DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on June 25, 2008, 03:52:08 PM
-
PROVEN: Barack Obama Presented Forged Certificate of Live Birth
June 25, 2008
BY VIRGINIA H. SHANAHAN
Is Barack Obama a United States citizen, and is he eligible to run for President of the United States, or did he present a forged government document to verify a citizenship he does not possess? For a few weeks now these questions have been swirling around the internet. The questions have become so prominent that Obama addressed the issue on his "Fight the Smears" website. Of course, in typical Obama fashion it is becoming clear that nothing is as it seems.
His site says the following:
The truth about Barack?s birth certificate
Lie: Obama Is Not a Natural Born Citizen
Truth: Senator Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, after it became a state on August 21st, 1959. Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v169/Greyskye/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg)
There it is, the Certification of Live Birth. Case closed. Or is it? Two sources have raised what has proven to be very interesting, and troubling questions. Polarik, a blogger from Townhall.com, and the israelinsider, have both posted compelling evidence that can no longer be ignored, or brushed off as ridiculous.
Friday, June 20, 2008, Polarik, who claims to have extensive experience in the world of computers, printers, and typewriters, wrote "given a set of printed letters, I can discern what kind of device made them. Printer output is quite different from the text created by a graphics program, and even if a document looks "official," it may not be." He goes on to claim that anyone could have produced this document, and then proceeds to point out every flaw imaginable with this alleged certificate. Because his article is so detailed, and technical, I advise my readers to follow the link and read it for yourself. Have no fear. He has visuals to help you make sense of it.
Yesterday morning I read an article in the Israelinsider, written by Reuven Koret. Koret's article claims to eliminate any lingering question as to whether or not the Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery/fake.
Koret begins his article by linking to Photobucket, an image gathering website, where millions upload images to share with others, or post in various places such as websites, etc. It shows variations of the same Certificate of Live Birth presented by the Obama camp. One has Obama's birthplace listed as Antarctica, while another shows one issued by the government of North Korea. This certainly lends credibility to Polariks argument that the Certificate of Live Birth was created by some sort of computer program, that anyone can use.
According to Koret, Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health made clear that no birth certification, or certification of live birth is transmitted electronically, and that all certificates of live birth contain an embossed seal and registrar's signature on the back of the document.
He then compares the 1961 Certification of Live Birth, presented as authentic on the Obama website, to one certifying the Hawaiian birth of a Patricia Decosta. The similarities and differences are quite noticeable.
Both contain a green bamboo background, though one is noticeably darker. Both contain borders that are noticeably different. Obama's is green, and Decosta's is black. Polarik did a fabulous job of pointing out the obvious flaws on the border of Obama's alleged certificate.
The most compelling and disturbing items of note are the lack of an embossed seal and the registrar's signature, on the copy being presented by Obama. Decosta's seal, even faded with time is quite prominent, as is the registrar's signature that bleeds through to the front of the document. The lack of these two items makes it clear that the copy presented by Obama may in fact be a fake.
This raises many more questions and concerns. Did Obama knowingly lie, and present a forged government document as official? Why does Obama refuse to present his real birth certificate, for inspection the actual piece of paper that can be handled by reporters? Is Barack Obama a citizen of the United States? Is he eligible for the highest office of this great nation?
[source: e-mail]
-
Shouldn't be much of a problem. Hospital records, municipal tax rolls, voter rolls all should be able to demonstrate that the mum lived in Hawaii and went into hospital for a live childbirth, delivering a male baby on Obama's alleged birthdate.
The alleged flaws in the certificate are ludicrous - - ink will bleed through or not depending on the type of pen and/or ink used, what was under the certificate when the Registrar signed it, what paper any given batch of certificates was printed on, ambient moisture and temperature, degree of force applied, etc.
But bottom line is, the issuing office will have a contemporaneous record of every certificate issued. Either it's in the archives or it's not. By this point in time, if there were anything to the rumor, the Registrar's office would long since have issued an announcement, "We have no record of that certificate, so it's a fake." Or words to that effect.
