It's Official: Experts says Barrack Obama's Birth Certificate is a Forged Document

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by aptness
So contrary to what Amaterasu and other birthers claim, scanning a document, converting to PDF and optimizing it will create the sort of ‘inconsistencies’ the birthers are all up in arms about.

Excuse me... I said SPECIFICALLY that the layers are NOT the issue. Please don't claim *I* was making an issue out of the layers (in fact, the layers were what allowed Them to more easily forge what They produced). *I* have issue with a half scanned, half forged mother's signature and multiple "scanned" letters being identical.

Please actually address MY issues rather than make false accusations.

I don't have issue with this... As I suspect, the released to the public version was probably cleaned up and enhanced for readability.. the source document is probably faded .. I know mine is.. there's too much conjecture and analysis over the public ( for download ) copy .. it's a fool's errand to analyze it and call it proof of anything when it's not the document that was certified.

Mini, I would have no issues if They offered a BC and said, "We scanned it in but it was too hard to read so We doctored it up so You all could see it." But that's not what went down. "Here it is. A true copy of the BC!"

And... I have scanned things that I thought I would have issues with, but a bit of adjusting levels, contrast and such brings out what I am looking for without resorting to painting it in. So to see things added, manipulated, and otherwise tinkered with - not only without explanation but without mention - is beyond the whole document processing that brings out the details, and should be mentioned specifically with an explanation.

But no... "Here it is, a true copy." Heh. Yeah, that riles Me.

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by Amaterasu
And You know that this director is incorruptible how?

Maybe the funniest birther thread yet.

Here is a clue. If the person in charge of Hawaiian birth certificates was corrupt, he would have just made one for Obama. Birthers claim the document is a fraud and yet somehow backed up by the guy that could just print out a real one with any info on it he wants.

I see. The director is a graphics expert, too. Able to forge documents along with all the other stuff (S)He does. Uh. Yeah.

The certs are numbered and so the director couldn't just "make one" in the usual fashion. Obama would have had a 2011 series number. The solution is to find a cert from the past and doctor it. I doubt the director has the expertise to do that. But I don't doubt (S)He is corruptible enough to say something someone else produced is valid.

You keep on laughing, though. I hear that's good for You.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by ontarff
It isn't about a personal attack on our elected President, it is a question on the legitimate proof that has not yet been provided by the State of Hawaii.

I must have missed all the birth certificates issued from the state all Previous presidents were born in - can you show us all a link to them.

they must be available, as according to you they must be provided by the state all previous presidents were born in!

So show us these birth certificates.

Dude. Are You suggesting that it's OK if Obama (whose birthplace is in question) doesn't show Us a true copy of His BC - because We never asked Others (whose places of birth were NOT in question) for Theirs? Really?

Whether We asked for Others' BC's or not is HIGHLY irrelevant. The point is that there is reason to question Obama's birthplace, We asked for a true copy of a BC, and We were given crap.

Stay on this and stop hauling in irrelevancies.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Dude. Are You suggesting that it's OK if Obama (whose birthplace is in question)

Except his birthplace is NOT in question - we all know he was born in Hawaii

doesn't show Us a true copy of His BC

he does not have to...

because We never asked Others (whose places of birth were NOT in question)

Who says that their places of birth were not in question? you?

Whether We asked for Others' BC's or not is HIGHLY irrelevant.

no, it shows the first time a man with an African for a father is voted President you whine about it!

The point is that there is reason to question Obama's birthplace,

there is? care to state that reason?

We asked for a true copy of a BC

and were shown both his short and long form...

and We were given crap.

no, just you refuse to accept the facts

Originally posted by the owlbear

Originally posted by Danbones
what happened to all the "anti birthers"
from the last couple of birth certificates?
they used all the same arguements we are seeing here

I don't see them on this one

Lord Ron Paul is against abortion...you must not.have gotten the memo...
Yet, he is for FREEDOM.
YEAH RIGHT, SAME SHEET DIFFERENT DAY.

almost half the black fetuses are aborted.
and you are talkin smack...whats Ron Paul shown in such a a non starting talking point got to do with the liar in the whitehouse

this is the true lie...
no this is the true lie
no this is the tru lie


here
let me miss direct you..to something that is a nonstarting miss direction.

thats what is known as a
DEAD GIVE AWAY

reply to post by mb2591

Name one thing he did huh?

