Obama's Birth Certificate faked?

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by xbook

So to prove the authenticity of the moon landing, you gonna build a rocket?

Wow.. that was a childish answer. ..

We get it, you love Obama, thus you no longer need to participate in this conversation, like ever again. This topic is reserved for people who are in the middle of the two parties and want to decide on their own in which direction their dick should swing.


Mkay..?

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

You've done it again. Conclusive answers are given, and you ignore them. A minor child does not lose US citizenship in any of the situations you bring up. No matter how many questions you ask, the answer is that, as a child, Obama did not lose his US citizenship. That is why Obama was deemed eligible to run for President by all three branches of the US government, and by both major political parties. If there is something you are unclear about, then you need to do the research, not us.

Same is true for his natural born citizen status. You are asking questions that have been evidently answered years ago. Again, the government and both political parties, fully aware of the citizenship status of Obama's parents, deemed him eligible. So you can answer your own questions above.

I'm sure that if I wanted to waste my time, I could come up with a large list of Presidents and eligible candidates, who have had a non-citizen parent. But it's not necessary for me to prove any of that to you, because the evidence lies in our current President.

A conclusive answer with no foundational documentation is a useless conclusion after everyone has heard it at least once. That kind of response can be just as well gotten by a yes/no poll.

This is supposed to be a conversation. Asking what information people have, so that through collaboration all can gain a clearer understanding of the subject has the best chance of people coming to the truth, than blindly accepting another person's conclusion.

Since noone can be trusted to base their conclusions entirely on truth, why should those who don't know the answer blindly accept what others have accepted in their self interest?

Whatever happened to the scientific method? What happened to critical thinking? Should we all have checked our need to know at the door when Obama was elected? I think not. And I dare say that you probably somewhere make arguments, ask for information, in order to uncover truth when there is something you deem to be of some significance. Or do you accept everything as a matter of majority viewpoint? Certainly you realize that the majority is ignorant, and hopelessly so.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by KGB7

Tell me, what is the abnormality that is circled in red?? What has caused it?

Back on topic... What are the possible ways that image could be like that? Is a doctored image the only explanation? Or is there something in the scanning process that could do that?

[mikeinsf]

Soooooo sick of this bullshit. For some, hearsay and innuendo will always "trump" common sense and pragmatism.

Long live our Kenyan communist dear leader!! give me a break.

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by scottwww

Back on topic... What are the possible ways that image could be like that? Is a doctored image the only explanation? Or is there something in the scanning process that could do that?

The paper was cut or two pieces of paper were being merged together but one side got unstuck/lose.

You can try this at home or with any scanner. You will have to have the top of the scanner open in order to have a black triangle next to the word State. That black triangle is the background light bleeding through, thus the scanner marks it black.

Just to shut the unbelievers up, i will do this at home to reproduce similar effect.

[KGB7]

Here are two of my own quick scans. Its not perfect, but proves the point.

First one has similar cut in the paper, but the top lid on the scanner is closed.

Second pic has the lid cover on the scanner open.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by scottwww

A conclusive answer with no foundational documentation is a useless conclusion after everyone has heard it at least once. That kind of response can be just as well gotten by a yes/no poll.

This is supposed to be a conversation. Asking what information people have, so that through collaboration all can gain a clearer understanding of the subject has the best chance of people coming to the truth, than blindly accepting another person's conclusion.

Since noone can be trusted to base their conclusions entirely on truth, why should those who don't know the answer blindly accept what others have accepted in their self interest?

Whatever happened to the scientific method? What happened to critical thinking? Should we all have checked our need to know at the door when Obama was elected? I think not. And I dare say that you probably somewhere make arguments, ask for information, in order to uncover truth when there is something you deem to be of some significance. Or do you accept everything as a matter of majority viewpoint? Certainly you realize that the majority is ignorant, and hopelessly so.

For someone who's sensitive to the tone of an argument, you sure know how to throw around the unjustified derogatory insults. You seem to be arguing with yourself; in other words, you're making assumptions and following premises that don't exist.

