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

Originally posted by aptness
This was already addressed.

The certificate number ‘theory’ is another non-issue.

You might be right, but I don't think that has been proven conclusively. Even if you are right, searching serial numbers, within a plausible range might be useful. There may still be someone whose record, i.e., birth certificate is on file with the same number as Obama's, or whose record may have been removed from the files.

Given the storng allegations of computer enabled forgery, looking into the matter further, is not unreasonable.

If this was scanned from an original doc that was black on white, layers extracted and all that, it's a bit shady that some of the layers are different colors that are close to the hue of the background it will later be pasted on. OCR would not know what colored background it will eventually be pasted onto. I have never used Omnipage so maybe someone who has can shed some light on this.

reply to post by aptness


You want proof but you are not presenting any proof to back up your claims either. The only thing you are giving is your own interpretation of what the DOH said.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Given the storng allegations of computer enabled forgery, looking into the matter further, is not unreasonable.

Please... by all means. No one is stoping you from “looking into the matter further.” But what you are doing right now, however, is simply making more allegations and spreading conjecture.

Birthers have been “looking into the matter” for 3 years. Have you gotten any proof of anything?

Originally posted by Kalki2012
reply to post by ZeroPointEnergy

 

Now suppose someone says that - ok - those were automatically generated commands referencing the different layers and instructing different readers to rotate/resize that particular layer. I don't know as yet if that's a likelihood. But then a bitmapped (1-bit) image should be either black or transparent. Why would it create separate color values for the same doc?

If the commands were all exactly the same then I think that could be a possibility, however the commands are different. Watch the video again.
Anyway check it out.
I also will confirm it. I have Adobe Illustrator at work. I can look at it next week.

Originally posted by Kalki2012
If this was scanned from an original doc that was black on white, layers extracted and all that, it's a bit shady that some of the layers are different colors that are close to the hue of the background it will later be pasted on. OCR would not know what colored background it will eventually be pasted onto. I have never used Omnipage so maybe someone who has can shed some light on this.

Did you see this yet?



EDIT: I just realised you have already watched this.

Originally posted by aptness
Birthers have been “looking into the matter” for 3 years.

And for 3 years, the President let the pot simmer. Three years ago he could have released his document and put the whole thing to rest, if he had a genuine document. Why has he let the pot simmer and discontent and questions and all sorts of allegations enflame people?

Have you gotten any proof of anything?

How long has the "real" document been available. 72 hours? It's all but been proved a forgery already. I think you are setting the bar unreasonably high for the birthers. What do you want, "debunking and fraud exposed in thirty minutes, or you're free"?

Originally posted by AggressivePerfector
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

Thanks for pointing that out. Im a novice at this kind of thing however the argument that it is a forgery is still alive and kicking imo. Im racking my brain as to why Obama would allow such a poor job to be done (if true it is a forgery) unless he is being set up and he does have the real BC, or whomever allegedly created the supposed document made a simple yet crucial mistake?

Or there is an explanation ?

Will reserve Judgement for now and see what happens... still very fishy

edit on 29-4-2011 by AggressivePerfector because: (no reason given)

that's what we need more of is the "why"questions,not because he is hiding his identity,we know that. We need people to concentrate on the big picture like why they would release a document in these conditions?My theory is someone is trying to screw him in a big way and they (or group of people)did it on purpose?Or like one poster said whomever scanned this document did not know what they were doing,still though,I can't help but feel it was done on purpose.

Originally posted by Rising Against
So people continually ask for the Obama Birth certificate and then when It's produced, It's still rejected.

Sigh.

LOL. So we are just supposed to take this obvious forgery at face value? Did you read the OP or are you just a Berry sycophant?

reply to post by ZeroPointEnergy


Yes I saw the video, and it seems there are two separate values for scaling/rotating. BUT, as some people have said that there could have been multiple passes in scanning. As you pointed out if ALL the transform instructions were the same then it is possible that transform instructions are automatically generated. However, even with multiple passes rotation/scale info should not change since the doc would not have been moved around on the scanner. It doesn't make sense.