HE KILLED BIN LADEN!!

Originally posted by BillyBoBBizWorth
If your an American,it seems you dont even understand or acknowledge your own laws.You have to be a natrual born citizen with BOTH parents natrual born citizens as well,not just your mother.

You then said:

My mistake, you are right.I didnt mean to repeat "natrual born" and i was just meant to have "U.S. citizens" after "both parents".
I do that abit sometimes,repeat phrases.

I'm sorry, I'll ask the same question again - show me where in the Constitution or US Code that it states that this is a requirement? It doesn't - so you're wrong again. As for "repeating phrases" - perhaps you should be more careful of what sources you repeat them from, since they appear to be completely incorrrect.

Like alot of ATS users,you just assumed as usual, when you should of asked me what i meant if you didnt understand clearly.

Since my command of english is at least comparable to yours, I understood your statement quite clearly. Your statement was plain, straightforward, and without ambiguity. It was also absolutely incorrect - as is your "amended" statement. Apparently *you* are the one who didn't understand what he was talking about, and to top it off you decide to give us "Americans" a haughty lecture in the process - piss-off jack.

userid1,its none of your business whether im american or not,thank you very much.

Well in that case, just to be evenhanded about it - OUR laws are none of YOUR business thank you very much.

Cheers

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Oh good grief. I wrote that in a thread titled: It's Official: Experts says Barrack Obama's Birth Certificate is a Forged Document and the OP here makes it clear that the document in question, the "birth certificate," is the PDF and not some other item.

The thread’s title doesn’t really help your argument since it mentions the “birth certificate,” and you are a different person from the OP, so I don’t see how the context of his posts automatically apply to yours. Moreover, in none of your previous posts in this thread you mentioned you were talking about the PDF file exclusively and you always talked about “the birth certificate.”

But now that we can get this behind us, can I claim you’re on the record as not saying the birth certificate is a fraud?

Yes, and We, the People, requested a TRUE copy of said document. We were given a file that was clearly a construct and not a straight scan

You can request whatever you want, doesn’t mean you are entitled to it.

What do you even mean by “a true copy”? The President showed one of the paper certified copies of the long form birth certificate at the press conference to reporters. Some reporters took pictures of it, and even got to touch it and feel the raised seal. You weren’t there to see it with your own eyes and touch it? Tough.

Do you also request NASA send you moon rocks so you personally inspect them and only then accept that NASA brought them from the moon? The standards you birthers make up are laughable. More so since you never applied them to other elected officials and Presidents.

There is no requirement or obligation that the President personally convince you to your satisfaction of the legitimacy of his birth certificate. You birthers think too much of yourselves.

and TOLD IT WAS A TRUE COPY. By the POTUS.

The President told you “the PDF was a true copy”? Can you show me the video or transcript of those statements?

Originally posted by weknowall
reply to post by mb2591

 

Name one thing he did huh?

HE KILLED BIN LADEN!!

edit on 6-7-2011 by weknowall because: (no reason given)

Haha even if he did that hasn't changed anything.

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood
Wow,

Another bro-birther thread with absolutely no point.

I would love to see you folks flail around in a courtroom...

Trying to condemn people that you are incapable of even establishing a motive for.

It's adorable.

"I promise that this is relevant somehow, Mr. judge, promise. I promise."

To see nonsense in a courtroom just look at Orly Oaitz's birther court cases - a judge even fined her for being moronic!

www.thepostemail.com...