Look at what I said, then compare that to what you said. I said, "as a child, Obama would not lose US citizenship, regardless of the series of events that occurred". I also said, "with full awareness of the citizenship status of Obama's parents, he was deemed eligible to hold the office of President". Now what exactly are you saying? Are you asking me to prove those two statements? The latter statement is self-evident. The first statement was made by several people knowledgeable on the subject, and has not been questioned by anyone I'm aware of. I am not about to become an unpaid legal counsel, therefore I will not be checking-up on the statement, as I have all the reason to believe it is correct, given that it's consistent with reality. If you have an opposing view, it would be incumbent upon you to provide evidence.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by KGB7

Wow.. that was a childish answer. ..

We get it, you love Obama, thus you no longer need to participate in this conversation, like ever again. This topic is reserved for people who are in the middle of the two parties and want to decide on their own in which direction their dick should swing.

Mkay..?

Talk about a childish answer
You do realize that we're all gonna give your suggestions the big middle finger, right?

How do you justify the examination of the birth certificate at an atomic level, when there are people working for the state of Hawaii, who have actually seen the real thing, and might, well, say something like "Hey, that's a fake"? How do you explain the 1961 birth announcements? How do you explain the certification by the Governor of Hawaii?

I don't care who you think this topic is reserved for. I thought GW Bush was an abhorrent, incompetent buffoon; that doesn't mean I'm gonna keep obsessing about the 2000 Florida vote. This birther thing is just pathetic, and mainstream republicans are as embarrassed by the tea-bagging birthers as the others are.

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Talk about a childish answer
You do realize that we're all gonna give your suggestions the big middle finger, right?

How do you justify the examination of the birth certificate at an atomic level, when there are people working for the state of Hawaii, who have actually seen the real thing, and might, well, say something like "Hey, that's a fake"? How do you explain the 1961 birth announcements? How do you explain the certification by the Governor of Hawaii?

I don't care who you think this topic is reserved for. I thought GW Bush was an abhorrent, incompetent buffoon; that doesn't mean I'm gonna keep obsessing about the 2000 Florida vote. This birther thing is just pathetic, and mainstream republicans are as embarrassed by the tea-bagging birthers as the others are.

How do you explain the cut that i circled in red?? How do you explain that two pieces of paper were being merged together to look as one? See red giant red circle i posted above several times!

Can you explain anything??


Let me know ...

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by KGB7

Here are two of my own quick scans. Its not perfect, but proves the point.

First one has similar cut in the paper, but the top lid on the scanner is closed.

Second pic has the lid cover on the scanner open.

So, does the binder full of birth certificates in Kapiolani Hospital have cutaway parts? On Obama scan, it looks like it may have a cut about an inch from the top edge and all the way across. Are these certificates meant to tear out that way and leave an inch border or something like that behind? Kind of strange, but looks possible. I guess they would have had to take the page out of the binder for it to appear as you have demonstrated, so that the page would be able to curl up where the paper is slit. Otherwise the pages behind it would prevent curling.

Whoever did the scanning must have really been stupid. If the page was taken out and laid flat on the glass, why not close the cover on top of the page? I guess it makes sense if the person would be so careless as to leave OCR turned on.

Now what about other anomalies? (assuming this one is explained)

[11Series]

Originally Posted by KGB7

How do you explain the cut that i circled in red?? How do you explain that two pieces of paper were being merged together to look as one? See red giant red circle i posted above several times!

Can you explain anything??


Let me know ...

The PDF you are so stuck on clearly IS NOT the original PDF that was created in 1961 on the Kenyan computer system running the 1961 version of Adobe for Kenya.

/sarc


The PDF is not the original document. It is a color digital scan of the original document. It could have flying monkeys coming out of the PDF, and it still wouldn't matter.

The CONTENTS of the PDF are not in question. Thus the FORMAT of the PDF, whatever artifacts were created during scanning, and whatever was done to defeat anti-copying measures are all irrelevant. Explaining multiple layers is irrelevant. Shadows are irrelevant.

