“Point of forgery” busted
Carl Gallups has a video out, where his voice narrates the Zullo/Gillar animated overlay showing 9 points of forgery. One of the items supposedly copied from the Ah’Nee to Obama certificate is the word “Oahu” in Box 6b. Here are two screen grabs from the Carl’s video, the Obama certificate on the left and the Ah’nee on the right:
Even in thus rather blurry image, it’s pretty easy to see that Obama’s certificate shows a “flying capital” on the letter “O” and the Ah’nee does not. We have sharper images to look at, but I fail to see how even Gallups could fail to notice the obvious dissimilarity!
I maintain that the latest release from Zullo is so silly that it shows they were desperate to get something out before Arpaio’s term came to an end and with that Zullo’s position as Cold Case Posse lead investigator was also terminating. We know Zullo’s (and Gillar’s) work was shoddy before but this video is amateurish even by those standards.
The lower case “a” is certainly not identical. Really pathetic work on their part. This is the best they could do over 4 years after the last press conference?
Not only that, but they were “working” feverishly until the start of the conference.
Since “really pathetic” summarizes their entire work ethic and product I think that about covers it.
In one of the other threads here Gorefan quoted Zullo reading from the Hayes report and a section Hayes spoke of similarities between the Ah’Nee certificate and the Obama LFBD PDF image. If that is accurate and there is only one Hayes report then that means this theory dates back to earlier than June 1, 2013 when Zullo first mentioned Hayes work for the CCP.
If that is true then the current theory seems to have been around much longer than the past few months. Why would Zullo only trot this out at the last minute?
You are absolutely correct.
Here is a comment Mark Gillar posted on NBCs site back in 2013.
“The two August date stamps were lifted directly off another birth certificate. Yes, the day was changed, but everything else is identical including the angles of both stamps. Tell me RC, what are the odds of two hand-placed stamps on two separate birth certificates having the exact same exact angles? Did the forger get lazy or is it just that all capturing tools would have preserved the original angles?
There is an old saying RC: “A dollar bill that is 99% genuine is still counterfeit.” Keep that in mind as we move forward.
Obama’s LFBC isn’t 99% genuine, but you get the idea.”
https://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/xerox-7655-ap-character-degradations/
Arpaio is out. They needed to do something and this was it.
Zullo had to coroborate Haye’s finding with people in Italy. The investigation reveals that Zullo had multiple goings back and forth with Hayes. The people in Italy used a different methodology in their analysis of the birth certificate and came back with the same findings. Hayes and Italy corborated their findings, in other words their findings match using different methologies.
John:
Let’s see the evidence of what you speak. This whole presentation was more like a parlor trick then a professional law enforcement presentation. Are my expectations too high for a bunch of flunky volunteers who aren’t even police officers? What are Zullo’s academic credentials? What are Gillar’s academic credentials? And what are Gallups’ academic credentials other than a Masters in WND? Where was Reed Hayes and his report? Nowhere to be seen.
This presser was one huge crash and burn.
If Zullo said “Marco” said it, it is good enough for john!
Mark Gillar has responded to the content of this article:
“We are very aware of the Os in Oahu. The explanation will be in the full report
to Congress as are other points of forgery that were not discussed at the PC.”
I agree. If you just look at their claims, and look closely at each of the 9 images, none of them are really even plausible.
In every single image, pretty much every letter or number is pretty clearly different from the corresponding one in the other certificate.
Yeah, really. And it’s not just that the “O” in “Oahu” is aligned differently. It’s the characters themselves. They’re visibly different.
The last 2 out of 9 come closest to being plausible. Those are X’s in checkboxes.
Even with those, if you look carefully at blown-up images, you can see that in both cases, they’re not aligned.
In example #8, the “X” on Obama’s certificate is at about the same height in the box, but it appears to be slightly more to the left than the one on Ah’Nee’s certificate. If you look at the joining of the “X” with the “o” in the word “no” above, you’ll see that on Ah’Nee’s certificate, the top left of the “X” blends right in with the “o.” And the top right portion of the “X” blends in with the comma that follows it as well.
On Obama’s, you can see a portion of the serif sticking out to the left in both instances. A portion of the serif sticks out to the left from the “o,” and a portion of the serif on the next part of the “X” sticks out to the left from the comma.
This is not present in the Ah’Nee certificate image.
You can also see by a visual comparison of the blank spaces at the upper left, and by a visual comparison of distances from the lower right X branches from the box edge to the right, that these are not the same image, even allowing for the possibility of some kind of graphic processing that might have blurred one or the other.
On the 9th item, if you look at the bottom of the X’s, Obama’s is clearly, again, a little bit to the left.
Again for your reference, the point-by-point comparison:
http://i66.tinypic.com/scf320.jpg
So really, their entire claim that Obama’s birth certificate was copied from Ah’Nee’s is simply and visibly false.
And about 90% of it is OBVIOUSLY so.
That’s even before considering that their grand presentation directly contradicts itself.
