Obama's LFBC has CIA-61 handwritten on it - ATS Exclusive

Originally posted by PplVSNWO

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by PplVSNWO

 

Nothing brought to light in an ATS thread is every considered "Established" Especially when the OP is that CIA-61 is written on it and the initials of the CIA leader of the time...

Originally posted by Bosko
It's an impression of his short form certificate. This image should make it quite obvious:

If you're still not convinced then I don't know what to say.

Well, there you go. So now that you can see what you apparently missed a few pages back in this thread and you can be caught up....
Go back and read my post and respond now that you have some added knowledge.

How many babies were born around the same time? From what recall there were LOTS.. so many that they had to delay the announcements of many of them until the next week in the paper (the announcements were done by the hospital)...

What I see is basically bleed through from another doc... nothing gives me the impression its from Obamas other certificate....

All the artifacts you have shown could have been from 20 other babies born around the same time

This is the "scientific" approach that you seem to be completely missing...

Originally posted by boondock-saint
Ok, so what we have uncovered here
is

the head of the CIA's initials
reference to the CIA-61
and Ann's address as Kenya

all in written text around the typed text.

how much more damning can you get???

hahahaha

I agree with you finding the CIA-61 part but look at the address for Ann better cause its not Kenya. Kenya wasn't a country for another two years.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

You didn't FIND anything... you INTERPRETED it...
Geesh
It's not a find until it's been peer-reviewed and accepted... until then, it's simply an interesting artifact

ok, I would agree with that.
I did interpret it from what I saw.
So on to the peer review now.
And I guess if that was you doing the peer
then it would never be accepted right ???

I wouldn't peer review anything that someone was CONVINCED of...

It'd be like talking theology with someone who was a religious fundamentalist...

I have to bust this bubble. It's getting ridiculous.

I'm a graphic artist by trade. I've worked on everything from document recovery to 3d simulations.

This is the first run I took on this image.



A. Section A was lifted out and I ran several active filters over it and adjusted to pull a variance of 40% or greater using the equalize and threshold tools in photoshop cs4. I then gave it a general passover for contrast to 60%.
You can see more depression lettering becomes available, but not legible. It does however match up to the visual pattern of the work ISLAND if island is typed in all caps. OAHU in all caps is even almost readable even in the equalized version. Equalize and threshold allow you to push and pull pixels based on the difference in their value in the color index array of the file.

B I took the equalized version and used a curve modifier to make it negative.

C standard negative curve pass.

D negative curve pass with overlayed text. you can see it almost fits. I don't see any evidence it's hand written at all. It's stamped print text, probably from a typewriter, that just left a depression in the paper.



This is section 7B of the form. If you notice that Island and Oahu have an offset relative to the OA and LA almost identical to the section addressed above, but they are in small letters not capitals. It is obvious that this information is most likely overwrite or even over type, or over stamp.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by morder1
Very interesting boondock, Where did you get the document from?

Also what program did you use to get that color scheme? Seems pretty clear to me, expecially the CIA-61... Have you noticed anything else on the whole document?

I would rather keep my editor manufacturer
confidential if you don't mind

as far as other hand written text. yes there is more
hand written text in the address block of Ann Dunham.
This is still a work in progress so I'm still hunting text.

with Adobe or Paint Shop Pro you would need to mess with the hues, In this case a blue hue was used along with color inversion. I tried it and could not produce the same results. OP added the CIA-61. I think by the time someone important see's this thread and the supposed CIA-61 status on the BC, THE OP would be arrested.

Originally posted by lcbjr1979
I apologize if this had been covered already, and let me preface this by saying i mean no disrespect at all. On the birth certificate under race of father it says African. In the 1960's would they not put Negro in that box. The mentality of the time was not for political correctness. It would be interesting to see if any african american members on here who were born in the 60's or have relatives who were can check the birth certificates and see what it says on there.

Having African American members show validate this would mean nothing because Obama's father was not an African American, he was African. That is why they put "African" and not "Negro". They would have put "Negro" if he was an African AMERICAN.

What you should be asking for is anyone who had a father who is African and was born in the 60s. THAT would settle this and only that.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Works for me, thanks for the quick reply.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
Boon, now I REALLY think you are stretching.

If this was voided, as with most legal documents that are voided, there would either be a hand written LAAAAARGGGEEE ALL ACROSS THE PAGE saying:

just because you would do it this way does not
mean that somebody else would also.

It may have been some ladies first
day on the job. who knows ???
she may not have known this
and filed it away. It's possible.

I only have paint here, so could somebody possibly take the high resolution of the long form(posted at top of page 2 on this thread) apply the enhancements to make the hidden text more visible and then take the short form, make it mostly transparent and put it onto the long form so the text matches up?

Originally posted by Bosko
It's an impression of his short form certificate. This image should make it quite obvious:

If you're still not convinced then I don't know what to say.