Trump should just post a reward for anyone who can come forward with a genuine Hawaiian birth certificate with the number: 61 10641.

Will the real 61 10641 stand up, please.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
How long has the "real" document been available. 72 hours? It's all but been proved a forgery already. I think you are setting the bar unreasonably high for the birthers.

Unreasonably high? You mean like the birther standards for Obama?

Obama released a certified certification of live birth, the document the state issues to everyone, months before the election. He won said election. The Congress certified Obama’s election without a single objection. He would have to have received background checks by intelligence agencies to get his security clearances. This wasn’t good enough for you.

The Republican governor of Hawaii and her Director of the Department of Health confirmed Obama was born in Hawaii. That wasn’t good enough for you birthers. The Director checked again and put out an official statement confirming Obama’s vital records confirm he was born in Hawaii. That wasn’t enough.

All these people have stated, on record, and some of them on camera, that Obama was born in Hawaii and the original records confirm this.

You demanded the long form birth certificate for years because, according to you, that was the only way to resolve the issue. The new Director of the Department of Hawaii agreed to a waiver of the department’s policy, witnessed the copies being made and released the copies. Obama releases the long form birth certificate and it’s still not enough.

That’s reasonable?!

What were your standards for McCain? Bush? How about Clinton? Reagan? Carter? Your standards when it came to citizenship and eligibility were none then. And you want to talk about reasonableness?

You birthers are so committed to your beliefs that you can’t recognize reasonableness even if it was a dentist with bleached hair born in the Soviet Union with a funny accent screeching “LET ME FINISH! I HAVE DOCUMENTS! I HAVE DOCUMENTS!” in the middle of a court.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
did you ever stop to think that maybe this document is the reason she was appointed?It's not that far out a theory really it happens all the time,you put the people in the positions to get the job done(the job you want done) and not necessarily in the job description itself.

reply to post by grahag


I'm amazed by what you guys think you know about strangers - yes it is bold board fairy - I don't much care about the little rules and ways of life of online postings and posters.

Amazing how many people are so into informing of the "rules" "online" good boy, follow just like you are supposed to..

> I CARE ABOUT ALL TRUTH ALL THE TIME WHATEVER IT MAY BE

By the way let me write now like and online fairy, this is not YELLING ABOVE, I'M CALM AS I TYPE...!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!


> TELL ME THIS: HAS THIS FILE BEEN ALTERED??

ON ANY LINE, ANY CHARACTER, ANY TEXT, ANY FIELD, ANY MARK??

TELL ME WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT THESE QUESTIONS..

Now back to the proper online structure as required I'm such a good rule follower now.

Also I'm semi trying to type 25wpm with some care in spelling, for the online spelllling fairies who in the middle of analysis and discussion are into typing errors, pointing them out, drawing conclusions, as though something related matters on a board of anonymous users.

Here is the conclusion you might have drawn if you actually had any clue vs.the fabricated childlike classic insult.

I have a lower than normal at this moment, $100,000 at risk right now in the market - I should be looking for my exit, not typing at a normal speed with fingers all working as intended with high accuracy rates.. At night I'm up late and then early morning pre-markets. Hey did you know that when humans are unrested, tired, the accuracy of activities such as typing can suffer? There are Chemical/Biological reasons for it.

Even though I can tell you are smarter than the average Modern Generation of Liberals, you still allow emotional, physcological, feelings, beliefs, to override flat intelligience and analysis.

I'm referring to the part where I'm both ignorant due to typing errors, and unable to listen or hear Truth based on who you a stranger states that I am.

Your need to be and feel all of those lovely liberal feelings and ways provides for that behavior.

HEY HAS THE FILE BEEN ALTERED IN ANY WAY BY HUMANS, IN ANY MINISCULE MANNER, EVEN IF %100 ACCURATE?

reply to post by aptness


What is it you want to see...?