If they’re proven anything, it’s that no one was able to find any item on the Obama image that you can plausibly say was copied from anything on the Ah’Nee one.
This was simply about throwing a final bit of flimflammery to the gullible. Nothing more.
Presumably that would be because they’re even more implausible than the 9 points of total nonsense that they presented to the public.
In other words: It was so necessary to show Gillar’s video twice at the press conference that Zullo simply ran out of time to acknowledge that these “obvious points of forgery” aren’t even remotely identical.
Any BC with the “Ukelelee” at the bottom is a fake.
Bottom line, both of them are forgeries.
I did this video yesterday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOUV8TBQNpk&t=10s
I am the Obama (paper) Forger
Of course, even if the so-called “9 points of forgery” were indistinguishable, the premise that similar features implies forgery is a leap of faith to begin with. It is an untested assertion. I am an identical twin. So who is the forgery, me or my twin brother?
In order to assert that similar features in different pdf documents imply a forgery there would have to be a body of forensic science that substantiates this form of document verification is a valid methodology. I am unaware of any such science and I doubt that one could find a single criminal forgery case prosecuted on the basis that features between two different documents are similar or identical.
Who’s collating the “Dr. Conspiracy kits” for every member of Congress?
Since Gillar is reading here maybe he can tell us when all the Obots are going to prison or did he make that video private like several others?
Yes, when you are running a major criminal investigation you always hide you best evidence and trot out the easily debunked bull hockey.
What a bunch of clowns.
The November election was not kind to the Hawaii Republican Party. Hawaii is now the only state in the nation where one party holds all the seats in a legislative chamber. The Hawaii state Senate went from 24 Democrats and 1 Republican to 25 Democrats and 0 Republicans. The lone Republican, Sam Slom, who had flirted with the birther cult was defeated for re-election.
In the Hawaii House of Representatives there had been 44 Democrats and 7 Republicans, the election changed that to 45 Democrats and 6 Republicans for a Democratic super-majority. The Governor is also a Democrat.
The final furtive gasps of the dying Birther Cult can expect no help from the state government in Hawaii.
Indeed Gillar has now expunged his infamous “The Wait is Almost Over” video in which he predicted people were going jail for forging Obama’s birth certificate.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2014/11/the-wait-is-almost-over/
Actually… no. Neither the alleged expertise of Hayes, nor the alledged expertise of the Italian lab are relevant to any of the alleged conclusions Zullo and Gillar announced at the press conference.
It is clear that the “date stamp angle” nonsense was originally Gillar’s, and all that the two “experts” did was fail to shut it down as stupid.
Read: “We are very aware that what we actually said in the press conference was not true. We have excuses in a report that we will pretend to release to a congress that has already told us multiple times to go pound sand, will never be released publicly, and that no one will ever see.”
john,
It’s bullsh*t.
See: http://i66.tinypic.com/scf320.jpg
Maybe you can have your babysitter show you the pretty pictures and explain them to you.
Be sure to have her click on the image a couple of times and enlarge it in the browser (Ctrl +) until the graphic fills the whole screen width, and you can see the comparisons large and clear.
Gillar should go to jail, along with Arpaio, Zullo, and the rest of those (such as Jerome Corsi) who perpetrated the fraud.
all of this criticism of the forensic examiner, and the various sides of the argument, and there appears to be no forensic examiner on this board, and I have not heard anyone claim they were such an expert, and but all ready to dispute everyone on the other side.
My position is constant, the darn LFBC is too ragged to have been produced by a clerk in the HDOH. Any supervisor would have had a new one produced that met the standards of a professional agency.
All else is trivia!
Just compare Nordyke’s with Obama’s
Fortunately Pete had captured the dialog from this late great video by Mark Gillar:
THE WAIT IS ALMOST OVER!
PEOPLE WILL BE PROSECUTED!
THE SMOKING GUNS HAVE BEEN FOUND!
WITNESSES WILL TESTIFY!
SHOCKING NEW EVIDENCE CONFIRMS!
DOCUMENT FRAUD HAS BEEN COMMITTED!
WE KNOW WHO!
WE KNOW HOW!
WE KNOW WHY!
AND WE KNOW WHEN!
What a load of bullsh*t.
(The last line was Pete’s comment.)
Video link: https://youtu.be/GhrNwYt9oU0 fro,m December 26, 2013
So now maybe Gillar can tell us who how why and when. 😆
THE WAIT IS ALMOST OVER!
I guess not. We have been waiting for three years and we have nothing Mark
PEOPLE WILL BE PROSECUTED!
Arpaio? Zullo? Both?
THE SMOKING GUNS HAVE BEEN FOUND!
😆
WITNESSES WILL TESTIFY!
I may be wrong but what happened to probable cause? Indictments? Discovery? Don’t they come first?
SHOCKING NEW EVIDENCE CONFIRMS!
The only shocking thing is that Zullo had the stupidity to trot it out.
DOCUMENT FRAUD HAS BEEN COMMITTED!
Sure it has Mark.
WE KNOW WHO!
Ah’Nee Randolph? Her boss? Alvin Onaka?
