOTUS.

From Ann Barnhardt
Lone Tree, Colorado

twg2a.wordpress.com...
April 26, AD 2011

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Not a good idea to impeach, just fire the guy.

reply to post by NuclearPaul


Has anyone actually thought of passing this info on to Trump? If he's genuinely interested in proving the truth about Obama then someone needs to pass it on to him and let him run with it.

Originally posted by hawaii50th
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Not a good idea to impeach, just fire the guy.

edit on 28-4-2011 by hawaii50th because: (no reason given)

Anne suggests the matter be turned over to law enforcement.

Originally posted by justyc
reply to post by NuclearPaul

 

Has anyone actually thought of passing this info on to Trump? If he's genuinely interested in proving the truth about Obama then someone needs to pass it on to him and let him run with it.

Maybe trump really has some dirt on him, and maybe that's why he suddenly decided to release the BC. Cmon, why'd he spend 2 mill fighting it, and now suddenly he decides it's time to reveal it? What's trump got on him?

So for kicks I used one of my kids birthday balloon forms they come home with every month to show optimization vs no optimization. I used 2 different pens, and a pencil to fill in some randomness (and maybe cheer up the anger)

First one up no optimization applied just scan, crop, and convert to .pdf now open in illustrator with layers panel shown.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d9b46dd0f619.jpg[/atsimg]

Here is the same .pdf except optimization was applied. Layers panel open to show... well ya know.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3985f0fd73eb.jpg[/atsimg]

Actually, anyone with Adobe Acrobat/Reader Pro can check this:

1) Open in Adobe Acrobat Pro.
2) Click 'Advanced' > 'Print Production' > 'Output Preview...'
3) Next to 'Show' there's a drop down menu, scroll through it.
4) 'Images' will show the background with text seemingly edited out of it, 'Line Art' will show just the text, no background.

This shows that this isn't just a raw scan and is, at the very least, a 'cleaned up' scan of the birth certificate.

The problem is even if it were fake or he were born out of a test-tube in a underground Human-Alien facility, we still wouldn't be able to do a damn thing.......people out there need to this.....UNLESS we have an equal power -I mean benevolent alien, light being, 6th dimensonal being, and what not backing up for us......we -the people- have chance to make thing right. Believe you me, if we somehow hallucinate that we -the people- have the power to change the gove't and keep pushing it....we shall be labeled as terrorists by them and ridiculed by the rest of the world (maybe not the world, but you get the idea)......and nothing will change....well, one thing is changed, that are us (outspeaker conspiracy theorists, birthers, we who are delusional enough to take on the gove't) down in Guantanamo getting water-boarding or worse.

This thread is pointless. We have more to worry about besides where our president was born. It's just a distraction.


Dumb people!

birthers arn't too bright.

They actually think that the GOP/Neocons would have missed this trick in the election campaign in 08. You know those neocons that just make stuff up anyway to smear the opposition. Like accusing the clintons of drug running & murder. Yeah those poeple would have missed this...right...

thats how detached from reality birthers are. Staggering.

i think the real meat of the issue is the layering of the "Date Accepted by Local Reg Aug- 8 1961" on the birth certificate . Please watch the video and let me know if this might be a real issue.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Connector

Originally posted by Connector
You people do realize this PDF was created by the Hawaiian Hospital, not the WH, right?

You do realize that Hawaii switched to electric BC records in 2001, right?

You do realize that the hospital uses OCR scanning ( which may require 2, 3 passes[layers] especially with hand writing) on old vaulted originals from before 2001( printed on plain white paper) and places the layers onto new current print stock, right?

You can NEVER obtain your original BC. They will only produce copies( using graphic software or photo-copying, etc. depending on the state procedure) that are designed to meet CURRENT legal requirements ( tamper proof design, watermarks, etc.).

If anyone is at fault, it's the technician at the hospital who didn't flatten the image and then passed it on with the new print out, BC package.~ETA~ or the post below may explain why people are getting layers in Illustrator, I get no layers in Photoshop CS5....

Do you really think that if this conspiracy is real, with all the power that people attribute to it (i.e. numerous people lying, ads in newspapers 50yrs ago, etc.) They would release a doc that can be questioned?

~ETA~ In other words, this is how they make BCs in Hawaii now.......

God this crap will never end.......as the world sinks into oblivion

edit on 27-4-2011 by Connector because: (no reason given)

Quoting myself here, since people are still not understanding why layers maybe showing up in some programs.

The Hawaiian officials CREATE BCs nowadays. Do you really think the green background is from the '60's?

God people open your heads!!!!!!!!

I'm outta here.......this is useless.......

.




