Major Discovery in Obama’s LFBC…and It’s in the INK!

Does C. Fukino’s Suggestion Help Prove Forgery?


Former DOH Director Chiyome Fukino


©Linda Jordan
March 27, 2012

Chiyome Fukino (former Director of Hawaii Public Health Department) had this to say about how “birthers” would respond to the release of Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate:

“They’re going to question the ink on which it was written or say it was fabricated,” said Fukino. “The whole thing is silly.” 1


Let’s start with the ink, shall we?

From Hawaii Public Health Regulations. Title: Vital Statistics, Registration & Records. Chapter 8, Certificates of Vital Statistics Events, Section 1:

Preparation. Certificates of vital statistics events are to be filled in by typewriter or in ink. If ink is used only permanent ink will be acceptable. All signatures are to be made with permanent ink. In all other respects, the certificates shall comply with provisions of Section 57-14, R.L.H. 1955.

On April 27, 2011, Barack Obama revealed what his representatives said was a photocopy of his original long-form Certificate of Live Birth from Hawaii (as posted on the White House blog website). The signatures on this Certificate of Live Birth are required to be made in permanent ink.

The truth is in the pixels

Download the Certificate of Live Birth document off the White House blog website2 and open it in Adobe Illustrator. Now zoom in on the signature of Obama’s mother.

Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Signature


The pixels reveal that only a portion of the signature is in ink as required by Hawaii Public Health Regulations.

Figure 1

Figure 1:  The Dunham part of the signature of Obama’s mother on the alleged long-form, original Certificate of Live Birth, posted on the White House blog website.   Here it has been downloaded into Adobe Illustrator. Click to enlarge.

The Ann and the D in Dunham are in ink. The pixels are a variety of gradations in grays and blacks, like ink signature pixels are.

Figure 2

Figure 2:   Zooming in on the top part of the D in Dunham. You can see the variation in color pixels–variations of grays to black tones. This is how pixels of a signature should appear when a signature is applied with ink and then scanned. Click to enlarge.

But what’s really interesting is that the rest of the signature, ‘unham Obama’, is not in ink.3 The letters are a solid greenish-black color with no gradation in color at all. This lack of gradation reveals that this part of the signature was created on a computer and is not even penmanship.

Figure 3

Figure 3:   Focusing now on the start of the u next to the D in Dunham. You can see there is no gradation of color at all. A solid, dark greenish-black color displays no evidence of the gradation in color for these pixels, which implies that this “signature” was created with image-editing software and not with ink.   Click to enlarge.

Figure 4

Figure 4: This last image focuses on the O in Obama and part of the b. You can see there is no color change in the pixels. The solid pixel color again suggests that the signature was not scanned or representative of ink. The Obama portion of the signature was computer generated. Click to enlarge.

The Stanley Ann Dunham Obama signature is forged on this “document”.

What’s it called when you forge a signature on a Certificate of Live Birth from Hawaii?


Well, that would be my top pick, but hey! They also violated Hawaii Public Health Regulations by not using permanent ink in their forgery! Maybe that’ll tick someone off.

So, yes, “birthers” do “question the ink” and say that Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth was “fabricated.” But it’s far from “silly.”


Ex-Hawaii Official Denounces Ludicrous Birther Claims


81 responses to “Major Discovery in Obama’s LFBC…and It’s in the INK!

  1. GREAT post. So, D what then ? hummm…

  2. TY, Linda. Excellent job explaining the anomalies. Everybody, watch Albert Renshaw’s videos. There are more at the link. I dare say that he MUST HAVE BEEN the first to note and demonstrate all these anomalies. Unless I’m mistaken, he published his first video the evening of the very day that they posted that BOGUS FORGED IMAGE on the WH blog. He’s a professional who deals with this software in his work. He’s very convincing. I didn’t know of these videos until Linda referred to them.

    • Miri, could it possibly be this D name maybe ?

      Roy E. Disney married Patricia Ann Dailey in 1955

    • I made a screenshot of something I want to show you from Renshaw’s video: Click that link to (I hope) see it larger.