WE KNOW HOW!
Yeah, they copied the Ah’Nee certificate but not very well. 😆
WE KNOW WHY!
Usurping!
AND WE KNOW WHEN!
Of course you do!
I hadn’t commented or checked in much for years. Quite entertaining as always. Is President Trump a lifeline to this site?
What forensic examiner am I criticizing? I have never seen a report from any forensic examiner that said Obama’s certificate was a forgery. I have seen 6, however, who said they didn’t find evidence of forgery.
It takes an expert to say “this feature of the PDF is impossible from an automated process.” Anyone can say with authority: I can create this feature of the PDF in a test, and then show it.
Trader Jack says: “My position is constant, the darn LFBC is too ragged to have been produced by a clerk in the HDOH.”
He is making the kind of statement that only an expert could make with any kind of authority.That is the essential difference between the birthers and their debunkers. Birthers make claims as to what is possible or not, when they really don’t have wide experience as to what is possible. Birther opponents simply say it’s possible because here it is. We don’t have to examine thousands of documents, be intimately familiar with hundreds of machines and software packages. All we have to do is find a counterexample. Our job is infinitely simpler, and requires little specialized knowledge.
This was a direct and public claim from a member of Arpaio’s official team – Mark Gillar produced multiple official videos that were presented as “evidence” at Arpaio & Zullo’s press conferences – that they were going to be arresting and prosecuting people.
Such a claim represented what people were supposedly receiving by giving their money to Arpaio’s reelection campaigns and to the “Cold Case Posse.”
It was flat-out false. No one was ever going to be arrested and prosecuted, for the simple reason that there never was any forgery. And a hell of a lot of people KNEW there was never any forgery.
Soliciting MONEY from people on the basis of FALSE claims is FRAUD.
I repeat: Joe Arpaio, Mike Zullo, Mark Gillar, and those with them like Jerome Corsi who participated in this fraud should be in jail.
I may be speaking for the owner of the site here, but it’s my understanding that for several years, this site has been on a planned countdown to a final farewell and archive status due to occur on the inauguration of the next President, whoever that President might be.
It is of course to the nation’s eventual misfortune that it turns out to be possibly the worst possible major candidate of either party. It is an oddity that it turns out to be one of the most prominent former birthers.
In any event, it’s my understanding that we’re in the (long preplanned) final days of an 8-year adventure.
Anyone with two eyes and a lack of physical or mental blindness can see that the latest claims from Arpaio and Zullo, like every claim before them (including the promises quoted above that definite, specific people were absolutely going to be arrested and prosecuted), are nothing but bullsh*t.
I mean really. It’s astonishing that you believe this bullsh*t.
By the way: Have you ever considered investing in prime Florida real estate? I’m talking about a great vacation and property appreciation opportunity.
Failing that, major city bridges are a great investment. Just think of the traffic!
Why would we need to produce a forensic examiner to counter anything when the issuing authority said that they issued the document? By law the ultimate authority on the authenticity of a document is the issuing authority. It’s actually in the Constitution. Hawaii has fully verified not one but two birth documents for Barack Obama.
Any forensic expert who would take money to issue an opinion on the validity of the LFBC PDF without noting in big black bold letters that the state of Hawaii validated this document is unethical and a fraud.
Hawaii didn’t produce the PDF. The PDF was just the result of a mundane scan to email done at the White House made by using one of the two certified copies obtained from Hawaii. I assume by “ragged” you are referring to the fact that the long form certificate was produced by printing a reduced copy on to a sheet of Simpson green security paper. I believe the reason for doing this was t make sure that all of the original document was included since the original was scanned from a bound book.
The Nordyke certificates were copied many years ago using a completely different technology. They were negative photostat image and of course copied full size.
Actually, what makes the whole question about the authenticity of Obama’s LFBC trite and “trivial” is the fact that the State of Hawaii has officially verified his birth certificate not once, but twice.
No so-called “forensic examination” is worth the time of day without first acknowledging and accounting for that simple fact. No so-called “forensic examiner” is at all credible if he or she has ignored that singularly essential point.
The agenda has become more important than the truth. I am completely convinced that Zullo and his crazy supporters including the faux news outlets like WND and others are more interested in promoting an agenda than the truth. It really becomes a waste of time to try to have an honest debate when we focus on the truth and they promote their agenda with complete disregard for the truth. It is a no win situation trying to tell Birthers the truth.
I have compared them. They look very similar to me. Would you care to be specific about the differences you see?
As for Obama’s birth certificate looking “ragged,” what, exactly, are you referring to? There are no misspellings and nothing is illegible.
Trader Jack doesn’t realize that he is commenting on a picture of a document that he is viewing on a computer screen and not the real three dimensional document itself.
How would Trader Jack know is any Hawaii birth certificate is “ragged,” he’s never seen the hard copy.