A process server has delivered a Hawaii court-issued subpoena to Loretta J. Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, commanding her “to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying testing, or sampling of the material:” original 1961 typewritten birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, III [sic] issued 08.08.1961, signed by Dr. David Sinclair, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and registrar Lee, stored in the Health Department of the State of HI from 08081961 until now. The subpoena allows Fuddy until August 8, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. to produce the document.

looks like that Taitz who's a lawyer and a dentist among other thing who's name you so like to trash is getting her day in court after all. So how about you contribute for once and publish this story you can put your pro obama anti taitz spin all over it

so you gonna do something other than post trash about people? You gonna step up the the plate put your views on the podium and let ATS have at it?

edit on 6-7-2011 by UcDat because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-7-2011 by UcDat because: (no reason given)

I'll take that challenge - and do you one better.

Taitz'z subpeona has no legal weight behind it. And you would know this if you spent even 1/10th of the time fact checking as you do looking looking for evidence to support a position you blindly support. She MAY be lucky enough to get an "electronically stored" copy - but I doubt that would even come to pass. She'll NEVER see the original BC

Here's the bet in front of everyone at ATS:
If Hawaii shows up Aug 8th WITH Obama's original white copy BC - I'll leave ATS that day and never come back - not as Userid1, or any other screen name - ever.
If Hawaii shows up without the original BC, or doesn't even show up at all - you leave ATS that day and never show up again as UcDat or any other screen name - ever.

So...you willing to walk it like you talk it, or not?

Yeah, that's what I and countless others were saying when we first opened it in Adobe Illustrator. It doesn't even take an expert like this guy to smell a big stinkin rat.

reply to post by userid1


The date for that phony subpoena has come and gone.

Source (Yes, it's WND because they're the ones milking this case to sell Corsi books)

June 14, 2011
...
However, in a response dated yesterday, Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine refused to respond, according to documents obtained by WND.

"These subpoenas would require disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, and there is no exception that applies to allow disclosure to you," she told Taitz. "Vital statistics records, such as birth certificates, are protected by strict confidentiality requirements under state law."

She also raised the complaint that the subpoena was not "served upon my client in accordance with the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

"Thus, it is our position that we have no duty to respond."

Just FYI. You win.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Dude. Are You suggesting that it's OK if Obama (whose birthplace is in question)

Except his birthplace is NOT in question - we all know he was born in Hawaii

Clearly "We" all DON'T know this. If "We" all did, there would be no issues, now would there? No One would be asking for the BC, nor questioning what is provided.

doesn't show Us a true copy of His BC

he does not have to...

Hahaha. So it's ok to provide something and claim it as true when it was forged? Come now. And how else might We, the People, determine if someOne was born here as Our founding document requires? Just take Their word for it?

because We never asked Others (whose places of birth were NOT in question)

Who says that their places of birth were not in question? you?

All the People who are not questioning where They were born.

Whether We asked for Others' BC's or not is HIGHLY irrelevant.

no, it shows the first time a man with an African for a father is voted President you whine about it!

The fact that He is not melanin-deficient is irrelevant to Me. I am not "whining." And His melanin bonus does not mean He is exempt from what Our Constitution requires.

I am offended that, when We asked Our servant for His BC to verify His eligibility, He provided an altered document, claiming it to be true. I would be equally offended if an albino did the same.

The point is that there is reason to question Obama's birthplace,

there is? care to state that reason?

We have several BC's that have been floating around - and some suggest foreign birth. That should be enough for Us to ask the question, require the US birth be proven. Geez.

We asked for a true copy of a BC

and were shown both his short and long form...

With evidence of tampering. So We do not have a TRUE copy.

and We were given crap.

no, just you refuse to accept the facts

Hahaha. Enjoy that belief. You can think that if You want to. But I have a strong feeling it is You who are denying the issues and not accepting the gross issues with what We were given. Meh. Have a nice life.

So how`s Ea doing these days anyways, and is the throne comfortable?

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Dude. Are You suggesting that it's OK if Obama (whose birthplace is in question)

Except his birthplace is NOT in question - we all know he was born in Hawaii

Clearly "We" all DON'T know this. If "We" all did, there would be no issues, now would there? No One would be asking for the BC, nor questioning what is provided.

doesn't show Us a true copy of His BC

he does not have to...

Hahaha. So it's ok to provide something and claim it as true when it was forged? Come now. And how else might We, the People, determine if someOne was born here as Our founding document requires? Just take Their word for it?

because We never asked Others (whose places of birth were NOT in question)

Who says that their places of birth were not in question? you?

