Birthers: We Were Right. The BC is a FRAUD!!! Obama Lovers: Debunk THIS!

Originally posted by Aisling

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by Aisling

 

Agreed the atrocities and lies that have deceived us for many years are being carried out and we many (the vast majority) Don't notice them Because; the entertainment industry seems to be more important to People these days then actual real subjects.

Also the MSM is spreading propoganda like no tomorrow. Claiming Birthers as automatic Racists. When we should have a right to question his eligibility when it took him so long to release a Long Form and it has many signs of being a Forgery.

edit on 18-5-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)

I agree. I don't care what skin color our president is, just give me an honest one.
When lies appear before us so blatantly it almost frightens me.

Lies didn't seem to matter much when bush jr. was in the white house.. the same people crying about this cert are some of the same people who were telling us to shut up about bush

reply to post by miniatus


Yes, and optimization is not the default, so people have to turn it on purposely. If they leave the default (As Ashley did on her first attempt) the layers don't appear. It's only with optimization that the document is separated into layers. People are unaware of this, and so they assume they've found the holy freaking grail - all because they were ignorant about the process.

I'm no documents specialist nor do I know much about Adobe or Illustrator or PDF files. I just know what I have found in my search for the truth.

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Yes. Color differences showed up, too, much to my surprise. lol Letters in the same word, some would be dark black, medium gray, and light gray. Although they started out with the same color in the original scan.

And so how is it his manged to get all the way into GREEN?

Shades of black are one thing, but GREEN is another. And it has NOTHING to do with the background color. This is in the TEXT we are talking about. This anomaly is pointed out in the OP document.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No, but I've seen people

That's enough for me to stop right there. No, don't take the word of the guy who not only owns a typesetting company but also sells and services all kinds of scanners. Don't take the word of all the graphic designers and digital imaging specialists either.

I applaud Ashley for her effort, but it still doesn't address all of the anomalous issues going on with this DOCUMENT. Which I might add IS NOT A JPEG. PDF

Originally posted by freakjive

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No, but I've seen people

That's enough for me to stop right there. No, don't take the word of the guy who not only owns a typesetting company but also sells and services all kinds of scanners. Don't take the word of all the graphic designers and digital imaging specialists either.

I applaud Ashley for her effort, but it still doesn't address all of the anomalous issues going on with this DOCUMENT. Which I might add IS NOT A JPEG. PDF

plus there were reports circulating a while back and right before release of another obama bc with a seal and differences - even a reporter tweeted a pic of the seal ! can't find the links, sorry, but something to keep in mind

reply to post by Aggie Man


Hey, I'm right there. I swore I wouldn't participate. But after a recent emotional upset, I needed to have some fun.

When the so-called expert in the OP's source started off with "This is not a Hospital Birth Certificate because it doesn't have a footprint", I KNEW he was full of crap. Over the years I have done a LOT of research on this issue and I was sure it was common knowledge that the hospital birth certificate isn't even good for identification, much less citizenship.

When people ASSUME these things without verifying them (how hard could it have been for this guy to research that piece of disinfo?), it lets me know that they are NOT interested in the truth, they are only pushing an agenda. This stuff is EASY to find...

But some people just don't want to find the truth. And they start threads based on crazy assumptions without taking 2 seconds to check them out. :shk: Denying ignorance comes easier to some than others, I guess.

Birth Certificates

Most hospitals in the U.S. issue a souvenir birth certificate which typically includes the footprints of the newborn. However, these birth certificates are not legally accepted as proof of age or citizenship, and are frequently rejected by the Bureau of Consular Affairs during passport applications. Many Americans believe these souvenir records to be their official birth certificate, when in reality it holds little legal value [10].

reply to post by TrueAmerican


I'm guessing because the certificate had green in it?

Since mine was originally black and white, it turned into shades of black, white, and gray. I'm assuming if I used different colors (either font or background waterproofs), it would take the original red font into shades of red and pink or the original purple font into shades of purple, red, and blue.

Just assuming. Too tired to start over with a colored document and I'm not sure my scanner does color. But since it auto adjusted the colors with black and white, I wouldn't be surprised if it did the same thing with color.

?

Originally posted by freakjive
I applaud Ashley for her effort, but it still doesn't address all of the anomalous issues going on with this DOCUMENT. Which I might add IS NOT A JPEG.

The ‘document’ is still a digital file, and at the end of the day you’re still talking about anomalies on a digital file, when what matters is the actual document. And that was BH’s initial point.

What you are asking us to accept is this premise: by looking at a digital representation of a document you can ascertain without a doubt the actual document is a forgery.

Want to scan your birth certificate, use the optimization process and post it here on ATS for us to analyze?

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by freakjive
I applaud Ashley for her effort, but it still doesn't address all of the anomalous issues going on with this DOCUMENT. Which I might add IS NOT A JPEG.

The ‘document’ is still a digital file, and at the end of the day you’re still talking about anomalies on a digital file, when what matters is the actual document. And that was BH’s initial point.

