Obama Birth Certificate Case Heard In 9th Circuit Court

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


I dont think any amount of evidence is going to convince some that there are issues with the BC

still great link and thanks for the reply. I hope the court has the gonads to do the right thing and take on king Obama.

Originally posted by UcDat
still great link and thanks for the reply. I hope the court has the gonads to do the right thing and take on king Obama.

Thank you for proving my point that Taitz’s fans, much like herself, don’t know anything about law.

Here you can listen to the oral argument of the case your thread is based on. Listen how Kreep, the first lawyer, in the consolidated case, throws Orly under the bus. Even other birther lawyers try to distance themselves from Orly. She’s a joke.

Pay attention at the judges’ questions, they focus on standing, because that’s what’s inevitably going to doom this, and other, birther lawsuits. Voters don’t have standing, and candidates don’t have standing after the results of an election are certified and the new President is in office.

It doesn’t matter what you think about the quality of your ‘evidence,’ if there’s no standing that evidence won’t even be considered.

Yet, after the courts explained this, in all the 80+ birther lawsuits, nuts like Orly keep filing suits asking the same thing and presenting the same meritless arguments. Only someone completely ignorant of the law, like Orly, believe these lawsuits have a chance in hell of succeeding if you just get “the right evidence.”

reply to post by aptness


"Pay attention at the judges’ questions, they focus on standing, because that’s what’s inevitably going to doom this, and other, birther lawsuits. Voters don’t have standing, and candidates don’t have standing after the results of an election are certified and the new President is elected."

yep because the courts wont hear it it cant be true...

lol facts are facts just like building 7 on 9/11 nothing the liars in charge say is going to change the facts we all can see with our own eyes

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Next time someone asks to see some documents of yours - you try just handing them a photocopy, or tell them youre entitled to your privacy, or its racist to ask!

Why? I can just use my driver's license or my short form birth certificate.

A computer document expert who analyzed the online ...

www.wnd.com...
Ivan?

I don’t think they reviewed my report. The report indicates that changes could have been made. But the pattern of changes suggests that the focus was on enhancing the legibility of the text, not in changing the content of the text.

I hope this clarifies.

Ivan

That WND expert?

It was analyzed by Ivan Zatkovich of Tampa-based eComp Consultants, ...

I cannot tell you how much I love the fact that you went with Ivan as your expert witness because so did I.
Oh you silly birthers. Ivan thinks you are all full of it too.

I would be happy to discuss any information I provided to ABC and WorldNetDaily that is currently appearing on WND. I did not state that any document was ‘fake’. But I did provide specific evidence that the document was modified /enhanced. I would be happy to provide the same report to you as I did to ABC.

Even though the WND article seems to somewhat sensationalize the information I provided, there is no speculation here. Just simple forensics.

If you have any other questions you may call me directly.

Ivan Zatkovich
Principal Consultant
eComp Consultants

Oh boy. Did you read his PDF or just the WND slant on it?

Originally posted by UcDat
I dont think any amount of evidence is going to convince some that there are issues with the BC

If any of you get any evidence, we will find out. Did you notice that your buddy just referenced the exact same expert that I have been referencing?

still great link and thanks for the reply. I hope the court has the gonads to do the right thing and take on king Obama.

It would help if you guys actually read Ivan's report and not just the WND article. In fact, contact Ivan yourself. He has emailed me back as late as 1:30 am EST.

The downfall to the whole quagmire, is that you know the 9th circuit will be twiddling their toes, and playing this off as long as they can,and who in their right mind wants to be the prosecuting attorney?
BUT,if more evidence does surface, i do not see that they have a choice, this just might get interesting, and as i have lost several points in the negative manner due to one cry baby on ats, i shall just say thanks op, for having the courage in seeing this evidence through. It is a bit of interest to note, that their are no longer several denyers in the midst, but one

Your evidence must be substantiating or has the truth lost its luster:

Originally posted by allprowolfy
The downfall to the whole quagmire, is that you know the 9th circuit will be twiddling their toes, and playing this off as long as they can,and who in their right mind wants to be the prosecuting attorney?
BUT,if more evidence does surface, i do not see that they have a choice, this just might get interesting, and as i have lost several points in the negative manner due to one cry baby on ats, i shall just say thanks op, for having the courage in seeing this evidence through. It is a bit of interest to note, that their are no longer several denyers in the midst, but one

Your evidence must be substantiating or has the truth lost its luster:

aww shucks I try but honestly its not me fighting the battle its the woman leading the charge. Like so many other amazing Americans Its my honor t share their stories with you. As for the deniers don't assume they are all what you think they are. Many good people who just cant face the truth or defend the official line out of a sense of patriotism. Don't let them keep you from posting. As for those who may be pros dont forget on ATS your free to ignore anyone you want.

So im enjoying the arguement going on here. cynthia could stand to chill a little, sounds like shes had a bad day

so Ive been doing some research and a member of another forum had this interesting thing to say

I am also somewhat of an expert at PDF documents. It is part of what I do for a living. The document Obama submitted as his birth certificate is most certainly tampered with, and it is so blatantly obvious that it has to be because Obama wants the birther controversy to continue. This is my opinion. The PDF is indeed made up of layers with a top layer and then black under that layer in different blocks. The top layer is transparent where they want black to show through. Is the end result the same? Maybe. I can't really tell. But I do know that of all the ways to scan a document for the world to see, this is the HARDEST and WORST way one could possibly do it. The easiest way is to scan in the birth certificate, make it a PDF and post it. The hardest is to take the document, scan it in, add an artificial background, make all the black parts transparent except for some signatures, create blocks of black to position behind the document so the black shows through, fail to flatten the image into a single image, make a PDF out of it via save as and not the distiller (PDF printer which would have flattened it), and post the results. So there is definitely something very fishy going on. Personally I think the birthers are getting played by Obama for fools regardless of what the truth is.

