BY MICHAEL P. RETHMAN – The tough economic times of late 2008 produced an once-in-a-generation leadership opportunity that a talented, attractive and multi-ethnic young president might have exploited to achieve good things for all Americans.
Unfortunately, President Obama has shown over three-plus years that he’s not that leader – unless killing Osama bin Laden is somehow all that matters. Indeed, in light of a record replete with domestic and international fumbles, including a budget deficit driven to unimagined levels and persistently high rates of unemployment/underemployment, Obama ought to be soundly defeated in November.
However, with so many Americans now feeding at the government trough, his defeat is far from a sure thing.
But still lurking in the media shadows is a compelling constitutional question that won’t leave Barack Obama alone. Obama’s long-form birth certificate, released by the White House amid great fanfare last spring, was recently and very publicly derided by a the nationally known Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County (Phoenix) Arizona.
Finally, after four years of media-abetted obfuscation of Obama’s ever-changing documents, someone in authority is finally willing put his reputation on the line and publicly raise questions that should have been unambiguously answered years ago.
Ironically, a revival of this political sideshow may be what derails the Obama re-election effort in November. Here’s why: Obama’s self-touted long-form birth certificate, forced into the public arena by then-candidate Donald Trump last spring, was almost immediately exposed as a simplistic cut-and-paste construct — yet this story has gone ignored for almost a year.
Indeed, an Adobe Illustrator pro and video game writer in Atlanta, who goes by the YouTube handle orangegold1, downloaded the document from whitehouse.gov and quickly exposed it as fraudulent. Orangegold1’s initial 7-minute YouTube video depicts a step-by-step forensic deconstruction of the document. This video has had nearly 1.3 million hits thus far and its detractors’ criticisms have been thoroughly answered in Orangegold1’s follow-up videos.
So will legitimate concerns regarding the latest versions Obama’s birth documentation continue to go unknown to most Americans? Unfortunately, it’s hard to count on reporters and editors in the so-called elite American media to ask the right questions.
Indeed, the Arpaio investigation has been widely reported in other countries, but so far the story has been covered domestically only by the Washington Times and World Net Daily.
But should the story behind Arpaio’s investigation eventually gain media traction in the U.S., Barack Obama’s re-election campaign could be in serious trouble.
Keith, thanks for confirming Orangegold1’s (Albert Renshaw’s) veracity in his deconstruction of the Adobe document. It’s been seen almost 1.3 million times, yet might as well be at the bottom of the ocean in terms of the media attention it’s rec’d.
Does it bother you that the computer expert for the Sheriff said in July, 2008 that she lives to make a mockery of Barack Obama? Did she finally get her opportunity in 2011?
Here’s another good presentation that debunks the “ocr scanner process made it all happen” theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdxaXaTcRQs
The bottom line is this document is a fake, and not a very good one.
The problem is that everyone is focused only on the pdf. There are in fact three copies of the BC:
1) AP high resolution image (shows that the infamous TXE is actually THE)
2) Lower resolution pdf
3) Savanah Guthrie photos of the document and her report of having “felt the raised seal”.
And of course there is the documentation from the Hawaii DOH that they made two copies of the LFBC for the President. And the State of Hawaii’s statement:
“We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai’i,” Hawai’i Health Director Loretta Fuddy said. “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai’i.”
and
“In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai’i, and both provide the same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawa’„i at 7:24 p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.”
So why forge a document that that says the same thing as the original.
What do you do when you realize the person acting as US President was never eligible to get into the election?
What do you do if the person acting as president has a wife and two daughters living in the White House, but he was never constitutionally eligible to be in the presidential election?
Well, Barack Hussein Obama is that man.
Now what are you going to do?
Contact your US Senators, State Governor, State Attorney General, any US Attorney, the US Attorney General, and tell them.
[…] cut-and-paste construct — yet this story has gone ignored for almost a year. read it all here.. Arpaio Investigation Brings Up Compelling Questions About Obama’s Birth Certificate and Eligib… __________________ "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot […]
To Silverbull8: I concur with both your observations and conclusions. However, no one cares. It’s my hope that some will care that Obama has been party to forged documents. That’s a lot easier for most folks to understand than whether or not he’s a “natural born citizen” or not in light of his dad’s status when young Barack was born. Not more important, but more easily understood. Politics is about the art of the possible. most folks refuse to focus on things that are complicated, they prefer it simple. (I wish it was otherwise too!) But here’s what’s simple and straightforward: “Barack Obama participated in, knew or should have known that his long form birth certificate (and draft registration paperwork) are forgeries. Do we want a President who produces or abets forgeries and lies to the American people?”
Cheers!
[…] spasms of a failed identity have culminated in Obama’s US birth being questioned, his ID cards being investigated, and his avowed identity as a Christian being doubted. Many firmly believe that Obama is actually a […]
[…] spasms of a failed identity have culminated in Obama’s US birth being questioned, his ID cards being investigated, and his avowed identity as a Christian being doubted. Many firmly believe that Obama is actually a […]
To July2006:
Your post is unclear. Obama ran in 2008 using a computer generated abstract that many were told was the original b/c and not to worry about it.. The long form was released in April 2011 as a .pdf document, available for download from whitehouse.gov. That .pdf is an obvious fraud; if you don’t believe this look at the link in Keith’s post above.