      This is what Renshaw says was the first layer they worked with. Look in particular at Mom’s first and last names and Dad’s middle name.

      Notice that this issue is exactly as speculated: They started with no final number on the BC#. Why?

      Look how the highlighting is still in the boxes around the registrar’s stamp and date, the date it was accepted, her occupation, etc., proving they were added or at least moved around on the “document”.

      Renshaw says there are even layers within the 9 layers pointed out previously. Now someone else posted a story the next day, on April 28. He pointed out something else: The size of the pixels vary on the “document”, too. To me, it looks as if Barry’s name is different sizes, too. Last name smaller? What say u?

      What does the mother’s first name look like to you? Her last name? What does the father’s middle name look like to you?

      Linda reports that half of Ann’s signature was drawn on via a computer. I saw how this was done myself, when I was playing with Paint. As soon as I activated the tool, I knew that’s how they did it.

      • What does the mother’s first name look like to you? Her last name? What does the father’s middle name look like to you?

        What do YOU see Miri ?

      • How Bizarre. These are words or Letters that I see

        Witchite areas
        B )( srin
        PaPacko 8nks
        Du k

        H ii (in center unrecognizable letters.
        BA CK – for Barack – all the letters aren’t there

        No long BC certification number at the top

        AUG 8 is like a small O with a loop at the top 19 smeared 6 and unreadable last number

        This is what I see for Barack Hussein Obama

        This is what I see for Stanley Ann Dunham

        • It is bizarre. In his video, Renshaw explains a lot of the layers, one by one. I’m seeing things I didn’t realize before. The “date accepted by registrar”? The only parts of it that he says are LEFT from the original are the 19 1. So it ended up reading Aug 8, 1961, after they used a white smudge tool to first erase whatever it said before in the month, day, and decade of the century. So it must be that the real date it was accepted was NOT in Aug, NOT on the 8th of any month, and NOT in the ’60s, because they smudged out whatever was there before they put the 6 into the date.

          Now what’s brilliant is that he shows that they also smudged out part of the heading for that box. “Date Accepted by Reg. General”. They wiped out “Date A” and then they had to put it back again. He says they did this because whatever was originally stamped there, was over the top of some of the words in the title, so they had to remove part of the title and then add it back in clean.

          He speculates that her “occupation” might have been wife but they wiped out the “wif” and added “non” to make it say “none”. I’m thinking of that Filipina wife.

          This is SO SLOPPY that it’s almost as if I did it. So why did they do such a crummy job? Just to punk everyone and rub our noses in it that we will KNOW but we can’t do a damned thing about it because the fix is in?

          • This is SO SLOPPY that it’s almost as if I did it. So why did they do such a crummy job?
            Intention ? distraction ? From what if that is the case ?

          • Didn’t Renshaw do a good job on that? He’s from Georgia too.

          • Miri | March 27, 2012 at 9:43 am —

            “This is SO SLOPPY that it’s almost as if I did it. So why did they do such a crummy job? Just to punk everyone and rub our noses in it that we will KNOW but we can’t do a damned thing about it because the fix is in?”
            “It’s An “Abstract” And What About That “Smiley Face””

            “And the distinct form of a “smiley face” can be seen on the side of the “A” in Onaka’s first name. The figure appears to be a side profile of a face with a nose, eye and mouth.

            Here’s the Onaka stamp from another document. “The” is properly spelled, and there is no “smiley face.”

            And why would the Hawaii DOH allow the document, issued to Barack Obama, to contain an obvious smiling face hiding within the first letter of the state registrar’s signature?

            Could it be the work of the forger leaving his mark, laughing at those who take the document seriously?”


            • I’m glad you brought that up, Gordo. It’s true. Renshaw missed those two things, especially the misspelling of the word THE. You’ve told us that TXE is a type of document, but the HDOH must follow rules. Their laws or at least official policies (not easily changed) require that the so-called official stamp of certification should be UNIFORM.