Yet, Colby says he can’t ignore the obvious. After downloading the birth certificate straight off of the White House’s website, he started noticing the apparent flaws in a computer program called Adobe Illustrator. ‘Legitimate digitized, scanned documents will always have [a] faded appearance… There are too many jagged features, here.’ he said as (he) scoured the certificate. ‘So, it’s not a single document, it’s actually ‘compositive’ layers.’ Colby says scanned images should only have one digitized layer. He says President Obama’s birth certificate has almost 50 layers.”

You can see the layers flash yourself just by rapidly zooming in and out in your web browser. That means that the browser is rendering different layers.’ Colby concedes that there are some instances where scanned images produce multiple layers. ‘It’s a program called OCR that converts text in the images into computer readable text,’ he said. ‘But, it would never work on signatures. So, the fact that the signatures have been edited discounts the possibility of it being OCR.’ Colby continued pointing out the apparent problems. ‘You’ll notice the white background behind these letters, which is also super-imposed, actually covers up a little bit of the ‘D’ in this word,’ he explained. ‘Even his name has been edited, all except for the ‘R’ in ‘Barack.’ ‘ …..Colby says… ‘It’s definitely been edited in it’s entirety, so the indication would point to the probability of it being fake,

Originally posted by VonDoomen
So im enjoying the arguement going on here. cynthia could stand to chill a little, sounds like shes had a bad day

hey dont pick on my #1 rival and now friend

besides I thought she was being pretty nice considering how passionate she is on this.

And thanks for the post I've seen a lot of the same kind of stuff just not much point in posting it for those who's minds already made up sigh
Anyways here's hoping I can keep entertaining you all if it helps focus on these issues.

Cheers and thanks again for the positive feedback. +s

reply to post by Sinnthia

Again, you have me all wrong. If you had been paying attention to my replies to you in threads like you said you had, you would see that I actually went to an expert rounding up by the birthers. Can I get any more unpartisan than that? The same expert WND went to prove it was fake is the one I went to. He has confirmed repeatedly that your youtube videos and armchair analysis are wrong. Find a better expert than WND did. I am sure you can.

I read many of your replies in that thread and some of the info you posted from I think "Ivan" ?

I didn't see where he said what was posted was "wrong"...
What I saw was he said they sensationalized it a little..
That's not the same things..

Was something else posted different that I missed??

reply to post by UcDat


yes i noticed she is passionate about democrats/obama.
If you go to her last 800 posts they are probly 98% about obama and rightVSleft paradigm.
kind of reminds me of that troll hooper that just goes into the 9/11 forums to disagree with everyone haha

Can anyone tell me how to upload a .PDF file to ATS so you can all actually read the full report from the WND expert witness?

reply to post by Sinnthia


google would be a good friend to become familiar!

Your probly just better off loading it as a picture

OR

uploading it to a website that supports PDF and then linking it.

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

google would be a good friend to become familiar!

Google how to upload a .pdf to ATS? No results.

Your probly just better off loading it as a picture

A 16 page .pdf?

OR

uploading it to a website that supports PDF and then linking it.

So you do not know how? Thanks.

reply to post by Sinnthia


yes you could upload 16 pictures.

Or you could upload it to an external website or provide a link to it.

I have yet to see a PDF file embedded on ATS.

and actualy if you google it - 3 website from the top is wiki-ATS
where it says you can upload movies and pictures. So yes, you could have found it with a little snooping

Originally posted by VonDoomen
yes you could upload 16 pictures.

Yes, I could.

ATS actually has a media upload function that allows you to upload .PDF files. Unfortunately it is either offline or my browser is acting up. I am not an ATS expert so while I know it is there, I am not sure why I am having trouble with it. This is why I asked for help.

Or you could upload it to an external website or provide a link to it.

Yes and I did that and it is still unavailable for viewing which is why I wanted to load it to ATS.

I have yet to see a PDF file embedded on ATS.

I never asked how to embed a .pdf file but I cannot post a link on ATS to my G drive.

and actualy if you google it - 3 website from the top is wiki-ATS
where it says you can upload movies and pictures. So yes, you could have found it with a little snooping

Did you find out how to upload a .pdf file while you were there or are you just responding to me to let me know what little help you are?

reply to post by UcDat

Thanks for the link. I uploaded it and it is still unavailable so I guess who knows when I can post a link to it but I have a feeling I am really wasting my time here anyway. I just had someone try to refute Ivan's report with a WND article in another thread. Guess who WND got their info from? Ivan. Yes, someone just tried to debunk Ivan with Ivan.

reply to post by VonDoomen


What I was hoping for was some help with why this feature is not working for me.

Uploads will usually take between 1-5 minutes per MB on a high-speed connection, so please only click the submit button once.

Allowed File Types: gif jpg bmp png swf wmv mpg avi flv mpeg rm mov 3gp mp4 asf mp3 wav midi mid pdf php

Max File Size: 50MB

Right here on ATS. Perhaps you are not familiar with it which is why I asked for ANYONE that could HELP me. Thanks all the same. Here is an external link to the .PDF file.

www.megaupload.com...

Originally posted by UcDat
yep because the courts wont hear it it cant be true...

You were talking about the courts and Orly Taitz’s lawsuits, so I addressed that. I explained, based on existing case law and, specifically, past decisions in birther lawsuits, what was going to be the result of these lawsuits.

Now, being typical of birthers, you are moving on to something else and making a different allegation.

Only Congress can remove a sitting President. If you birthers think you have proof of your claims, petition Congress, talk to your representatives, and ask them to start the hearings.

Let us know how that goes.

reply to post by Sinnthia


I prefer the "teach a man to fish" approach over just giving you a fish!