-
The alleged flaws in the certificate are ludicrous - - ink will bleed through or not depending on the type of pen and/or ink used, what was under the certificate when the Registrar signed it, what paper any given batch of certificates was printed on, ambient moisture and temperature, degree of force applied, etc.
Notarized documents have the impression embossed over the signature, after it's signed, so the ink is always forced through to the other side (that's one of the points of the embossing, makes the ink hard to remove or change). I have not seen a notarized document where the ink hasn't seeped through to the other side.
But bottom line is, the issuing office will have a contemporaneous record of every certificate issued. Either it's in the archives or it's not. By this point in time, if there were anything to the rumor, the Registrar's office would long since have issued an announcement, "We have no record of that certificate, so it's a fake." Or words to that effect.
That's assuming the government bureaucracy is efficient. I don't make that assumption. Though, you are right, I'm sure someone has checked it out already. Someone from the FEC most likely.
-
Michael I agree it may not be true, but I bet Hillary hopes it is.
I would assume the FBI does background checks on US Senators?
Who knows, I guess we'll find out sooner or later.
-
<<Michael I agree it may not be true, but I bet Hillary hopes it is.>>
For all we know, she's getting measured for Supreme Court robes and loving every minute of it, CU4.
-
This is just more swiftboating, and deserves to be ignored.
-
"For all we know, she's getting measured for Supreme Court robes and loving every minute of it, CU4"
Michael ya know I have heard that too, but I really just do not see that as her cup of tea.
I think she would get really bored with that and it is for the most part so far away from the spot light.
Not to say it is not important work, I just can not see her accepting that as her final destination.
-
"This is just more swiftboating"
So XO do you also call it "Swiftboating" when liberals question whether
John McCain is eligible to be President since he was not born in the United States ?
-
Michael ya know I have heard that too, but I really just do not see that as her cup of tea.
I think she would get really bored with that and it is for the most part so far away from the spot light.
Not to say it is not important work, I just can not see her accepting that as her final destination.
==============================================================================
I tend to agree with you, CU4, she just doesn't seem to have been following the law recently and she'd probably have a lot of catching up to do if she wanted to play any role on the court other than a Clarence Thomas-like stooge, but on the liberal side. But if she doesn't get a high-profile slot in the Obama administration, the SCOTUS would look pretty good to her, though.
-
This is just more swiftboating, and deserves to be ignored.
Swiftboating should not be ignored. It indicates somebody who was a first hand observer of said event and is telling the truth about it, i.e. the swift boat veterans for truth who pointed out that John Kerry was full of crap when he said he crossed the border into Cambodia, among other things.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0703270151mar27,0,5157609.story
(http://onemansthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/image001.jpg?w=198&h=233)
http://onemansthoughts.wordpress.com/2008/05/24/stanley-ann-dunham-obama-soetoro/
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/familytree/545458,BSX-News-wotreeff09.stng
(http://celebrity.rightpundits.com/wp-content/photos/Stanley_Ann_Dunham_2.jpg)
http://celebrity.rightpundits.com/?p=3191
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/14/us/politics/14obama.html?n=Top/News/World/Countries%20and%20Territories/Indonesia
I am starting to think that Barak Obama was born in Hawaii.
There is no point in proveing the document presented by an Obama critic is a fake, perhaps it is a fake , that would not prove that there wasn't one that wasn't fake,would it?
If this turns out to be true I will be surprised.
But check out Senator Obama's mother , she was a caricter.
-
As Obama stonewalls on uncertified birth certificate,
official doubts mount
June 28, 2008
(http://web.israelinsider.com/Static/Binaries/Article/obamabc424_0.jpg)
Suspect Obama birth certificate, not showing required official seal, signature nor certificate number.