All the People who are not questioning where They were born.

Whether We asked for Others' BC's or not is HIGHLY irrelevant.

no, it shows the first time a man with an African for a father is voted President you whine about it!

The fact that He is not melanin-deficient is irrelevant to Me. I am not "whining." And His melanin bonus does not mean He is exempt from what Our Constitution requires.

I am offended that, when We asked Our servant for His BC to verify His eligibility, He provided an altered document, claiming it to be true. I would be equally offended if an albino did the same.

The point is that there is reason to question Obama's birthplace,

there is? care to state that reason?

We have several BC's that have been floating around - and some suggest foreign birth. That should be enough for Us to ask the question, require the US birth be proven. Geez.

We asked for a true copy of a BC

and were shown both his short and long form...

With evidence of tampering. So We do not have a TRUE copy.

and We were given crap.

no, just you refuse to accept the facts

Hahaha. Enjoy that belief. You can think that if You want to. But I have a strong feeling it is You who are denying the issues and not accepting the gross issues with what We were given. Meh. Have a nice life.

edit on 7/6/2011 by Amaterasu because: I failed tags again.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by userid1

 

The date for that phony subpoena has come and gone.

Source (Yes, it's WND because they're the ones milking this case to sell Corsi books)

June 14, 2011
...
However, in a response dated yesterday, Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine refused to respond, according to documents obtained by WND.

"These subpoenas would require disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, and there is no exception that applies to allow disclosure to you," she told Taitz. "Vital statistics records, such as birth certificates, are protected by strict confidentiality requirements under state law."

She also raised the complaint that the subpoena was not "served upon my client in accordance with the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

"Thus, it is our position that we have no duty to respond."

Just FYI. You win.

Thanks, but I already knew - that's why the bet. Since UcDat is so poor at doing his homework, I figured he wouldn't be able to resist and we'd have one less source of misinformation. Unfortunately, some of these birthers don't seem to understand that Taitz is all about the "DONATE" button on her web site. Don't get me wrong, she IS an imbecile - but she's also a greedy imbecile preying on the willfully uninformed - just like Corsi and WND.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Oh good grief. I wrote that in a thread titled: It's Official: Experts says Barrack Obama's Birth Certificate is a Forged Document and the OP here makes it clear that the document in question, the "birth certificate," is the PDF and not some other item.

The thread’s title doesn’t really help your argument since it mentions the “birth certificate,” and you are a different person from the OP, so I don’t see how the context of his posts automatically apply to yours. Moreover, in none of your previous posts in this thread you mentioned you were talking about the PDF file exclusively and you always talked about “the birth certificate.”

But now that we can get this behind us, can I claim you’re on the record as not saying the birth certificate is a fraud?

You can get Me on record as saying that, except for the PDF (and the high-res version), I have no idea if any of the BC's for Obama that are floating around on the web are real or if they are fake. The PDF (and high-res) version have been tampered with. Can We drop this deflection now?

Yes, and We, the People, requested a TRUE copy of said document. We were given a file that was clearly a construct and not a straight scan

You can request whatever you want, doesn’t mean you are entitled to it.

And how do You propose to establish whether someOne qualifies under Our founding document as being born in the US? Just take People's word for it? Because the requirement preceded any other "laws of the land," I say it trumps any subsequent "laws," unless We amend the Constitution.

What do you even mean by “a true copy”?

A copy that has not been tampered with.

The President showed one of the paper certified copies of the long form birth certificate at the press conference to reporters. Some reporters took pictures of it, and even got to touch it and feel the raised seal. You weren’t there to see it with your own eyes and touch it? Tough.

I am not dealing with that here. I am dealing with the PDF (and high-res) document stated to be a true representation and the fact that it has been tampered with.

Do you also request NASA send you moon rocks so you personally inspect them and only then accept that NASA brought them from the moon? The standards you birthers make up are laughable. More so since you never applied them to other elected officials and Presidents.