The state of Hawaii has verified the authenticity of the original document. That is all that has ever been needed, and even that is not required by law since no state or division of the federal government requires a birth certificate to run for office or assume an elective office,
NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 27, 2011
HAWAI‘I HEALTH DEPARTMENT GRANTS PRESIDENT OBAMA’S REQUEST FOR CERTIFIED COPIES OF ‘LONG FORM’ BIRTH CERTIFICATE
HONOLULU – The Hawai’i State Health Department recently complied with a request by President Barack Obama for certified copies of his original Certificate of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “long form” birth certificate.
“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.”
http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/files/2013/05/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf
In other news, the sky is blue.
Our friend, “trader jack,” is in denial and continues to tilt at windmills.
The State of Hawaii has, on multiple occasions, verified that Obama was born there, that they possess his original birth certificate and that the PDF of Obama’s LFBC on the White House website is accurate and authentic.
That’s all that need be said. Nothing else is necessary. End of story.
Mr. C
The Green background of the Johanna Ah’nee pdf image does not exhibit the “White halos” surrounding the text characters which are visible in the Obama pdf image. Isolating the Green background layer of the Ah’nee pdf image in Illustrator shows it to be regular basket weave pattern without any White Halos. The White halos outline the text on the Obama certificate only. This is the case for text characters on the background layer as well as on the separate 1 Bit layer. Those who support the Obama image as being genuine have provided no explaination for this difference between the two images.
This is important because the two pdf images are each purported to be scanned-to-pdf images of the Green background certified copies. In that case, the HDOH would be producing some certified copies with halos and some without. Otherwise the halos would have to be an artifact of the scanner used to create the Obama pdf image.
I know that you know better because you were closely involved in the discussions surrounding the experiments scanning an Obama birth certificate facsimile with the Xerox WorkCentre. You know full well that those experiments created halos. Halos are normal for that machine.
The Ah’nee certificate PDF was created by different equipment with different software.
Experiments show that the Obama document is normal with respect to halos. If you want to press the case that the Ah’nee PDF is not authentic because it lacks halos, good luck.
“Ragged” is a meaningless criticism.
Nonsense. This has always been excruciatingly easy to explain. It is an artifact of scanning and subsequent MRC optimization of the President’s certificate. It is not a feature of the paper certificate. Zullo himself has admitted that their own tests of the Xero WorkCentre demonstrated this effect.
Oh? This may be true, but where has anybody ever claimed the Ah’Nee certificate was “scanned-to-pdf”? You appear to be making stuff up.
Nonsense. The HDOH does not produce scans. They produce paper documents only.
See? Even you know the right answer, even if entirely by accident.
Hermi, as usual you are clueless. The Obama image was copied at least twice and manipulated(flipped) in the process. There is NO reference that the Ah’nee was copied more than once. Further, unless they were scanned on the same type of scanner using the same generation of software, it is unlikely that the artifacts would be similar, actually more likely that they would be entirely different. The HDOH DID NOT produce the images, they produced paper documents that were certified records that were then scanned/copied by other parties. You really are clueless.
HDOH didn’t create the pdf. HDOH produced two paper copies copied from the original in their archives. We know this because HDOH affirmatively states in writing that it did this. HDOH has also on three separate occasions issued official verifications that the pdf of Obama’s LFBC posted on the Whitehouse website is accurate and authentic. We also know that numerous reporters physically examined the paper copy that the pdf was made from.
Fact is, every pdf ever created is technically a “forgery” of an original document. The pdf of Obama’s LFBC is not a legal document, it’s a copy of a legal document – one, that’s been verified by the originating agency to have been produced and delivered to Mr. Obama with a clear and documented chain of custody.
It doesn’t matter how many “anomalies” you find on the pdf version of Obama’s LFBC, the State of Hawaii has verified it as accurate and authentic.
It Is a true and accurate copy of a document that might, or might not, be completely phony, and there is no way to tell the difference.
Do you remember Bustamante xlll?
Your claimed work flow, used by the HDOH to produce the Obama certified copy would also apply to the Ah’nee certified copy. So why does the Obama certified copy have the “White halos” whereas the Ah’nee certificate does not?
Why do you think that the Obama certified copy has halos?
Accepting arguendo, that Obama’s birth certificate is a true and accurate copy of the document on file with the Hawaii Department of Health, make your case that the information it contains is false.
Who cares? What difference does it make? I don’t give a rip about halos or how copies of different birth certificates produced at different times under different circumstances compare with each other. What matters is that the State of Hawaii has affirmed Mr. Obama’s LFBC is genuine and that he was born in Honolulu in 1961.
He’s never seen the photograph of the certified copy that Savannah Guthrie took. No white halos.
So, you agree that the document on file with the Hawaii Department of Health says that Obama was born in Hawaii?
Congratulations, you’ve agreed that Obama has a birth certificate on file that says that he was born in Hawaii, which is all the proof that is needed that he was actually born in Hawaii. This further means that Barack Obama is eligible to be President, and is the legitimate President of the United States. Congratulations. You’ve taken the first step to becoming a recovering birther.