A senior official in the State of Hawaii's Department of Health, Director of Communications Janice Okubo, confirms that the image published and circulated by the Obama campaign as his "birth certificate" lacks the necessary embossed seal and signature. Backing away from a quote attributed to her that the image on the campaign site was "valid," she told the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times in an article published yesterday: "I don't know that it's possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents."
Barack Obama has claimed in writing to have a valid printed document: In the first chapter of his book Dreams From My Father, describing his origins, he wrote about finding a local Hawaiian newspaper article about his Kenyan father: "I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school."
So where is that birth certificate? It got lost? The dog ate it? No matter. Barack Obama or an immediate family member can plunk down $10 ($11.50 if he orders online) and have Hawaii mail a certified document to him within a week or two. But more than two weeks have passed since the Obama campaign adopted the suspect, uncertified image of a purported birth document published by a left-wing blog Daily Kos, and nothing certified and nothing on paper has since has been forthcoming. Nor has there been any official comment about the issue from the campaign. They may cling to the hope -- however audacious -- that the one issue that could disqualify their man constitutionally from gaining the presidency will just go away.
Amy Hollyfield of the St. Petersburg Times, and a reporter for the paper's "Politifact" blog, said that she has been seeking the birth certificate "for months." She was frustrated: "Hawaii birth certificates aren't public record. Only family members can request copies, so when the campaign declined to give us one, we were stalled."
Finally, the campaign released the image (resembling the one at the top of this article). Hollyfield e-mailed it to the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records, to ask if it was real.
"It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo told us.
Then the firestorm started.
Israel Insider contacted Okubo several days. She could not refer to Obama's specific case, she said, because no one but an authorized family member can do so. But she did confirm that a valid "certification of live birth" would need to have an embossed seal and signature and that it can only be printed and mailed. There is no such thing as an electronic only certification.
In our previous article on this subject we published an example of a certified birth certificate of another Hawaiian citizen, Patricia DeCosta, reproduced below. The stamp and signature are reversed because the embossing is done from the back as per law, as Okubo noted is required by law.
(http://www.valeehill.net/genealogy/documents/doc_decosta_pat_birth.jpg)
Speaking to National Review Online, Okubo admitted that the Obama image lacked those required features but thought that perhaps the embossing was applied too lightly.
Maybe so, but all the certificates we have seen have the embossed imprint clearly visible, as well as horizontal fold marks.
There's only one way for Obama to show he's a natural born citizen eligible to be President: produce the paper proof.
We got an email yesterday from Bryan Suits who has a radio show on KFI Los Angeles. He writes:
"I have just received my State of Hawaii certified birth certificate for my 1964 debut on the planet earth. It looks....nothing like Obama's. We've scanned it at 72dpi, 300dpi. Nuthin. We can't make the emboss disappear. Also, we can't make THE FOLDS disappear!! How did FightTheSmears do it?
I got curious when I compared his (with the 2007 date bleed) to my old beat-up1986 copy. then I went online on June 13 and ordered the thing. It got here yesterday tri-folded in a state of hawaii envelope. I called the State and asked if I could get an unfolded copy. No dice.
Hollyfield brings up other issues that her readers raised, although she does not address them or explain them [bracketed comments from Israel Insider]:
Where is the embossed seal and the registrar's signature? [Required for validity]
Comparing it to other Hawaii birth certificates, the color shade is different.
Isn't the date stamp bleeding through [in reverse] the back of the document [image] "June [6] 2007?" (Odd since it was supposedly released in June 2008.)
There's no crease from being folded and mailed. [Hawaii requires printing and mailing, according to Okubo. Electronic images are never released, she assured us, nor are they valid.]
It's clearly Photoshopped and a wholesale fraud.
Hollyfield, frustrated by failing to access the required original, being refused by the Obama campaign, and finding only secondary documents from his subsequent career, asks what's "reasonable" and then claims that skeptics about Obama's published birth certificate believe that there's a conspiracy afoot:
Because if this document is forged, then they all are. If this document is forged, a U.S. senator and his presidential campaign have perpetrated a vast, long-term fraud. They have done it with conspiring officials at the Hawaii Department of Health, the Cook County (Ill.) Bureau of Vital Statistics, the Illinois Secretary of State's office, the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois and many other government agencies.