          • Gordo, Fooled by a smile maybe ? There is ALOT here guys. This document is like a treasure hunt map. Linda has found the treasure chest.

            * Gordo, Mom’s maiden name is Roberts….*

        • I saw that Tanlst, too. Or whatever it says. It sure doesn’t look like Stanley. For certain, the last letter does NOT look like a capital Y.

          I remember someone pointing out how the margins were off. If you look, that word that begins Tanlst (or whatever) begins right under the items on the other lines above it, which is how it would look when a TYPIST had set tabs for the various boxes. It may be somewhat blurry because I doubled the size in Paint.

          So doesn’t it seem MORE likely that the mother’s first name DID start right under the 2 in his age and above the 1 in her age? Her last name looks more like Dunelan. Not Dunham. But maybe it’s because of the screen shot. Well, wait a minute. There’s a diffent number of letters in Dunham (6) and how many I think I count there (7). Huh?

          Renshaw also noticed that they wiped out part of the words in the box for mother’s signature, so they had to draw in the parenthesis again.

          • Miri, Do you know what this name Tanlst reminds me of ? Stanislaw/Stanis
            When you search it do you know what comes up ? Tanlst ? First up is Satanist…yay. Stanis and Law. Like Jude Law, a combo name again ? Stanislaw goes to Albright and more.

            • It looks as if they used someone else’s birth certificate for a template (so had to change the crucial data) or they changed the name of the mother. It looks as if the name began and ended with a T. The beginning T lines up with the other data elements above and below, exactly as it would on a typewritten form where the typist had set tabs. The forgers may be so young as to not realize how typists did their work. Their bad.

          • I kind of see “Jubelan” in the background of the mother’s last name.. I tried a search and the name “Jubilan” appears fairly frequently in and always in the Phillippines but not with an “e”.

            • Whoa! Interesting. Can’t get that “wife in the Philippines” out of my mind.

              • Speaking of the wife in the Philippines, I found this in my photo collection. The gal sitting next to BHO Sr.was named “Anne”. She was a Filipino from the US. This is cropped from a group photo of a small gathering. I don’t know the origin of the information, it was the information in how I saved the photo. Just to add to the confusion, don’t you think?

                Below BHO Sr. in 1959 (photo-shopped). Cropped from the large group of his supposed arrival in Hawaii.

          • Surely a coincidence, but I tried “Jubela” instead of Jubelan and the first search result was a Linda Jubela in……wait for it…Wichita, KS 😉

          • Bridgette, the photo you posted…… it the same woman in the center of the Hawaii arival photo?

          • I don’t know if it is or not. I will check to see if I kept that photo — it was the one with BHO wearing the leis – if we are thinking of that same one. That one was photo-shopped.

            I added it next to the other photo above.

    • Yes he did. Renshaw was fantastic and had the whole thing nailed down within hours. Layers and all the other stuff. I tried to get him to be an expert witness but he never responded. Yet, in spite of his excellent work, the forgery continues to be ignored. I figure if i tied in the Hawaii law that states that signatures on birth certificates have to be in permanent ink, that would bolster the forgery aspect for some people.

      • Glad to see you Ethical! Happy you could join us! I think you both tied it up in ribbons!

      • He didn’t come across to me as a political person. Just a tech expert who’s astonished that this obviously faked “document” was presented and that people accepted it. I watched all his videos. I can’t believe that I never saw them before. In another video, he compared Obama’s SFCOLB to MIKI BOOTH’S son’s. One thing he didn’t seem to realize is that the revision numbers also prove that Barry’s SFCOLB is BOGUS. He has an example from a BC that was printed after Oct. 2005, because there was a revision of the form then. So Barry’s, in no way, if printed in 2007, would have a revision date of 11/01. He doesn’t realize that the form it’s printed on has no relation to the date of birth, because all his examples were printed after Nov. 2001. This guy has the complete SFCOLBs for 4 people to compare to.

  3. Well done Linda! It adds more evidence of the forgery that BHO tried to pass off as authentic. I still can’t believe he tried to con the citizens of the US with something so easily disassembled by professionals.