The CONTENTS have been confirmed over and over, and have been certified by the parties that matter over and over.

Do you believe the CONTENTS of the PDF are correct? If not, what proof do you have that the CONTENTS of the PDF do not match what is on the certificate of live birth that is on record in Hawaii?

You have nothing. Nothing.

Do you think Obama was born in Hawaii or not?

[11Series]

Originally Posted by scottwww

So, does the binder full of birth certificates in Kapiolani Hospital have cutaway parts? On Obama scan, it looks like it may have a cut about an inch from the top edge and all the way across. Are these certificates meant to tear out that way and leave an inch border or something like that behind? Kind of strange, but looks possible. I guess they would have had to take the page out of the binder for it to appear as you have demonstrated, so that the page would be able to curl up where the paper is slit. Otherwise the pages behind it would prevent curling.

Whoever did the scanning must have really been stupid. If the page was taken out and laid flat on the glass, why not close the cover on top of the page? I guess it makes sense if the person would be so careless as to leave OCR turned on.

Now what about other anomalies? (assuming this one is explained)

What do anomalies of the scanning process matter? They don't change the CONTENTS of the document.

Do you have any evidence that the CONTENTS of the PDF are different than the original?

That is a yes or no question. Are you capable of answering a yes or no question?

[OldArmy]

Anyone who engages any further with these mouth breathers is as crazy as they are. These are not the kind of people you would give five seconds to in person, why do it here.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by KGB7

Here are two of my own quick scans. Its not perfect, but proves the point.

First one has similar cut in the paper, but the top lid on the scanner is closed.

Second pic has the lid cover on the scanner open.

Looking at this again, in your example scans, the curled page leaves a black gap. If in the Obama scan it was all one page, then there would also be a black gap. But there is not. So, how could the Obama birth certificate scan be one page even if that pager were cut as you demonstrated? I don't see how it could be that way. Case is not closed on this one. Any explanation?

[11Series]

Originally Posted by OldArmy

Anyone who engages any further with these mouth breathers is as crazy as they are. These are not the kind of people you would give five seconds to in person, why do it here.

Two years ago, when this first came out I would have agreed with you. Sadly these mouth breathers are infectious, as we saw how the number of Birthers kept rising and rising.

Time to go after the source of the infection.

In this case, it is one disingenuous political hack who doesn't even believe his own BS, and one truly lost individual that is incapable of weighing evidence.

Thanks for throwing in a voice of reason from the anti-Obama side. More of that is needed, the same way McCain had to correct the crazy-hair lady who thought Obama was an Arab/Muslim.

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by scottwww

So, does the binder full of birth certificates in Kapiolani Hospital have cutaway parts? On Obama scan, it looks like it may have a cut about an inch from the top edge and all the way across. Are these certificates meant to tear out that way and leave an inch border or something like that behind? Kind of strange, but looks possible. I guess they would have had to take the page out of the binder for it to appear as you have demonstrated, so that the page would be able to curl up where the paper is slit. Otherwise the pages behind it would prevent curling.

Whoever did the scanning must have really been stupid. If the page was taken out and laid flat on the glass, why not close the cover on top of the page? I guess it makes sense if the person would be so careless as to leave OCR turned on.

Now what about other anomalies? (assuming this one is explained)

There is no cut away parts. There should be borders just like borders on your HS degree or College Degree. Fancy looking borders.


If you look at my second image, you see black line from top to bottom. On his there is no black line from top to bottom, because that side of the page is wider and then the rest of it and it hides under the rest of the left side of the paper. Thus you dont see background light bleeding through.
Makes sense?

My image;
Ok do this. Take your hands and face palms towards you. Now have your palms touch each other side by side. Now imagine your hands are now a piece of paper. Make a cut in the middle. Dont move them apart, just move one away from each other at an angle.

Obamas BC:
Move your palms apart a little, you just made a cut in the paper.
Now over lap your palm over the other. Pinky on top of pinky.
With one sheet of paper this is not possible. Its only possible if two separate pieces of paper were joined together.