Regarding what Loretta Fuddy said or didn’t say, the document they released is a fraud. Fuddy may not know this, Obama may not know it, but, again, look at the video linked in Keith’s post, which is the same one to which I referred in my op-ed.
Why forge a document that “says the same thing” as the earlier abstract? Have you actually looked at these documents? The long-form has a lot more details — details that appear to be forged. No one is claiming the abstract (short form) was forged.
But suppose the genuine b/c has no docs’ names on it? Etc.? It was very easy to get a b/c here in Hawaii back in the day, indeed Stanley Ann’s mom could have done it — even if Stanley Ann and young Barack were not in Hawaii.
I’m unclear about your response.
“the document they released is a fraud. Fuddy may not know this, Obama may not know it”
From the Hawaii DOH website “Enclosed please find two certified copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth. I have witnessed the copying of the certificates and attest to the authenticity of these copies.” She is talking about the Long Form BC not the short form.
And then the Hawaii DOH website links directly to the White House pdf.
https://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
And there are still the photos of the Long Form Birth Certificate taken by NBC News reporter Savanah Guthrie, they are photos of the actual document not a pdf image. Those photos show the name of the doctor and the hospital.
https://lockerz.com/s/96540937
https://lockerz.com/s/96540721
As to the video of Keith’s, have you read Dr. Neal Krawetz (Ph.d in computer science) analysis of the pdf?
“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”
https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/428-After-Birth.html
Thanks for the additional information.I stand corrected on Fuddy — she may be telling the truth, she may be lying. After all, we live where we live. And, if what you wrote above is an accurate quote, it’s grammatically incorrect insofar as the term “certificates” in the second paragraph makes no sense. Or does it?
And why not just make a photocopy? Why in heck was a pdf version produced to start with?
Sorry, I’m unsure if what you wrote about Guthrie’s photos is accurate. Indeed, her photos look like a photo I anyone might shoot of the whitehouse.gov pdf file.
Krawetz’s analysis goes beyond my understanding of digital documents. He may be right. However, Renshaw (orangegold1) addressed a number of Krawetz’s observations in his several follow-up vids when he got the same/similar criticisms last spring. Take a look yourself. Furthermore, Krawetz doesn’t tackle all of what Renshaw found…. e.g., some of the layers have very little in them, other than what look like cuts to be pasted and much of the handwriting/signatures look like they was digitally created; I can’t find anyone who has addressed all of what Renshaw depicted..
But in deference to the info you’ve provided, I will no longer call the document a fraud. I will instead call it a “suspect document” and we’ll see where Arpaio goes with all this. Truth be told, as I wrote originally, Obama ought to be sent packing based on his poor performance in office, if nothing else.
Thanks for your insights.
“And why not just make a photocopy? Why in heck was a pdf version produced to start with?”
Well, the pdf format is one of the most widely used. Virtually anyone with a computer can download a pdf in the Adobe Acrobat reader. So if you want to make the an image available to the widest group of Americans, the pdf is the format to use. BTW, virtually all documents posted to the whitehouse.gov website (and there are a lot unrelated to the BC) are in the pdf format.
“Sorry, I’m unsure if what you wrote about Guthrie’s photos is accurate. Indeed, her photos look like a photo I anyone might shoot of the whitehouse.gov pdf file.”
The Guthrie photo (wide shot) came be shown by adjusting the contrasts to be lying on a table. Also the raised seal is visible as well as wrinkles in the paper caused by the impression of the seal but in the pdf the seal can only be seen if the contrast is adjusted radically.
Finally, everyone is ignoring the high resolution copy handed out at the same time.
https://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_obama_certificate_dm_110427.pdf
Zoom in on the Registrar stamp. The Sheriff’s report prepared by Mara Zebest, says that on the pdf there is a misspelling in the stamp (TXE).
“Figure 13 displays text color inconsistencies in dates, along with a misspelling in the official stamp text—”TXE” instead of “THE.” While it may be argued that the misspelling is merely a function of the stamp ink applied unevenly, the odds signifi cantly decrease that this would occur on both vertical bars that aff ect both sides of the “H” character. Both sides pull in substantially displaying an “X.” The stamp also sports suspicious markings in the “Alvin” signature that has been referred to as a “happy face.”
But this is only the result of making the lower resolution pdf. In the higher resolution image the “TXE” becomes clearly “THE”. There was a problem with ink transfer from the stamp to the document. This can be seen in other letters in the stamp as missing portions of the letters. The compression of data from the original scan (megabytes of data) to the much smaller pdf file (kilobytes of data) resulted in a lot of information being lost.
How can a computer “expert” make that fundamental of a mistake?
You may wish to visit this site.
https://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/category/exploring-the-layers/
For any questions you have about the layers, the blogger will be happy to answer.
Comments are closed.