It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 79
299
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
It sure is! I was critical of these birthers until i had a look myself. Question is, can a scanner create these artifacts 10 layers in a PDF?

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




posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by starless and bible black
reply to post by D377MC
 

Dad as 'african' is so stupid that it can't have been altered. Let's give them some credit, please. I suppose if you looked over enough documents from the same hospital and compared the use of race, it would clarify things.


The term 'African' was not in use on official documents until at least twenty years later. There is no arguing this point, it is incontrovertible.

The word Negro was accepted as normal, even by people classified as Negroes, until the Civil Rights movement. One example is the identification by Martin Luther King, Jr. of his own race as 'Negro' in his famous speech I Have a Dream.

Here is the question: how does one justify the usage of specific terminology on an official document dated 1961, when the usage of the terminology in question began at least 15 years later?

The answer: one doesn't.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 





Why are you lying? Show us the box then. Just 3 options huh? Can you tell me what it says on box 12a and 13a of this 1978 certificate? “Race — Caucasian, Japanese, etc (SPECIFY)”


Very funny, I see what you did there.

NOW, Go and look at the BC that is the subject of the thread and look at that relevant box...What does it ask for ?

Don't post a BC from 17 years later to try and prove your point, You fail, Accept it.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by happykat39
Lets say that the document was digitally altered and is in fact as phony as a three dollar bill. And with all the new studies of the document coming out this is starting to look like a dead certainty.

Then why such an amateurish job? Of course several of the government agencies have experts who could have faked the document so that it would look real to the point that what little discrepancies were found could be easily dismissed.

.
edit on 29-4-2011 by happykat39 because: Typo


Well it has definitely been edited using software.
What ever happens it can't be good. I know nothing about US politics, but I have a feeling the BC may indeed be legit but for some reason they want to make a fool out of us so that the next time we try and expose him no one will believe us.
If he was prepared to go to that extreme then he must have something big he wants to hide.
I know that sounds crazy, it is just speculation really. The only other alternative is he was not born in the US and someone wants us to know about it.
The fact is the document was doctored using software. The question is why?
edit on 29-4-2011 by ZeroPointEnergy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by AggressivePerfector
 

In my experience, the so called "layers" created by scanners are of isolated parts of a document, which do not seem contiguous to the scanner, so it interprets them as separate items.

On the Obama birth certificate some of these "layers" are in very odd places, not at all typical of what a scanner does, although to be fair there are some "layers" in isolated areas like the signature at the bottom of the document.

If you open the document in Illustrator and see the layer created on one of the dates Aug - 8 1961, you will note that Aug - 8 196 is one layer, while the last digit of the date 1 is in another layer.

In my experience, that is not the sort of thing a scanner does normally. That kind of thing sticks out and is very odd, even to a non expert.


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



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by AggressivePerfector
It sure is! I was critical of these birthers until i had a look myself. Question is, can a scanner create these artifacts 10 layers in a PDF?

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


Apparently the layers are created when the pdf is optimized in Adobe Illustrator (I cannot confirm that since I don't have the application). So the idea is that before uploading to the internet, whoever scanned the certificate decided to optimize the document. It was the optimization then that actually created the layers, not the scanning, not the editing.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
NOW, Go and look at the BC that is the subject of the thread and look at that relevant box...What does it ask for ?
I’m looking at it. Where are the 3 options? That was your allegation, there were 3 options. Where are the options?

You’re talking out of your ass aren’t you?



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   
This absolutely prooves it. Do you understand what is being said. It proves software was used to insert text. It was not due to OCR scanning




posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 



Yeah and what questions did you ask? You didn’t ask any. You just keep repeating and spreading the same old debunked lies and unfounded nonsense on a website.

In the real world the word of a state official speaking in their official capacity trumps the word of nuts like you on forums and anonymous blogs.

Until you prove otherwise all you have is your completely unfounded ‘suspicions’ and ‘feelings.’ You birthers are pathetic.


No problems mate, cause we ALL believe what our Government appointed officials tell us without question..

Man, I can't stop laughing at that crap.


That deserved more than 7
's but I had to stop somewhere..