Otherwise, you’re stating that every birth certificate anywhere is not proof of citizenship, because it can possibly be forged, or misfiled, or something else. That’s of course a redicilous statement, because you’ve agreed that birth certificates are actually used as evidence for place of birth.
The thing about it is that you’ve actually agreed to the birth certificate is a true and accurate representation of the file on record with the Hawaii Department of Health, it is now upto you to prove that the facts on file are not the actual facts. So, far, you haven’t presented any evidence that Barack Obama was ever born anywhere else.
You’ve agreed that the birth certificate is legitimate. Now, if you really don’t believe that Obama was born in Hawaii, then you must present evidence to contradict the facts of the birth certificate, not just state, “Well, there’s this anomoly on the birth certificate, so it must be a forgery.”
I make no such claim , as I do not know what the original bc information on it.
Can you present evidence that it is an original first birth record and that it has not been altered or amended.
Of course you can’t!
I simply claim that the presented LFBC Is insufficient to determine the true facts of the matter.
HDOH is allowed under law , to issue certified copies for birth certificates that do not contain correct information. Whether this is one of them, I do not know as those types of birth certificates are sealed from public disclosure.
Given that FACT the original document must be the one that is subject to inspection and verification.
And it appears that will never happen under this administration.
“All nonjudicial records or books kept in any public office of any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or copies thereof, shall be proved or admitted in any court or office in any other State, Territory, or Possession by the attestation of the custodian of such records or books, and the seal of his office annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate of a judge of a court of record of the county, parish, or district in which such office may be kept, or of the Governor, or Secretary of state, the chancellor or keeper of the great seal, of the State, Territory, or Possession that the said attestation is in due form and by the proper officers.”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1739
Does the LFBC meet those standards for the full faith an credit standards.
Halos would be consistent with a cut and paste job. There are no certified copies that look like the White House pdf. If there were then there is no reason for Obama having not released one to the public.
You’re discussing differing reprographic processes, not the actual DATA on a certified certificate that confirms natural born citizen status that is corroborated by state Index data and Health Bureau Statistical data from August, 1961 that was published in newspapers.
Different state, different circumstances, and there was evidence that Bustamante was born in the Philippines.
Show us evidence that Obama was not born in the United States and we will have something to discuss. Otherwise, you are whistling in the wind.
assuming arguendo, that the above post is correct , then the birther can never get into court with the evidence.
No wonder no case has been heard by a jury, or do you think a plaintiff could get those things from the HDOH?
there was evidence that he was born in the USA and there was evidence that he was born in the Phillipines, and there was evidence that he had a US Passport, and that he served in the armed forces, but none of that was known by the State of California when they issued a certified copy of a birth certificate that was filed late, or do you think the filing late means that the certified copy was void
And we had the letter from the daughter of a missionary’s that said she flew back to Seattle with SADO and Barack in August, 1961 after Barack ll was born.
The Ah’Nee certificate picks up halos when a printed copy is scanned on a Xerox WorkCentre as I demonstrated https://rcradioblog.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/ahnee-birth-certificate-generates-layers-when-scanned-on-a-xerox-workcentre-just-like-the-presidents-lfbc-does/
Of course you already knew that because you left the first comment on that article.
WND has two (so far) old-news about Zullo and Gallups being “interviewed” on Hagman’s show.
They’ll keep stoking that fire for as long as people will buy copies of the book they plug multiple times per article.
You would think by now every Birther and Teatard had a copy of Corsi’s joke of a book.
A birther on YouTube last week told me to get a copy of Corsi’s book, and he was certain it would change my mind.
I told him not only did I already have a copy, but that it mentions me 3 times.
Hermie doesn’t answer questions like that.
You didn’t answer my question. You said the Obama certified copy had halos. I asked why you thought that. You’ve never seen the original, No photocopies or photographs of it show halos. So why do you think there are halos?
Hermie’s not going to say anything further on this blog unless he answers it.
LOL Good move.
Maybe it has something to do with the white toner. Hermie once did mention something about white toner.
Maybe I can sell Hernie a truckload of white toner? He comes up with the craziest nonsense.
I never said that it isn’t possible for a birth certificate to contain false information. However, it happens very rarely, and there is no evidence that it happened with Obama’s birth certificate. As you yourself noted, Bustamante’s birth certificate was a delayed birth certificate, whereas Obama’s was issued within days of his birth.
The two situations are not analogous.
That’s your evidence? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I guess Hermitian doesn’t consider photographs of the certified hard copy taken by a photographer for the Associated Press and a reporter for NBC News to constitute being “released to the public.”
Are those photographs indicative of a “cut and paste job?” I think not.
I guess also he doesn’t consider Hawaii’s index data, which the public can freely access (and can also request by mail), isn’t publicly accessible.
This would make what his 8th ban?
Same shelf as the blinker fluid
Yes, actually we can present evidence that it’s an original first birth record, and that it has not been altered or amended. You can see that evidence here: http://origin.factcheck.org/Images/image/birth_certificate_images/birth_certificate_2.jpg
Nowhere on that birth certificate does it have the words “altered” or “amended” on it that it would be required to have if it was actually altered or amended: Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338.16(a): “…certificates which have been altered after being filed with the department of health, shall contain … the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly … “altered”.