READ UP FOLKS /THREAD. CASE CLOSED. geez.

reply to post by krossfyter


You cannot prove nothing to birthers ...they will still be delusional even if you show them footage with Obama birth and newspaper from that day

Let me ask those of you who are concerned with where are president was born.... Why are you so concerned with where he was born? You should be worried about other issues!

Why release it now?
It's the resurrection of the PERSON called Obama.
Perfect timing actually.

Originally posted by yeti101
birthers arn't too bright.

They actually think that the GOP/Neocons would have missed this trick in the election campaign in 08. You know those neocons that just make stuff up anyway to smear the opposition. Like accusing the clintons of drug running & murder. Yeah those poeple would have missed this...right...

thats how detached from reality birthers are. Staggering.

Speaking of the Clintons, if it wasn't for Phil Berg, the original birther attorney who supported Hillary, there might not have been a birther movement. How funny that Democrats never acknowledge one of their own in this. One theory was that Trump was a Hillary supporter and is muckraking around to ruin Barry's reputation for 2012.

Pennsylvania's former deputy attorney general and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter Philip J. Berg has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Pennsylvania accusing presumptive Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama of lying about his U.S. citizenship, which would make him ineligible to be president.

Mr. Berg is one of a faction of Clinton supporters who haven't heeded the party's call for unity, filing the suit just days before the opening of the Democratic National Convention, which will nominate Mr. Obama as the party's presidential candidate.

www.theodoresworld.net...

Cheers

I don't know if this has been posted yet in this 60 page thread, I only read the first 10 pages and the last couple. It seems that there are differences between some of the handwriting (like the signature) and some of the stamps or type-writer ink in the image. I created the following two images using Adobe Illustrator with all the layers set to visible, zoomed to a magnification value of 1600%, hit Print Screen on my laptop, pasted into paint, cropped it, saved as a bmp, and then uploaded to imageshack.us which converted it to their .png format(set upload resolution to "do not resize".





As you can see, there is a stark difference between the makeup of the text. The top one has aliasing(the pixels go from light to dark on the edge of the line) which you would expect when a camera processes even a completely sharp line. On some pixels on the camera sensor, the line will only be partly exposed and the rest would be detecting light from non-inked paper. The camera or scanner can only output one color per pixel and thus it would be an average of the surface area it is being exposed to on the page. The bottom of the date stamp shows no aliasing and thus was not processed by a camera unless the camera only output values of black and white. This kind of image is called monochrome. The question then should be asked is why is part of the image scanned in monochrome and other parts of the image scanned in grayscale? On scanners, you can set it to either one or another to either save space or on the other hand increase detail. Also, there is an element of noise to any camera. Even a completely uniform red background with even lighting will create noise at the subpixel level. This will only not occur detectably on extremely long exposures or extremely accurate scanners that this doesn't seem to be. The scanner that created this text is # or was set to a #ty resolution setting. Anyways, there is no noise on the scan of the ink(which wouldn't be a completely uniform or lit surface anyways). The color value for the ink on the bottom image is exactly (65 Red, 86 Green, 67 Blue) using the color dropper in Adobe Illustrator. This applies to all the colors consisting of that particular date no matter it seems where you sample them.

The other strange thing is that other words are different colors. For instance, the word OBAMA has the color (27 Green, 45 Red, 21 Blue) . Still, every where you sample that specific word of the supposed real ink on the page, you get the same value with no camera noise, ink variation, or aliasing (there is no fade on the edges of the text).Interesting it seems that every layer on top of the bottom layer has a certain color of its own that is ubiquitous in that layer. I am not going to sample every pixel on the screen but that seems to be the case. Interesting, it seems the very bottom layer that everything is composited onto is the real image that shows properties a camera in a scanner device would exhibit(aliasing, noise). Every layer on top of that is added on top with no evidence of being processed by a camera but instead very simply being added on top by an algorithm(possibly image sharpening set to the maximum level) or by hand.

For your convenience this is what you see with only the bottom layer visible...at 150% zoom.



Very little of text is legible. Below is the bottom layer only on the top and all layers enabled on the bottom both zoomed to 1600%. This is of course a crucial portion of the document being that it is his first name.



Anyways, this isn't an undoctored and unenhanced image of his birth certificate. It was either on purpose or accidently modified considerably by a person using a editing tool, the scanner, a program algorithm to re-encode or digitally sharpen with extremely bizarre compression artifacts(done with or without the users knowledge). If it is doctored to change information, it is one of the worst forgeries I have every seen making this quite the puzzle. I am leaning towards Hawaii not having a birth certificate and some file clerk with a computer and trial software with some youtube tutorials whipping this up. The president had this piece of art commissioned? Hmm, only if the only person he could trust with doing it was learning on the spot and had a short time to produce it. Anyways, the fact remains, this is not good evidence for the president's case. I know what it doesn't support, now the question is what theory does it support?