I'll duplicate the effect a bit later.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

For someone who's sensitive to the tone of an argument, you sure know how to throw around the unjustified derogatory insults. You seem to be arguing with yourself; in other words, you're making assumptions and following premises that don't exist.

That you are satisfied you know the answer to life, the universe, and everything and the answer is "42" is in no way satisfying to anyone who doesn't see how you arrived at your conclusion, or who has disagreement with your process and the gaps in it. By discussion with people who are looking for solutions based on examination and evidence, maybe an concensus can be formed. Without that effort, the divide widens, rather than narrows.

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Look at what I said, then compare that to what you said. I said, "as a child, Obama would not lose US citizenship, regardless of the series of events that occurred". I also said, "with full awareness of the citizenship status of Obama's parents, he was deemed eligible to hold the office of President". Now what exactly are you saying? Are you asking me to prove those two statements? The latter statement is self-evident. The first statement was made by several people knowledgeable on the subject, and has not been questioned by anyone I'm aware of. I am not about to become an unpaid legal counsel, therefore I will not be checking-up on the statement, as I have all the reason to believe it is correct, given that it's consistent with reality. If you have an opposing view, it would be incumbent upon you to provide evidence.

Where are my assumptions? I have offered questions and observations. There have been no answers with clarifying explanation from you or others.


"as a child, Obama would not lose US citizenship, regardless of the series of events that occurred"

This is your conclusion. You have offered no proof it is a true statement. I don't know it to be true or false.

"with full awareness of the citizenship status of Obama's parents, he was deemed eligible to hold the office of President"

I am aware that various government entities do not want to touch this. You can accept as gospel what these office holders decide, or you can look at them critically and with suspicion, or you can ask for clarity. Because there has not been a full discussion as was called for by many. But instead the conclusion is always to look the other way. This leads to more dissatisfaction.

Can you see that your providing conclusions without support do nothing to resolve anything?

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by 11Series

What do anomalies of the scanning process matter? They don't change the CONTENTS of the document.

Do you have any evidence that the CONTENTS of the PDF are different than the original?

That is a yes or no question. Are you capable of answering a yes or no question?

It seems to me I have answered this type of question many times. I think it is probably containing accurate data. I support the verification of the data and the scans that are supposed to have proved it.

Why the scan appears as odd as it does is a serious question. Perhaps there are logical explanations. We have started discussing those possible explanations.

The best settlement to any argument would be for a full forensic examination of the document and pertinent details.

Are there not also questions regarding the certificate number? I don't remember the details. Wasn't it that the certificates immediately preceding Obama's number and those immediately following it were all dated a month later? If that is true, it deserves explanation. Maybe somebody else has that information right now.

My copy of the Jerome Corsi book just arrived.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by KGB7

With one sheet of paper this is not possible. Its only possible if two separate pieces of paper were joined together.

I totally agree with you. The image could not possibly be the result of one piece of paper.

Does anyone else have a different explanation? If not, then why would the Obama document have combined two pieces of paper like this? Is it a mask to hide the margins? For what purpose?

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by 11Series

What do anomalies of the scanning process matter? They don't change the CONTENTS of the document.

Do you have any evidence that the CONTENTS of the PDF are different than the original?

That is a yes or no question. Are you capable of answering a yes or no question?

Yes! Is my answer. I have provided proof.

Now the burden is on you to prove my proof false. See attached images.

[mikeinsf]

Originally Posted by OldArmy

Anyone who engages any further with these mouth breathers is as crazy as they are. These are not the kind of people you would give five seconds to in person, why do it here.

AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do not validate absurdity with a response. Sometimes I wish I were Canadian. This fabricated "controversy" is a national embarrassment... founded in hysteria and laced with racist undertones.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by mikeinsf

AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do not validate absurdity with a response. Sometimes I wish I were Canadian. This fabricated "controversy" is a national embarrassment... founded in hysteria and laced with racist undertones.

Are you indicating that you also see this as not one page, but instead at least two pieces of paper?