Go to any of these places and ask to see whatever it is you are looking for.

The term for the period for all these examples was such.

1961 Vital Statistics of the United States;
U. S. Dept. of Health Education, and Welfare;
Public Health Service;
National Center for Health Statistics;
National Vital Statistics Division;

Check this pdf scan ... there may be clips and layers of all this text.... NOT... LOL

www.nber.org...

Everyone else legally CLASSIFIED the term.

Isn't that the point of the term usage question for the period ?

Classified in these terms means arranged or distributed in classes or according to class.

How is that even a keyword when the point is to discern the classes of race ?

It's just a sentence.

In 1961, the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare classified non-Whites, who were not Asian, Eskimo, Aleut, Hawaiian, part-Hawaiian, or other "non-White," as "Negro." The U.S. Census Bureau also used the term "Asian and other Pacific Islander" in 1961, which included Filipino, Hawaiian, and part-Hawaiian. The Census Bureau, like HEW, used the term "Negro" to describe blacks and those of black descent. The term "mulatto," used to describe those of mixed white and black ancestry, ceased being used by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1918.

1961 Vital Statistics of the United States;
U. S. Dept. of Health Education, and Welfare;
Public Health Service;
National Center for Health Statistics;
National Vital Statistics Division;

Race and color

Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics into white, Negro, American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aleut, Eskimo, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian (combined), and "other nonwhite."

The category "white" includes, in addition to persons reported as "white," those reported as Mexican or Puerto Rican. With one exception, a reported mixture of Negro with any other race is included in the Negro group; other mixed parentage is classified according to the race of the nonwhite parent and mixtures of nonwhite races to the race of the father. The exception refers to a mixture of Hawaiian and any other race, which is classified as Part-Hawaiian. In most tables a less detailed classification of "white" and "nonwhite" is used.

In the United Kingdom, the terms "black" and "Asian" were used in the 1961 census to describe those who were "non-white British" nationals. Barack Obama, Sr., as a citizen of the British Colony of Kenya, would have known that his British racial designation was "black" in 1961. The term "African" was not used as a racial designation in either the colony of Kenya or on the British mainland. In South Africa and other British colonies in Africa, "Coloured" was used to describe those of mixed white-black descent.

The consensus among intelligence agency experts is that the Obama long form Certificate of Live Birth was hastily manufactured by an amateur who never thought of using the standard race designation of Negro in Barack Obama, Sr.'s racial designation block on the form either due to ignorance or an attempt to be politically correct in 2011 by refusing to use an accepted term from 1961.

Yes we continued to ask for it, and hey we got one that was printed on a laser printer in1961, and then after 2 and a half years we got this latest piece of generated garbage, which is a little better but really Barry with all the resources of the office of president, don't you think you could have done better?

Originally posted by WildWorld
reply to post by TWILITE22

 

Very odd there is no seal. I know they don't always show up well when copying or scanning them but there is usually still a faint outline of it. Other copies of Hawaii birth certificates from around the same time show the seal, at least partially.

to me it seems as though the state did not want to implicate themselves.No seal,no responsibility.

reply to post by aptness


Are you kidding, he's had more attorneys and money involved with BLOCKAGE of that you say to feel free to do..

I think Trump might have some interesting sucess with Billions worth of analysis.

Originally posted by Opspeculate
The consensus among intelligence agency experts is that the Obama long form Certificate of Live Birth was hastily manufactured by an amateur who never thought of using the standard race designation of Negro in Barack Obama, Sr.'s racial designation block on the form either due to ignorance or an attempt to be politically correct in 2011 by refusing to use an accepted term from 1961.

Good god man. Warn me next time you’re going to say something as absurd as this. I was drinking my coffee.

reply to post by aptness

Don't get me wrong. I have a high opinion of people born in Africa. They just lack the opportunities that Obama's caring parents were able to give to him.

It's a legalistic thing. The Constitution bars the office of President to people not born in territory of the United States. I like Obama personally. He seems like a very nice guy.