Photo - Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate (political fraud)

After reading the last twenty or so pages I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask where we are on the Australian version. Any progress that has been made since last night has been lost in a flurry of posts that were completely irrelevant to that discussion, so if it was posted in the last 20 pages I somehow missed it.

Has anyone attempted to validate or disprove the assertion that the Australian version has layers? Not just saying it can't happen because it's a jpeg, actually attempting to repeat it. I wouldn't have a clue how to do it or I'd try myself.

Has there been any confirmation that the words and lines do in fact seem to sit on top of the folds? Or has that been explained?

What are the chances of the thread getting back on track with the research and discussion that was going on last night before the latest round of racism accusations and people who hadn't read a page assuming that they knew what had been posted in the last 70+ pages started?

If these were answered somewhere in the last 20 or so pages and I missed them, my apologies. I've tried to read every post and was keeping up pretty well till I went to bed last night. This thread grows too quickly to keep up if you aren't online constantly.

Just wanted to add my 2 cents.

Here is a Interview of the Australian man who's Birth Certificate was used for the fake. Sorry if this has been posted before

Adelaide man caught up in bid to oust Obama

In regards to the constitution. It is a Sacred document but we really do have to understand that it was written a long time ago by people who lived in a completely different world. In their eyes slavery was ok, Planes didn't exist etc etc..I could go on. To think that they would really want a American who was born in America and decided to go visit another country and out of circumstances has a child in said country could not run for president. That's rubbish and that should be changed in the constitution. (My Opinion of course)

Is there a taste of Racism in the Birther movement. No Doubt. How much? I don't know but I think its alarming when the stats show that the majority of birthers are southerners.

That is my 2 cents..

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Provenance, causality, and any potential motive by those who perpetrate such forgeries is as valid a line of inquiry as any ... perhaps less comfortable to discuss, but no less valid.

Discussion of the motivations, be they racial or not, within the posters who support or don't support the "Birther Movement" is, however, immaterial.

You don't think the underlying psychological trend that is the prevalent amongst the majority of Birthers is relevant to the discussion? Especially considering the implications and how far this whole thing has gone, I think it's rather ridiculous not to notice the demographics or the masters who are pulling the strings on this thing.

The Australian BC has destroyed any hint of legitimacy for this whole thing and the whole Birther movement is so full of holes it'd sink in rational waters, so there's something as play here as to why normally rational people keep pushing this.

[edit on 4-8-2009 by CuriousSkeptic]

reply to post by Jenna


Yessterday I brought up the aussie doc being faked (both r fake but I could see the aussie was bodge in 1 second) and GLDNGUN and Skeptic Overlord both denied me...LOL!!!!!
GLDN has (kudos to him) agreed and debunked it further.....
Yes it has been debunked.
I am yet to see the Kenyan official debunk as I understand it didnt come up photoshopped???
It would be great to get a summary please of the Kenyan Debunk.
And can we have both put on the front page as links.
Ta
Zazzy F
@SO, I renig being a spider monkeys uncle......

Originally posted by CuriousSkeptic

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Provenance, causality, and any potential motive by those who perpetrate such forgeries is as valid a line of inquiry as any ... perhaps less comfortable to discuss, but no less valid.

Discussion of the motivations, be they racial or not, within the posters who support or don't support the "Birther Movement" is, however, immaterial.

You don't think the underlying psychological trend that is the prevalent amongst the majority of Birthers is relevant to the discussion? Especially considering the implications and how far this whole thing has gone, I think it's rather ridiculous not to notice the demographics or the masters who are pulling the strings on this thing.

Eloquently said.

I am also wondering about the psychology, and sociology behind all of these fake docs. Should the notion of there possibly being some element of a racial motive be discarded so quickly?

In this thread, the answer is absolutely, yes. The argument that this could possibly be racially motivated is completely out of the question, it should not even be asked, and should in fact be censored.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


I second the request for a recap and for it being put in the OP for easy reference!

From what I've read, and someone correct me if I'm wrong please, the problems that were pointed out with the Kenyan BC have for the most part all been cleared up and it has not actually been debunked yet. Taitz website has apparently been hacked with possible changes to the BC she had posted a picture of. The Australian BC seems to have the words going over the creases instead of with the creases except in a few cases, the man whose name is on it verified that his BC was posted there but didn't check to see that everything matched, just his name and parent's address.

Is that the basic gist of it? Or have I missed something?