    Link works to enlarge the screenshot, Miri.

  4. Tanlst ?

  5. Miri, I am brainstorming this info across the hall, Like we did with Tim Stanley and Justagate. Are we fooled by a smile ? Some are not.
    This is a GREAT post btw.Will connect so many things.

  6. Rosemary Woodhouse

    “Tanlst” root, anyone? 🙂 I couldn’t resist!

    • Hi Rose (waving) I swear you read my first thought ! I have been wondering all day about those burlap bags in Africa… Tannis anyone ? Good one. LOL !
      Let me get my racket and peds….

    • Anyone? what’s that stench?

      go ahead, Rosemary, drink it, its good for the baby.

      oh, I really like your amulet. protection, breathe.

  7. Renee… is it really been JUST 4 years?
    My, time flies… were all …. having so much FUN!
    Linda Jordan…. thanks for staying on top of this issue… dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s…. will it ever end?
    I’m flustered with osama /obama videos on drkates…can he really be… the dead man? I wonder!

    • Zen, The only thing fun in the last 4 years are the people we met along the way. We have met the best of the best imho.

    • Thank you guys for staying at it this long. After reading just some of your lengthy research history on B.O. I’m more akin to a relief pitcher.

    Dr.Orly Taitz on right upper corner

  9. From Russian media

    Obama’s birth certificate may be forgery

    • Russian media expose ‘forged birth certificate’
      But American news agencies still absent on presidential scandal
      May 27, 2012 Snips

      While many U.S. mainstream media outlets spike news about the Obama eligibility investigation, Russia’s government radio is keeping the world abreast of the scandal that has caused “the biggest censorship and blackout in the history of journalism.”

      The Voice of Russia – successor of Radio Moscow, the official station of the Soviet Union – published an exclusive interview with Sheriff Joe Arpaio March 26 titled, “Obama’s birth certificate may be forgery.”
      Russian news website Pravda published an accusation that the American media is “tame,” afraid to publish news and is “deliberately hiding the evidence published on the internet about [President Obama’s] defrauding of the American public and the deliberate evisceration of the Constitution of the United States.

      • Russian news website Pravda published an accusation that the American media is “tame,” afraid to publish news and is “deliberately hiding the evidence published on the internet about [President Obama’s] defrauding of the American public and the deliberate evisceration of the Constitution of the United States.”

        Tame or LAME ? I guess they are too TIRED during the day…I hear moonlighting as escorts and strippers now at night keeps them out too late.
        What professional fakes they are. Puppets…lips moving any direction for a buck. They used to call it prostitution…now it is called journalism..what a joke they are. Even Russia is laughing.

    • “No. We got some to talk shows. But I haven’t been called by any major networks or cable. I’m on cable all the time – Fox, CNN, – and where are they. They are not calling me, they are calling me for everything else. You would think this will be an interest, especially the ladies during the investigation they slept at service, currently they just pulled out. I see this in web and I guess in other news outlets like yours but I don’t see any major outlets talking about it.”

      Can someone explain that part about ladies?


    Lord Christopher Monckton Interview and Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s March 31st Arizona Tea Party Event

  11. Has anyone figured out why such a sloppy forgery was put forward? Has it occurred to anybody that it was done on purpose? Could it be it’s an “in your face” thing to show that he can get away with it—Constitution be damned? Or possibly some other evil motive?

    • Yes, several of us have kicked around that possibility. It’s exactly like him to smirk and be smug and “in your face” when he knows he has gotten away with something. That there will be no repercussions. Just like a incorrigible child whose mother never recognizes what a delinquent her “baby” is and so protects and defends him always.

      • With the end result being further erosion of the Constitution. It’s so blatant! If he can get away with this, he can get away with anything.

      • Kick it around a little more Miri. I’m not sure it’s “in your face” or not. Not even sure it was deliberate. Maybe the forger wanted to be found out. Learning the motive is a beautiful thing. Any theories?