What you are asking us to accept is this premise: by looking at a digital representation of a document you can ascertain without a doubt the actual document is a forgery.

What to scan your birth certificate, use the optimization process and post it here on ATS for us to analyze?

There is word on the street though about people who saw the original document. And it had a seal (a reporter tweeted the pic, I saw it) and other differences. So yes I agree. I'd love to see the original doc, too!

That Birth Certificate is legit. We spent a lot of time putting it together and hand delivering it to Hawaii.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Exactly. The 'footprint BC's' are not official. I stated earlier in this thread when going for a job at the airlines, they made it clear our 'footprint BC's' were just a cute little thing for our parents to take home and were nothing official in terms of verifying anything legal. We had to get a copy of our state produced BC- not the footprint one.

I asked earlier in this thread why the man stresses the need for the footprint BC but nobody answered. lol

Haven't kept up with the BC issue much but I do remember a lot of people hemming and hollering for the 'long form BC.' Now there is demand for the footprint BC? lol

Originally posted by freakjive
No, don't take the word of the guy who not only owns a typesetting company but also sells and services all kinds of scanners.

Have you taken his word that he owns a typesetting company? He CLEARLY doesn't know what he's talking about.

I applaud Ashley for her effort, but it still doesn't address all of the anomalous issues going on with this DOCUMENT. Which I might add IS NOT A JPEG.

The pictures in OP's source are jpegs. htmlimg1.scribdassets.com...

Originally posted by aptness

What you are asking us to accept is this premise: by looking at a digital representation of a document you can ascertain without a doubt the actual document is a forgery.

I guess the same can be said vice-versa. We're being asked to accept a digital representation of a document...THAT JUST HAPPENS TO BE FULL OF ANOMALIES!!!!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Unreal...they're JPEGs on the scribd site because they are uploads. 2nd

who cares if he wasn't born in the U.S, what is the big deal?

My only question is this:

Would the President even be ALLOWED to give photos of his REAL bc? I mean was it intentionally faked to a certain extent?

Just saying...If I was going to show my bc for millions to see and I had the resources, I would have some of the information wrong also...

Originally posted by aptness
reply to post by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Obama is not president, and all He has signed and done in office is null and void.

The Constitution disagrees with you. “The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President.” 12th Amendment

Your claims that everything Obama “has signed and done in office is null and void” is completely unsupported in US jurisprudence.

Except that there is a caveat: In order for that person, votes or no, to be president, (S)He must be a natural-born citizen. So votes are irrelevant. The above presumes individuals who qualify are running.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Impeachment is for Those legally elected.

Wrong, yet again. Impeachment is for an office holder.

If One is ineligible to hold that office, One is not truly holding the office and is a usurper or pretender. Impeachment is for people properly installed into office. Obama does not qualify, and is therefore not properly installed.

Your proposition that it’s just for “those legally” elected is absurd and contrary to the premise of the impeachment process itself. If one was stupid enough to buy your interpretation, someone illegally holding office could not be impeached.

True that someone illegally holding office could not be impeached. That is why We don't need to impeach. We need merely to send Him packing. We need merely to do nothing further on His say.

Anyone stupid enough to believe We need to impeach a usurper or poser... Heh. Well.

You’ve just rendered useless the only tool available to the American people to forcefully remove a sitting President before his mandate is over. But wait, there’s more. What if a sitting President refused to leave office when his term is over? He’d be illegally in office, and according to you he couldn’t be impeached.

No... I pointed out that WE DON'T NEED TO IMPEACH AN IMPOSTER. We can just physically remove Him and quit responding to His edicts.

You’re a genius.

In equal measure with You, I suppose.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Amaterasu
The law is the law - except where it's convenient to ignore it.

And you seem to ignore it every time you open your mouth to comment on it.

Sure, Love. You're right. Have a nice life.

Originally posted by freakjive
I guess the same can be said vice-versa. We're being asked to accept a digital representation of a document...THAT JUST HAPPENS TO BE FULL OF ANOMALIES!!!!

You’re not being asked to accept the digital representation of a document, no. We are saying the actual document is authentic.

The ‘anomalies’ can be explained by the process BH and others have talked about. Try it with your birth certificate. You might not like the outcome though, because then, as per your theory, you’d have to conclude your birth certificate is a forgery.

reply to post by freakjive


I don't care WHY they're jpgs. They ARE jpgs. All the anomalies on the zoomed-in pictures shown are jpgs. Even the PDF is a digital representation. It's a picture. I'm just an electronics technician, but I KNOW that what I'm seeing is a digital representation of an imperfect scanning and converting process. You know that, too, right?

I'm not saying it's real. I cannot. NO ONE can. See? That's the point I'm making. The only document that could be verified is the ACTUAL document. And then, only by actual Documents Specialists. Not some dude who claims to sell scanners on the Internet! Some people are so gullible.