Originally posted by Jenna
After reading the last twenty or so pages I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask where we are on the Australian version. Any progress that has been made since last night has been lost in a flurry of posts that were completely irrelevant to that discussion, so if it was posted in the last 20 pages I somehow missed it.

Has anyone attempted to validate or disprove the assertion that the Australian version has layers? Not just saying it can't happen because it's a jpeg, actually attempting to repeat it. I wouldn't have a clue how to do it or I'd try myself.

yes... Jpegs CANT have layers...

You can also find more here...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 4-8-2009 by HunkaHunka]

Jenna
I think we were looking at orlys site BC to get the layers?
So the original has no layering?

reply to post by zazzafrazz


I have no clue.

I thought it was the Australian version that was said to have layers. I'm all confused now, I'll have to go re-read again and look for the post.


EDIT: This post was the one I was thinking of that was saying the Australian version supposedly had layers.

[edit on 4-8-2009 by Jenna]

A poster on Godlike production 'Annoymous Coward' made a good point which I have quoted below which rather makes the discussion over his birth certificate a moot point if any lawyer really wanted to take it up.

www.godlikeproductions.com...

>>." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawai'i being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after*.

In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawai'i. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aformentioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Cizen parent. Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office.

*** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President

reply to post by Jenna


May I ask too whether Flyers Fan has had any further contact with their correspondent ? Is Flyers Fan now in a position to identify that person & do they have any comment on the thread and various theories put forward ?

Apologies in advance if this has already been answered.

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
Yessterday I brought up the aussie doc being faked (both r fake but I could see the aussie was bodge in 1 second) and GLDNGUN and Skeptic Overlord both denied me.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Please provide reference where Australian BC was debunked.

I must have missed that.

Thanks.

[edit on 4-8-2009 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by Jenna


Someone had originally claimed the Australian one had layers... but there was no evidence of any layers, and then we realized... doh! JPEGS don't support layers.

MORE PROOF OF THE AUSSIE BC BEING A FAKE! I wish I could take credit for the following, but I can't, although it's in the area that really concerned me - the bottom paragraph. Anyway, look closely at the signature - the "Deputy Registrar" part of the form is OVER TOP of the signature/stamp! Man, I could kick myself for not catching that. Next? Here's something else I learned - open both the Australian and Kenyan documents in Photoshop Elements. From there under the Image menu "Divide Scanned Photos". Nothing should appear on the Kenyan document, however six layers should peal away from the Australian one! These layers should all show distortion: Layer 1 - Date and Place of Birth Layer 2 - Father (followed by) Name, Surname, Age and B Layer 3 - Name, Surname and Birthplace Layer 4 - Issue [ Living Deceased Layer 5 - Signature, Description Informant Layer 6 - The entire right section of the page, specifically the inserted text fields and bottom right quadrant

I am a spider monkeys uncle?
Im now lost, this debunk wasn't a DEBUNK?

reply to post by zazzafrazz


Exactly... that debunk was completely fabricated.

The Aussie orig is a JPEG... they don't support layers.

And at the time that poster posted that, they hadn't realized the owner of that birth certificate had already been made aware and given an interview in australia.




[edit on 4-8-2009 by HunkaHunka]

Originally posted by Ulala
May I ask too whether Flyers Fan has had any further contact with their correspondent ? Is Flyers Fan now in a position to identify that person & do they have any comment on the thread and various theories put forward ?

I second the request. (Grabbing shovel, putting on mud boots.)

reply to post by HunkaHunka


GLDNGUN MADE it up?
thats odd he was anti it bing a fake, that makes no sence at all?

reply to post by zazzafrazz


I dunno what to tell ya...

jpgs don't support layers.


If you believe what he posted, I'd press him for evidence... a movie of what he believes he did etc..

but jpgs don't support layers, and as soon as this was pointed out... silence from that side...

reply to post by zazzafrazz


He also didn't realize there are no layers in a jpeg. So that is how the "Aussie is a fake" failed because it is real.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


I have reviewd doc in various image editing platforms, (Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Corel Draw) I never was able to see the claim of type overlap. No image was provided.

As Hunka mentioned, JPEG files DO NOT have layers. They are "flattened / merged" to use PS vernacular. They are also compressed as opposed to raw/ native.

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
. . . but I could see the aussie was bodge in 1 second

What was YOUR evidence that you spotted in 1 second?

Just curious. Thanks.

[edit on 4-8-2009 by kinda kurious]