        • That’s another theory–that the forger wanted to be caught or wanted Obama to be caught. There are probably plenty of individuals who are intimidated, persuaded, cajoled, or forced to take part in this stuff. Any number of them could be passive-aggressive enough to put a poison pill in the mix, hoping they’d get caught. But so far, even when a posse of experienced, professional law enforcement people and LAWYERS say there’s probable cause that this is a forgery, the mainstream media and Congress and everybody but us chickens ignore the story.

          As for the TXE in the registrar’s stamp–that could be their plausible deniability if anyone ever says they’ve forged a registrar’s stamp. It’s not a registrar’s stamp because it OBVIOUSLY is fake on account of the misspelled word. Like Monopoly money. Can’t be counterfeit money because it’s obviously fake. Or like when somebody sends you an ad that contains a bogus check that looks real, but says in the fine print, “not legal tender,” or whatever it is that they print on those things.

      • You could be right that the forger wants to be caught or maybe that they’re taunting the public because they know they’re protected from any reprisals.


        Conspiracies are real. We know they are. We have laws against them. For a conspiracy of this size, it would take a tremendous number of people to pull it off. How many are running the show? How many are coerced? I’m told conspiracies are nearly impossible to pull off because somebody will get drunk and tell his mistress or squeal to somebody. Did somebody squeal? Tim Adams? Maybe he didn’t get the mum’s-the-word memo. And we know what happened to him. Complete character assassination, etc. Maybe it’s not as impossible as it seems.

        Of all the players mentioned in this post, I find Fukino’s the most interesting.
        “They’re going to question the ink on which it was written or say it was fabricated,” said Fukino. “The whole thing is silly.” 1

        How do you get multiple people to go along? Bribery? Threats? Think Miss Tickly’s phone call (or was it an email?) that casually mentioned her child. With details. However, you wouldn’t need to threaten everyone directly. Just the highest rung possible. The governor? The head of a department? Then that person issues a decree that “we won’t involve ourselves in this ‘silliness’. No comments, please. We’re above this. Don’t answer any questions or give out any information…at the risk of your job.”

        So what if someone who is being threatened or coerced wanted to tell people something is wrong, but can’t come right out and say it? Hints? Let’s say that’s Fukino’s case. She couldn’t come out and say, “Boy, they’re going to say there are all kinds of layers in the document that shouldn’t be there.” She doesn’t know that. She didn’t create the document and had no hand in it. But she does know what SHOULD be there, what is required for a vital record’s legitimacy.

        She’s not the first person who seemingly gave ‘hints’.

        Arrogance or a cry for help?

        I don’t know.

    • “Arpaio: ‘Probable cause’ Obama certificate a fraud”

      “Additionally, the posse says, the videos demonstrate that the Hawaii Department of Health Registrar’s name stamp and the registrar’s date stamp were computer-generated images imported into an electronic document, as opposed to rubber stamp imprints inked by hand or machine onto a paper document.”
      “Birth Certificate II — The Sequel”

      “It’s An “Abstract” And What About That “Smiley Face””

      “Now let’s be clear about the subtle use of “txe” instead of “the.”

      “TXE” is the file extension for an enriched text file which is exactly what Onaka meant to say! He doesn’t say he gave you an copy of Obama’s original birth document, but an abstract of the “records on file,” compiled from “TXE” files.

      This is compatible with Adobe Illustrator or the exact software conglomeration Hawaii uses today. It is pertinent to point out the change from “the” to “TXE” as it leads to the obvious fraud but it means something and exonerates Onaka. These people know that they are not telling the truth. …”
      Perhaps Alvin T. Onaka and the person who assembled the LFBC (could be Onaka) are in cahoots. The registrar’s stamps are legitimate – approved by Onaka for use on this one-of-a-kind document. Notice that Beckwith says: “the change from “the” to “TXE” … exonerates Onaka.” He wants legal ‘cover’ in this matter. Of course, the intention is to mislead the public.

      • Hopefully time will tell, and the truth (whatever it may be) will come out, but I just don’t buy the “TXE” explanation. I just don’t believe it was intentional or that it “means” something.