Hush.. You are spoiling everything for the Obama-haters. How will they now be able to "Prove" that it is all actually a conspiracy?
Ah well, we can be sure that it won't take long untill they come up with something else to scream OhMyGod about. Perhaps they can start investigating why he has that odd skincolour he has and that it has to be proof that he is a robot or an genetically engineered hybrid or a Reptile or whatever and go to the media about it, and if the Media refuses to report the findings at the prime time News, then it is CLEAR proof of it being a conspiracy.

I'm utterly shocked that there is still a debate as to what the BC says. It does not say CIA-61. Even I thought it did at first. So much so that I told my boyfriend that I was actually creeped out now over the whole birther issue. When I couldn't get the contrast to adjust to the point that I could see the letters better, I just tipped my laptop back and VOILA it said "OAHU". It is plain as day. It is not hand written. It is typed. But the depression is not uniform and that is why it looks like it could say "CIA-61". I ever showed exactly how and why it looks like one and not the other. Also, I still don't see the same initials you do.

And, Boon, I am not a "spook". I take offense that you would accuse me of that just because I don't see what you want to see. In fact, because I take offense I purposefully avoid calling people I have been a member of ATS for years. I an a tinfoil hat wearer. You can take a look at any of my posts and threads and see that I am not someone who is constantly trying to debunk and detract like spooks do. In fact, I am one the types debunkers often ridicule because I am quite gullible, ergo, why I thought I saw what you did in my first post on this thread.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Oh come on Boon even you can see that this is the standard operating procedure.
(jokes, sorry if offended)

It has been for, I dont know, ever?

My argument may be weak as I am not 100% well versed in how this worked back then, but just because it could be "some new girl" is just as weak.

But I would put money on my understanding of how "void" works being the go to rule of thumb for longer than we know.

Originally posted by ResearchMan
with Adobe or Paint Shop Pro you would need to mess with the hues, In this case a blue hue was used along with color inversion. I tried it and could not produce the same results. OP added the CIA-61. I think by the time someone important see's this thread and the supposed CIA-61 status on the BC, THE OP would be arrested.

i have NOT added anything but the
letters outlining what I saw in the image
and the original was always shown before
I added what I saw.
And if they want to come to my house.
I will reproduce it on my computer
just as I posted it here.

I showed just where I got my originals
d/l from and told the process of how
I found it. There was even another
poster sonicinfinity who also recreated
it on his machine and several others here
said they saw the same thing I did.

An investigator I am.
A hoaxer I am NOT !!!

If posting a theory on a web site becomes
against the law, then there is no hope
for America.

Guys, it's called "Pareidolia". Look it up and let's move on.

Originally posted by ResearchMan

with Adobe or Paint Shop Pro you would need to mess with the hues, In this case a blue hue was used along with color inversion. I tried it and could not produce the same results. OP added the CIA-61.

The OP did not add the CIA-61. Instead, the OP is seeing something that LOOKS like it could say CIA-61 but it just says OAHU. Look at the two words:


CIA-61
OAHU

Can't you guys see exactly how you could mistake one for the other if the depression from the transfer was not uniform in pressure? It's plain as day. The C and the I make the O. The A is the A. You can't make out the left side of the H very well, but the dash in the H comes through as exactly that, a dash. The 6 is the left part of the H and the right and bottom part of the U and the one is the left part of the U.

Originally posted by Sky watcher

Originally posted by boondock-saint
Ok, so what we have uncovered here
is

the head of the CIA's initials
reference to the CIA-61
and Ann's address as Kenya

all in written text around the typed text.

how much more damning can you get???

hahahaha

I agree with you finding the CIA-61 part but look at the address for Ann better cause its not Kenya. Kenya wasn't a country for another two years.

well then they got Obama's daddy's info wrong
cuz it says Kenya for him doesn't it ???

This makes perfect sense. Since President Bush #1 who was the former haed of the CIA, we have been slipped down a slippery sloop of financial ruin. The CIA is in bed with the Elites who also run the world financial system. Since Bush #1 all the presidents have been finely crafted puppets. There was no change with Obama from Bush jr. Nothing has changed. The wars are raging, illegals are invading, debt is skyrocketing, jobs are leaving and bank CEOs are getting richer!.
This manufactured LFBC (by the CIA) stinks at every level. Why did it take 2 years to disclose and why did Obama spend $2 million to keep it under wraps. It stinks just like everything else associated with Obama.
The elites end game plan is to weaken the US so much as to push the one world government and currency schemes. It's working thanks to our US government corruption run amock!

Has anyone taken any old document and screwed with the contrasts and hues and found similar anomalies? Just curious because I don't believe I've seen a document so scrutinized before.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by rogerstigers
first question.. how was an xray of the BC performed?

well I call it an x-ray cause of the way it looks
in my image editor. Actually it is just playing
around with the different color codes, slight
adjustment here and there and it revealed
this and I happened to see it and brought it here
for all to speculate

Now that's what I call credible reasoning