But Hollyfield is mistaken. There would be no need to invent a conspiracy among officials. All Obama needed to do would be to pass off an uncertified document as being certified. He may have done so unwittingly. Then the rest can follow without any need to conspire with any other official. They just take it on faith that the person is an American citizen.
They don't check about the embossing requirements of the State of the Hawaii. They believe Obama. Why should they doubt him, certainly after he becomes a lawyer and a state senator? The officials believe that the claimed document is authentic, and therefore issue other documents, based on the phony one, buried deep in the documentary chain. Unwitting or not, however, the high stakes for basing one's citizenship on an uncertified birth certificate must be pretty obvious to the campaign now.
Nothing else explains why Obama's campaign refused to release the original paper document, to make this distracting controversy go way. Because Hollyfield is right about one thing:
"If this document is forged, a U.S. senator and his presidential campaign have perpetrated a vast, long-term fraud."
U.S. citizens who have written to Israel Insider or have posted on the Internet are not satisfied. Ordinary people are compelled to produce certified paper birth certificates to get a passport or a driver's license. Why, people are asking, doesn't Obama needed to show one to run for President?
In a follow-up contact by Hollyfield, Janice Okubo backtracked and qualified, pointing to the main issue that Israel Insider and others have brought into focus [our comments in brackets]:
"I guess the big issue that's being raised is the lack of an embossed seal and a signature," Okubo said, pointing out that in Hawaii, both those things are on the back of the document. "Because they scanned the front -- you wouldn't see those things." [But of course, as in the DeCosta sample and others, you can see it clearly.]
Okubo says she got a copy of her own birth certificate last year and it is identical to the Obama one we received. [Well, "identical" cannot be correct. Her name is not Obama, Her certificate number was not blacked out, and her certificate had the required embossed certification. So she can only be saying that the form looked the same, as she said to the National Review Online's Jim Geraghty.]
And about the copy we e-mailed her for verification? "When we looked at that image you guys sent us, our registrar, he thought he could see pieces of the embossed image through it." [Except that she received only what was published on the Internet and circulated by email, and no "pieces of the embossed image" do come through that. We have published the highest resolution available and there is no trace of embossed seal or signature. Readers can see for themselves.]
Still, she acknowledges: "I don't know that it's possible for us "to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents."
And there you have it. Okubo can't "even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents" because she is not allowed access to Barack Obama's personal records. State law prohibits it.
Only Barack Obama (or another immediate family member) can authorize the release of the paper birth certificate, and submit it to objective analysis. He refuses to do so, even though it would seem to be in his interest to do so, to silence the skeptics, to show that they are wrong and he is right, to settle once and for all that he is a "natural born citizen" entitled by the US Constitution to be President of the United States. Yet there is only silence and inaction from Obama and his campaign on the subject. The palpably uncertified document remains online, with an explanation that refers only to the date of Hawaiian Statehood and an irrelevant passage from the Constitution.
Admitting her failure to obtain a demonstrably authentic birth document for the candidate, Hollyfield falls back at the end of her latest article into her reliance on the "straw man" of a conspiracy theory.
And there's the rub. It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice [sic] of the world's biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything's possible.
But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what's reasonable has to take over.
There is not one shred of evidence to disprove PolitiFact's conclusion that the candidate's name is Barack Hussein Obama, or to support allegations that the birth certificate he released isn't authentic.
Here Hollyfield is again incorrect. He didn't release a birth certificate, but an image of a purported "certification of live birth" that contains dubious features, lacks a traceable certificate number and -- as the Hawaiian state official Okubo admits -- lacks the stamp and signature required to make it valid. There need be no conspiracy by state or federal officials, just a willingness to believe Obama and accept an image that might look real but might not be.