1. What I do regarding NASA is irrelevant.
2. I am NOT a "birther." I am a concerned citizen regarding a PDF (and high-res) document that was offered as a true copy which shows signs of having been tampered with.
3. If any other official provides a document, claiming it to be a true copy of something, and which shows signs of tampering, I would apply the same intensity - I don't like being lied to by My servants.

There is no requirement or obligation that the President personally convince you to your satisfaction of the legitimacy of his birth certificate. You birthers think too much of yourselves.

Except that little clause in Our founding document. And how do you propose to establish that ANYONE meets the requirement? Take Their word for it? Wait. I asked that already... Seriously, don't bother responding if You cannot answer how else this fact might be established.

Come to think of it, wasn't one of the reasons We even HAVE birth certificates is so that We can establish WHERE SOMEONE WAS BORN??? Geez, dude. If ever a Person questing for presidency, Our ultimate servant, We could whip out Our BC and proudly show Our nation of birth.

If *I* was seeking such honorable servitude, *I* surely would not evade that chance. Yes. MY birth was within these, the United States of America, within one of the States, and if ever *I* run for president... *I* would be VERY proud to prove this fact.

My big question stems from the fact that it was ever an issue to begin with. But that, too, is irrelevant to the question of the blatant forgery We see before Us.

W.T.F.

So. Think (please!) on that a while.

and TOLD IT WAS A TRUE COPY. By the POTUS.

The President told you “the PDF was a true copy”? Can you show me the video or transcript of those statements?

Really, dear? You think the pres has no say in what is presented on whitehouse.gov? (I know You can't be so dim as to actually think I was QUOTING Him, now. Scary if You are. Please, this ending is spooky.)




Just to add a final edit tag:

Here's an update:

U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN HONOLULU SUBPOENAS LORETTA J. FUDDY, HAWAII HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR

This subpoena was received and signed for by the Dept. of Health YESTERDAY, July 5, 2011. Notice that it was issued by a U.S. District Court in Hawaii.

www.thepostemail.com...

Originally posted by Deetermined
Here's an update:

U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN HONOLULU SUBPOENAS LORETTA J. FUDDY, HAWAII HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR

This subpoena was received and signed for by the Dept. of Health YESTERDAY, July 5, 2011. Notice that it was issued by a U.S. District Court in Hawaii.

www.thepostemail.com...

4 Posts between debunking of a claim and repeating of said claim.
Is that a new record?

Originally posted by Amaterasu
You can get Me on record as saying that [Obama’s physical birth certificate is not a fraud]

Good.

And how do You propose to establish whether someOne qualifies under Our founding document as being born in the US? Just take People's word for it?

Birth certificates.

Come to think of it, wasn't one of the reasons We even HAVE birth certificates is so that We can establish WHERE SOMEONE WAS BORN??? Geez, dude.

Good thing that when his name and birth place were questioned Obama publicly disclosed his birth certificate.

What do you even mean by “a true copy”?

A copy that has not been tampered with.

Obama’s birth certificate is a true copy. Here’s the state registrar’s stamp and signature attesting to such.

I am not dealing with that here. I am dealing with the PDF (and high-res) document stated to be a true representation and the fact that it has been tampered with.

It’s telling that you don’t want to ‘deal’ with the physical documents. With the PDF, on the other hand, you can continue this nonsense and raise non-issues about layers and pixels.

Unfortunately for you and the rest of the birthers, the PDF is absolutely irrelevant. Even if you got a court to demand Obama to prove his place of birth, the PDF would never be used.

And even if it was ever proven the PDF was deliberately manipulated, it would still mean absolutely nothing because the PDF is not legal or valid proof of citizenship or place of birth in the first place. The physical documents are. And the issuing authority of those physical documents has unequivocally stated, multiple times, that Obama was born in Hawaii and stands by the documents.

Birthers will never be able to overcome this burden unless they present actual proof that Obama was not born in Hawaii. Making allegations about a digital file that couldn’t be used as proof of birth even if Obama wanted to doesn’t get you any closer of doing that.

As I’ve been saying from the beginning, the PDF file is irrelevant and a non-factor. But I support every birther’s right to waste their time obsessing over it.