        • How could it be unintentional? Either the person creating the bogus stamp on a computer made a typo or we’re supposed to believe that someone ordered a stamp with a typo? Either the state or a forger? The state would be unlikely to make such a mistake because requisitions and receipts of goods go through multiple checks for accuracy.

          • I could be wrong…I just think a typo (yes in the computer generated fake…not an actual stamp) is more likely. The TXE theory reminds me too much of the “ukelele” theory I guess.
            But I don’t claim to be any kind of expert 🙂

      • Does the registrar have the power under Hawaiian law to unilaterally make up his own definition of what constitutes his “certification” of the “authenticity” of any document? Somehow, I doubt it. Documents like this, in order to be legal across the country, would seem to me to have to meet certain national standards. This isn’t even a “DOCUMENT”, anyway, so it is legally meaningless in the first place.

      • There is no need for a physical stamp – it would only have to exist as a TXE record in some database. It could easily be a modified ‘THE stamp’. Same for Onaka’s signature with the smiley face.
        “TXE is a file extension associated with Enriched Text files.”
        Part of batazoid’s comment at thedailypen:

        “For the record: Obama’s long form Certificate of Live Birth document is quite clearly based on secondary sources information without any supporting original source documentation from his hospital-issued birth certificate.* In addition, Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth document is obviously not a copy of an original record of birth, as he amateurishly tried to project. Such authentic copies would be negative image reproductions of archived photostats.

        Moreover, the Registrar clearly states as much in his affirmation stamp on Obama’s new long form Certificate of Live Birth document as the following: “I certify this a true copy or abstract of TXE record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health”.

        A TXE record is an “enriched text file” used to combine graphics with textual data for easier storage and retrieval of information stored in computer databases. So, the Registrar is certifying that all the information on the new long form is all from electronic sources, which might not even be based on any one particular database record. The Registrar admits none of the data is from original sources; it is all digital data printed out as an “abstract”.”

        • Now if “TXE” were the only capitalized word in the “stamp” i would find it more plausible. “of TXE record” does not make sense grammatically and I think if they were going that far out of there way to insert a never before used in this context term/abbreviation into an otherwise “normal” certification statement they would go the extra step to put an article (a or the) in front of txe.

        • There’s nothing in Hawaiian law that allows the registrar to electronically certify a digital file. So it’s meaningless and evidence of nothing.

      • Onaka is probably terrified about the Arpaio investigation.
        Dean Haskins & Duncan Sunahara:

        “… When we pointed out to Supervisor Jesse Koike that their “rules” were illegal, according to Hawaiian statutes, he told us that Duncan would have to discuss that with Dr. Alvin Onaka. We spent four hours waiting to speak with Onaka, who eventually instructed the security guard to throw us out of the facility (which seems to be outrageous behavior from someone with nothing to hide). Duncan also made several phone calls trying to make an appointment to see Onaka, but could not get him even to return his calls.

        We then sent a certified letter to Onaka requesting the photocopy, and also included the relevant statutory information, and were informed in writing that we would have to take the matter up with Hawaii’s Attorney General, which we did. …”

  12. theories?…a fool and his forger. Who with a brain would get paid to get busted at this level? A fool…or O will say I’m black and protecting myself.
    Time will tell who that person is… Pelosi? …Val J….Michelle O ….the Professor?? Oh so many would stick it to us if they thought they may get away with it…. I can’t wait…. this is going to be someone young and a male!
    All bets are on!

    White ribbons in America. Will Russians March in Solidarity with us?
    Dr. Orly Taitz
    it’s now found on left side #9 today…
    (from above …sorry I took a short cut)

  14. I noticed Rush mentioned the crazed democrat in Tenn. that was threatening Sheriff Arpaio’s life at least three times today. Do you think he was signalling his audience to research Arpaio in order to tune them in to what’s going on without coming right out and saying so? My feeling is that many in the media have been threatened.

  15. go fetch…hit home page!

    • First of all, Rob’s comment has my avatar because I moved it. Bridgette knows how to change the avatar, but I’ve never been able to get it to work, so don’t be confused!