You can view the Hawaii Revised Statutes here: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0016.htm
So, now that we’ve actually presented evidence that the birth certificate is not altered, are you willing to concede that it’s not altered?
First off, the only way HDOH is allowed under law to do that is if they have the incorrect information in their records (and therefore don’t know that it’s incorrect). But let’s get down to your ultimate argument.
So, ultimately your argument is that no birth certificate can ever prove anything, because the state can possibly issue birth certificates with incorrect information on them?
If that’s your argument, then why have you been asking for Barack Obama to release his birth certificate for the last 8 years, if you ultimately believe that birth certificates actually prove the place of birth?
You ultimately know that this argument is pure bunk, because you’ve been asking him to first release his birth certificate (and then his long-form birth certificate) for the last 8 years.
Trader Jack has been provided with that information before. He simply ignores all evidence with is contrary to his pre-conceived notions.
If you look up “obstinate” in a dictionary you will see a picture of Trader Jack.
I am afraid that you may be in error as the HDOH is authorized to issue birth certificates for the purpose of witness protection, or other reasons , when requested by a governmental agency, and they are allowed to issue new birth certificates for adopted children which show the parents as the parents , rather than the genetic parents.
They are allowed to alter birth certificates when instructed to do so by a court of law and seal the original from public view.
And they specifically state when issuing birth certificate for use in a foreign country that the do not guarantee the contents of the birth certificate only the signature of the holder of the document.
The only thing that they can not alter is the day and time of birth as that is all that the doctor has attested to.
I am sorry but that document referred is not a birth record, nor a birth certificate, but is certification of birth, and there is no place on that document to state that it was amended , or altered, or anything else, as it has no registrar stamp on it.
So, you think a certified copy of a birth certificate from HDOH is not the same as a certified birth certificate from California?
aren’t they both subject to the full faith and credit expressed on this board
I have never asked anyone to post their birth certificate!
Birth certificates are document created by people, that are submitted to government for filing and there is no way that they government to tell whether the information is true or false, as exemplified by the ability of the producer of the birth record to make changes to the birth records per the laws which allow it
a photograph of a certified copy of a birth is not a certified copy of a birth record, no matter who takes the photo, but a court could accept it as evidence if the original is not available, but that does not make it true
Wrong on every account: a COLB is a birth certificate; you have no idea if there is a place for it to state it was amended; and the registrar’s stamp is on the back.
The information is provided under penalty of perjury, which is sufficient in countless other situations, and you have no evidence that anyone lied.
You have no evidence that President Obama’s birth certificate (or “records”) were ever changed.
Again completely wrong: It is sufficient for any court and must be accepted as true until proven otherwise.
Wrong again. Dr. Sinclair attested not only to the day and time of Obama’s birth, but also to the location of the birth.
You really are dense.
Both are prima facie evidence. If you don’t know what prima facie evidence is, I suggest that you look it up.
In the Bustamante case, evidence that he was born in the Philippines overcame the prima facie evidence of his delayed California birth certificate.
You can doubt the accuracy of Obama’s Hawaii birth certificate all you like, but without documentary evidence that he was born somewhere else you will never overcome its probative value.
Actually, legally under witness protection, that new identity becomes them. They are no longer legally their former identity, but are actually their new identity, and legally have the new identity. So, legally, the information is not wrong, but is correct. But your argument is that because of witness protection, then no birth certificate can ever be relied upon?
And according to Hawaii Revised Statutes, any birth certificate that is altered after registration, must be marked with the words “Altered” on it. Since Obama’s birth certificate does not have those words on it, then the birth certificate is not altered. See how that happens? Actually applying logic to it.
And it doesn’t matter. What the Hawaii Department of Health says is that there’s a record on file with the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii. That creates a prima facie case that Obama was born in Hawaii. Now, it is upto the person making the claim that he was not born in Hawaii to present evidence that Obama was not born in Hawaii. You have yet to do so.
They can’t alter the location of birth either. David Sinclair also attested to the fact that he was born to Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Dunham. That he was born in Kaplioani Hospital, in Honolulu, Hawaii. Almost every fact on the birth certificate (other than the self-identify facts on the birth certificate such as race of parents) are actually attested to by the Doctor. It’s not just the date and time of birth that’s attested to by the doctor. It’s location, parents, name, etc.
In fact, there are very few things that they can legally alter (without some very unusual circumstances, such as the U.S. Marshall’s Office backstopping an ID. All of which require a court order to do so (name and gender being the two that come directly to mind).
But every single altered certificate is required to be marked as “altered” by the Hawaii Department of Health. It’s spelled out in the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Since Obama’s birth certificate isn’t marked as altered, that is evidence that it wasn’t altered after birth.
Official statement from the Hawaii Department of Health: “It’s a valid Hawaii State Birth Certificate.”
Again, the title of the birth certificate doesn’t actually mean anything. It’s still a birth certificate.