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroPointEnergy
 


Could someone with Illustrator (e.g. whoever made that video) try if optimization of the document (which has first been flattened) will create the layers or not. It would be interesting to know, and also if it does, please post a video about it so that we (unfortunates without Illustrator) can see.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


Dude, Really.

It specifically asks for RACE, Now how many races of people do you think there are ( Or were accepted at that time ) I've previously listed them....CAUCASIAN, NEGROID and MONGOLOID.

Twist and turn all you like but you're still wrong.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
No problems mate, cause we ALL believe what our Government appointed officials tell us without question..
Who said anything about “without question”? You are not questioning anything, you are just spreading conjecture and demanding unreasonable information you didn’t demand of any other elected official.


Man, I can't stop laughing at that crap
You can’t stop laughing because, in all likelihood, you have some psychological problem.

Why am I wasting time with you? You’re not even American, nor do you have any arguments to present, just more absurd and childish conspiracies. Enjoy your delusion.


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



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
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)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
It specifically asks for RACE, Now how many races of people do you think there are ( Or were accepted at that time ) I've previously listed them....CAUCASIAN, NEGROID and MONGOLOID.
Listed them from where? Out of your ass. Show us the options on a Department of Health document, something.

You’re just making stuff up.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by backinblack
No problems mate, cause we ALL believe what our Government appointed officials tell us without question..
Who said anything about “without question”? You are not questioning anything, you are just spreading conjecture and demanding unreasonable information you didn’t demand of any other elected official.


Man, I can't stop laughing at that crap
You can’t stop laughing because, in all likelihood, you have some psychological problem.

Why am I wasting your time with you? You’re not even American, nor do you have any arguments to present, just more absurd and childish conspiracies. Enjoy your delusion.


lol, yeah right..
I did ask questions, not about Obama but about the ONE Government Official you'd like us to blindly believe..
Here they are again...
Care to answer them??

Wow, one person said so so it MUST be true..

Who is this ONE person?
Who do they vote for?
What are their affiliations?
Are they involved with the Dems or Obama in any way?
Who hired them and pats their wages?

Why would you believe ONE person without asking some questions?????


Or should we just accept the word of ONE nobody??



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


So, What you are saying there is no difference between Race and Nationality, isn't it ?



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   

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 ?


These are very good questions. In the video debunking OCR as a cause of "layers" in the document, the video maker traces the tracks of additions made to the document, even to the point of noting the trail of commands to "rotate" the additions for aesthetic purposes, i.e., so that they will fit into the document better.

If what he says in that video is accurate then it is beyond doubt that the document was forged on a computer.

How could they have done it. Paranoia . . . within a very closed and small circle around the President. This job wasn't farmed out to experts. It was done by trusted allies who could be counted on to keep quiet. This course necessitated a sacrifice of quality.

Hitler would have hired an expert forger, who could work with his hands, not a computer, and then when the job was done, would have shot the forger.

Experts know how these things are done by politicians, nowadays. As a consequence, it is harder to get good help. 9/11 is another example of a slipshod job done by the "B Team".

Bottom line: It ain't easy bein' sleazy.
edit on 29-4-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
So, What you are saying there is no difference between Race and Nationality, isn't it ?
No. I’m saying the DOH policy was to accept what the parents told them, because that’s what the DOH officials stated and can be observed from other certificates.

I can show you an Hawaiian birth certificate with ‘American’ as race, I can show you an Hawaiian birth certificate with ‘Black’ and ‘Hawaiian/Chinese/Korean/German/English/Portuguese’ as race, I can show you an Hawaiian birth certificate with ‘Caucasian/Japanese’ and ‘Caucasian/Hawaiian’ as race.

Can you show me one with ‘Negro’? Can you show me one with ‘Negroid’ or ‘Mongoloid’ or whatever you claim were part of the only 3 options?



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



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 

That is what they are all saying about the African thing. I can't find anything from 1961 where a black person is called African as a race on any US documents. Maybe they are right but I haven't seen any proof of this.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by WildWorld
reply to post by ken10
 

That is what they are all saying about the African thing. I can't find anything from 1961 where a black person is called African as a race on any US documents. Maybe they are right but I haven't seen any proof of this.


Perhaps things were different in Hawaii at the time -- multinational and multi cultural ==

We really need to prosecute this Onaka character for affirming a false document!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
299
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join