If Obama is confident that he has a valid paper birth certificate from Hawaii, it is unreasonable for him to be withholding it.
But if he lacks a valid US birth certificate, and therefore cannot prove that he is an American citizen, then he would have good reason to put up a smokescreen and stonewall as long as he can. He would have good reason to try and slide by, as he may have done in the past, by putting up something that would pass as legitimate to the untrained and uninformed, as the one posted by the left-wing Daily Kos blog did, and which much of the media accepted as such, on his say-so.
Because if Obama lacks a valid birth certificate from Hawaii, it would mean that he has been living a lie his whole life: an illegal alien born outside the country who never obtained American citizenship, never became naturalized, and yet has been passing himself off as a citizen to the Illinois Bar, the Illinois Legislature, the US Senate and now, as a candidate for President.
To give Obama the benefit of the doubt: he may not know that he was not born in Hawaii. This may also be part of the family legend his mother communicated to him. As he himself admits in the first chapter of his Dreams, this would not be the only half-truth or outright life his white family told him. The chapter skips over completely anything about the circumstances of his birth or what preceded it: "First the baby arrived, eight pounds, two ounces, with 10 toes and 10 fingers and hungry for food." Subsequent reports have him born in two different hospitals.
Has Obama -- by the "white lie" of claiming to be born in Hawaii (whether the lie came from him or from his mother) and not Kenya or Canada as some have a suggested -- been misrepresenting himself -- wittingly or unwittingly -- to the people of his state and his nation all along?
If so, he would have every reason to put up a web site accusing his critics of conducting a smear campaign to avoid answering valid questions about his identity and background. He would have every reason to accuse political opponents of planning a campaign that raises these questions -- as if to ask whether a candidate for US President is in fact a US citizen is an illegitimate question.
To this day, the question about Obama's national origins remains unanswered, because the proof offered to date is inadequate, even according to the responsible Hawaiian state officials.
The question is not whether he's black or white or somewhere in between. The question is not whether he's a Muslim or Christian, a Democrat or a Communist. The question is whether he can document that he was born in Hawaii and thus meet the requirements of the Constitution.
Yes, the question about whether the candidate is a natural born American citizen is legitimate. But is Obama?
If Obama lacks a certified Hawaiian birth certificate, he's not a natural born American. If he's not a natural born American, he can't be president. That's the law of the land.
If Obama is a legitimate candidate, a natural born citizen of the United States, he must prove it. If he is not, he must admit the truth, and accept the consequences. Now, not later.
This is a matter of US national security. Because there are people in this world who know the truth and can prove it. They would be able to hold that knowledge and proof over his head to make him do their bidding, or else expose him as a fraud, liar and, yes, an illegal alien. That is not a risk that it is reasonable for the American people to take.
Beyond the vulnerability to blackmail, there is a more fundamental question that must be asked if Obama is not forthcoming in producing the requisite documentation of his citizenship: does the American people really want to elect a man who would conceal his past and identity? Does it want to elect a man who would withhold the full truth and stonewall legitimate questions in his pursuit of the presidency, all the while claiming to be a victim and accusing others of fraud?
There's only one way for Obama to show he's a natural born citizen eligible to be President: produce the paper proof.
Whether from popular pressure or a legal challenge to his credentials, it is essential that Obama be forced to release for objective analysis the birth certificate he claimed in own book to possess.
Each American, at watershed moments in his or her life -- to get a driver's license, a marriage certificate, a passport -- must produce a paper birth certificate for official inspection and analysis. Now it's Obama's turn.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12944.htm (http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12944.htm)
-
We always need some organization like israelinsider to warn us of the possibility of the Constitution being violated.
Imagine that, constitutional advice from a country that has no constitution and therepore no constitutional rights.
It was particularly useful to point out that Osama presented not a birth certificate, but (gasp!) a "Certificate of Live Birth"!