And it does have the registrar stamp on it (you can actually see it in the photograph that I showed, but it’s actually on the back of it). You can see it here: http://origin.factcheck.org/Images/image/birth_certificate_images/birth_certificate_7.jpg
You should read the entire Fact Check article. You will see both the registrar’s stamp and the raised seal.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/
At the bottom the COLB says “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.”
The federal rules of evidence say that if a COPY has a seal and a certifying signature it is self-authenticating and needs “no extrinsic evidence of authenticity.” That’s what makes a copy of a birth certificate “true,” if by “true” you mean verified.
There is no law, no rule, no custom and no tradition that a presidential candidate or a president show a birth certificate to anybody, ever. Birth certificates are not required in order to qualify for the presidency.
The only reason Barack Obama showed his birth certifcate (first his Certification of Live Birth and then his Certificate of Live Birth) publicly was to help him to get votes by embarrassing his political opposition.
trader jack:
All of your claims and “evidence” and “questions” – every single one of them, and any others you might come up with as well – can all be boiled down to just one single statement:
“Barack Obama is ‘ineligible’ to be President of the United States, because I really want him to be.”
Which, come to think of it, is how it’s been for the entire 8 years with every single birther who kept on desperately wanting to believe in fairy tales.
And the rest of us have been alternately astonished, then amused, then perplexed, then annoyed, then astonished again, by the extreme desire of some people to deceive both themselves and others with complete fabrications and fantasies.
But we did learn a good deal about the utter stupidity of some members of the human race.
And I actually don’t mean to insult you or anyone else by saying it. It’s just a frank and honest observation.
Anyway, as my old pappy used to say (well, he didn’t, really, but it makes for a good quote):
“Wish in one hand, sh*t in the other. See which one fills up first.”
For 8 long years birthers such as yourself have wished in one hand, and as hard as you wished, it never did fill up. In fact, nobody other than the birthers could see anything in that hand at all, except for several specks of dust, which blew away with the wind.
Meanwhile, you sh*t in the other hand, and it did fill up and overflow, many times over.
So after 8 years, all you have is one hand empty, and the other one covered with manure.
That’s it. That’s all.
Ee be de be de.. That’s All, Folks!
But don’t forget birthers just luuuuuurve to parse words beyond their meaning.
“It doesn’t say it’s evidence of place or time of birth, only that a birth occurred”, or something. 😀
Birthers somehow believe the data on birth records can be false, yet can be legally attested to as true by simply using “weasel words”. “Yes, I certify that a birth occurred sometime somewhere, not necessarily at the time or place the document says, because why would I, and who cares? Bazinga!”
Trump’s childhood home is up for auction.
“The real estate firm is now pushing the Trump connection further by circulating a copy of the president-elect’s birth certificate that lists the address of the home built in 1940 by real estate developer Fred Trump, the president-elect’s father.”
http://www.ibtimes.com/trumps-childhood-home-market-again-buyer-plans-auction-president-elects-former-home-2466872
Is that birth certificate “certified”?
I’m not sure what to make of this website. I watched the press conference. After seeing the evidence with my own eyes, I’m not sure how anyone who claims to be based in reality can deny the findings. The .pdf released by the White House is a forgery. I’m not sure how anyone here can deny the facts. Apparently there are plenty of people here who are doing just that. You can grasp at straws all day if it helps you sleep at night, but the certificate is a fraud.
But forget about that for a moment. It seems to me that all these people want for congress to do is to make a law that states any future President must provide a valid birth certificate to prove they are American. Congress isn’t going to touch this certificate with a 10 foot pole, and neither will Trump. Barry will get a pass but going forward, I think it would be a good law regardless of which party you are affiliated with.
I’m confused by your comment. You can hardly see anything in the press conference and its fuzzy video, and I clearly showed in this article that they lied about things being similar. How can you deny your own eyes when I showed you they lied?
I think your eyes are seeing what you want to see rather than what is actually there. Rather than trying to understand this web site, you should take the time to understand yourself.
There is a rather large contradiction in the video.
It says that the X in box 7e on President Obama LFBC was both brought over directly from box 7e on the Ah’Nee certificate and that it was also copy and pasted from box 6d of Ah’Nee certificate.
It is impossible for it to be both.
Look. At. The. Frickin’. Images.
http://i66.tinypic.com/scf320.jpg
Note:You will have to click until you get the “raw image,” then full-size that, and zoom in with your browner (Ctrl +).
If something is DIGITALLY COPIED from another thing, the two images are IDENTICAL.
PIXEL-FOR-PIXEL identical.
Every single d*mn character on Obama’s certificate is visibly different from every single corresponding character on Ah’Nee’s.
In fact, when closely examined, they’re different enough that about 7 of the 9 claims they made are NOT EVEN PLAUSIBLE.
And as I’ve noted before, “plausible” is about 3 freeways, a cow farm and a golf course away from “proof.”