-
<<It was particularly useful to point out that Osama presented not a birth certificate, but (gasp!) a "Certificate of Live Birth"!>>
XO, I think the certificate of live birth (if I read this right) was lacking a verifiable certificate number and other evidence of authenticity. If there's a birth certificate, Obama ought to produce one without delay to whatever authorities, state or federal, that are charged with overseeing the election process. I can foresee a couple of problems:
1. He may have already passed some kind of deadline for filing this or for satisfying authorities as to his eligibility to run, in which case his late production of a valid birth certificate could create legal difficulties compounded by the implicit admission that earlier material filed was insufficient. At the very least this could involve submission of an exemption plea or extension-of-time plea to the courts, and given the packing of the Supreme Court with Republican-friendly judges, and the results of Bush v. Gore, this wouldn't be something he'd want to undertake lightly.
2. He may have already obtained the birth certificate, there may be no problems in producing it now, but his legal team is going over it minutely to ensure that when released it will be fully glitch-proof. He can't afford to reawaken the issue by one more questionable document and have even more doubt thrown on his legitimacy, even if the doubt becomes resolved. In the rumor mill, doubts are never resolved 100%.
-
I agree that it should not be difficult for Obama to present a valid copy of his birth certificate. This issue has not yet appeared in the news, so far as I can tell.
I can't imagine that there is a deadline for presenting a birth certificate. The Constitution makes no such requirement.
In the example given, where the certification number is, there is a black stripe, as might be used to cross out the number. The difference in borders is not too hard to explain, since the woman's certificate is from 1930, and Obama was born three decades later.
Notarization here in Florida can be done either with an embosser OR a small ink stamp. But there should be more than one sees.
In 2004, it was pointed out that both Cheney and Juniorbush were Texans, which meant that the electoral votes of Texas would be forfeited to them.
Cheney grew up and lived for many years in Wyoming, then was elected mayor of Cheyenne and as the sole state congressmen from Wyoming, After ha had made lots of pals in the defense and oil industries, he was made president of Halliburton, and moved to Texas, where he declared himself a resident for the next several year.
When someone pointed out that constitutionally there was a problem, he made a very quick trip back to Wyoming, had dinner and ere said dinner could have ventured through his digestive system, he was recertified a Wyoming resident by someone who ostensibly had this power and was up and way back to Texas and DC.
Naturally, the Supreme Court saw nothing wrong with this.
-
In 2004, it was pointed out that both Cheney and Juniorbush were Texans, which meant that the electoral votes of Texas would be forfeited to them.
Actually not. The Texas delegation would have to vote Bush for President, and someone else for Vice President, or they could for Cheney for Vice President and someone else for President. If they voted for some one else for Vice President then Cheney would have still have had the majority of votes, I believe. But moving his legal residence avoided that issue.
-
But moving his legal residence avoided that issue.
========================================
I seriously doubt that anyone else has transferred their state citizenship so rapidly in Wyoming.
Cheney could have still had as much influence as he had as VP theoretically. I don't think that he would have had more votes had the Texas delegation voted for someone else. Lieberman would probably have had more, unless the Democrats voted for Cheney.
-
I seriously doubt that anyone else has transferred their state citizenship so rapidly in Wyoming.
If you already have residences, it just takes moments.
I have a house in Minnesota and a house in North Carolina. For voting purposes, changing my legal residence takes about 15 minutes to fill out a form.
I'm sure Cheney still had a house in Wyoming that he went to occasionally. For voting, you don't have to live in a place for any length of time - just sign a form saying that you will not vote anywhere else as long as you're voting from that residence.
-
Cheney finagled a deal that I am sure the Founding Fathers would not have agreed with.
Of course, Cheney was no more a representation of the thoughts of Wyoming people than Texans.
He was and is, the featherless biped version of the military-industrial complex, a being too horrific for even Quincy Adams to visualize in his blackest nightmares.
===================================
Will Barak Obama have to step down?
No.
----------------
Hillary, are ya ready?
Yes.
I'd vote for Hillary, too.