Even that remote plausibility would require the Obama image to have been further changed (WHY? Do they present any theory for this? NO.) And it further falls into the garbage if you start comparing the higher-resolution AP PHOTOCOPY of Obama’s certificate.
As others have noted, they even flatly and directly, irreconcilably contradicted themselves IN THE OFFICIAL VIDEO.
They had FIVE FRICKIN’ YEARS just to come up with a story that didn’t contradict itself. They couldn’t even do that.
Never mind coming up with a story that actually had any evidence for what they wanted to prove, which theirs doesn’t remotely approach doing. They couldn’t even come up with a story that didn’t contradict itself.
As Dr C (aka Kevin Davidson) has said:
Seeing what we want to see isn’t that uncommon, but you really should take Mr. Davidson’s advice.
It seems to me that you have no idea what “these people” really want: to line their pockets with your money while delegitimizing President Obama.
It is a solution in search of a problem, motivated by the aforementioned goals.
If all the is wanted is for Congress to create a law requiring documentation of birth, then investigating a PDF online is worthless. It is not an official birth certificate. It is a scanned version of the certificate Hawaii sent him. If there was a requirement for a BC, he would have sent the one he got from Hawaii back in 2007, the so-called “short form.”
You are asking for a law even though Obama is the only President I know of to publically show his birth certificate before the election.
Hawaii has stated and certified multiple times that Obama was born there, and you guys refuse to accept it. Sorry, I do not believe the “all they want is future presidents to present a BC” claim.
Such a law is probably unconstitutional since it creates a qualification for the president that contradicts the qualifications in the Constitution. I think the Congress COULD pass a law requiring a birth certificate for a presidential candidate to receive federal funds for the election. (That law wouldn’t have applied to Obama since he didn’t take federal funds.)
Hypothetically, if Obama had submitted his birth certificate to the Federal Elections Commission, the State of Hawaii would have verified it, just as they have on numerous occasions. So I really don’t see what would be different.
Birthers are simply wrong, and nothing can change that.
Nothing.
Mike says: “But forget about that for a moment. It seems to me that all these people want for congress to do is to make a law that states any future President must provide a valid birth certificate to prove they are American. Congress isn’t going to touch this certificate with a 10 foot pole, and neither will Trump. Barry will get a pass but going forward, I think it would be a good law regardless of which party you are affiliated with.”
———
Presidential election qualifications fall under states’ rights. Each state has its own qualifications for getting on the ballot in that particular state. Arizona’s legislature DID pass a birth certficate requirement law in 2011 but it was vetoed by the (very conservative Republican) Governor Jan Brewer. No other state nor the federal government has passed such a law.
Barack Obama announced that he was running for president in February of 2007. That means it will soon be ten years that the states and Congress have had the opportunity to simply get a court order or a congressional subpoena to inspect Barack Obama’s birth certificate in accordance witn Hawaii law.
They haven’t done so and the reason why is that they know that the first birth certificate released by the Obama campaign in June of 2008 is the only LEGAL proof of birth that he would ever need. That is the same birth document that every person born in Hawaii gets when they ask the state for their birth certificate. And on that official birth certificate it clearly states:
“This copy is prima facie evidence of the FACT OF BIRTH in any court proceeding.”
The U.S. Constitution states in Article IV, Section 1 that: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, RECORDS, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
That means whatever the state of Hawaii says is a legitimate record of birth in that state MUST be accepted everywhere else in the U.S.A.. On eight separate occasions, the state of Hawaii has issued official statements confirming that Barack Obama’s birth certificate and the data on it are authentic and true. One of those eight confirmations was provided to a U.S. Federal Judge.
Here is one of the eight confirmation statements. This one is from former Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, a Republican: “You know, during the campaign of 2008, I was actually in the mainland campaigning for Sen. McCain. This issue kept coming up so much in the campaign, and again I think it’s one of those issues that is simply a distraction from the more critical issues that are facing the country. And so I had my health director, who is a physician by background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records of the Department of Health, and we issued a news release at that time saying that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that’s just a fact. And yet people continue to call up and e-mail and want to make it an issue. And I think it’s, again, a horrible distraction for the country by those people who continue this. It’s been established. He was born here.” –[former] Governor Linda Lingle (R-HI)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/hawaii_gov_lingle_answers_the.html
Nevertheless, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett verified Obama’s qualifications with the State of Hawaii, and was satisfied Obama met Constitutional muster.
Just in case our friend Mike doesn’t believe it. Conservative Republican Secretaries of State got official confirmation from the state of Hawaii:
Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett satisfied Obama was born in United States
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/arizona-secretary-of-state-ken-bennett-satisfied-obama-was-born-in-united-states/2012/05/23/gJQAN1czkU_blog.html
and the very conservative Republican Secretary of State in Kansas followed suit:
“I have no doubts now,’ Kobach says of Obama’s birthplace”
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article1099175.html
We’re still not sure what to make of birthers. Are they:
(1) Racists
(2) Stupid
(3) Ignoramuses
(4) Trolls
(5) A combination of two or more of the above
(6) All of the above
Johanna Ah’nee pdf, fake.