      Rob, that’s an amazing article. First, I assume the scenario they present is satire, but it sure matches what we’ve seen obots come up with in their never-ending quest to find a rationale, no matter how extreme or delusional, to “explain” all the anomalies in Barry’s “documents”. It reminds me of the delusion that Barry is not guilty of forgery because the BCs were campaign ads.

      Not that FORGED Selective Service Record. Really, in THAT case, what ELSE could they do? Considering how many patriotic Americans of African extraction served honorably and even gave their lives for our country, it would be impossible for them to cry “racism” if anybody asked if he registered for the draft when Jimmy Carter called.

      Will they cough up an original for Sheriff Joe’s forensic experts to examine? Ha! This is probably why they’re doubling down on suing him. Trying to destroy him by any means necessary. At this point, it’s all they can do (short of the worst, which we’ve seen happen to others) to get rid of him. Destroy his reputation as best they can so he’s not reelected.

      Second, I’ve found the article that Daily Pen must be talking about, when they explain how they PUNKED the OBOTS! How masterful was that?!!!!

      Here ya go:

      “What’s wrong with this picture? It’s a fake. The original is in Vital Statistics of the United States – 1945 – Part II Natality and Mortality Data for the United States Tabulated by Place of Residence, PDF Page 8 (VIII in the document). Here’s what it really looks like (and I have to split this into two parts because in the original, the footnote doesn’t appear directly under the United States totals.”

      How does it feel? How does it feel? NO direction home. Like a rolling stone. 🙂

      • Here’s only a part of the brilliant takedown of these hypocrites (emphasis added). Do read the entire post. It’s well worth it:

        “Meanwhile the growing chasm of evidence separating them from reality continues to metastasize into what will eventually become a fatal malignancy.

        Sadly, our experiment revealed the tragic weakness of ideologically corrupt minds and an endemic incapacity to understand the difference between the standards of credibility necessary to verify the legitimacy of an individual seeking untold power and influence over millions, as opposed to the unnecessary credibility of private citizens in merely writing what will eventually be proven meaningless opinions through a temporary and faceless confluence. Apparently, according to the multitude of these liberal hacks, the content issued by unknown bloggers is worthy of more scrutiny than the illegitimate content issued by the most powerful liberal politician on the planet, for whom their fetish calls.

        Unfortunately, it also revealed they would rather apply their investigative vigor against faceless opinioneers bearing no authority for validating government documents, while defending the illegitimate, unverified documentation of a corrupt global power. They find more wrong in randomly fabricated blog information than they do in official, government issued documents bearing the identity of four dead people unable to defend their attestation of the record. They ally themselves among a defiled chorus against the intentional and admitted alteration of a minor footnote rather than take arms against the exploitation of the blood-ransomed constitution and millions of innocent lives being deceived by a digital fabrication of information used to exalt a liar into political power.

        Ironically, our experiment also revealed that even though Obama has never provided corroborating, original paper documentation of his birth, his horde of blind defenders still possess the conscientious ability to understand how easily the alteration of computer imagery can mislead when no original information is provided to corroborate it. They just refuse to exercise the same diligence against Obama. They understand how detection of such altered digital information warrants accusations of nefarious intent, reprobate character and dishonesty, yet they refuse to apply that same standard against Obama because he is the “god” of their psychotic favoritism.

        The test also revealed that Obama’s most vigorous defenders are simply hypocrites willing to accept the absence of proof from demagogues when that absence of proof supports their selfish lusts for being seen as right by a transient majority. They are not stupid, they are just uninformed and unwilling to recognize the hierarchy of scrutiny against those with power as opposed to those without power.

        Simply stated, when someone like Obama works as hard as he has to hide his real identity from the public, it means that his true identity is being hidden because it is harmful to millions of innocent human beings. It means that Obama understands that if the truth enters the domain of consciousness, it will bring destruction upon the false reality he has constructed in the minds of his followers. When private citizens demonstrate how easy it is to alter a computer image in order to show why the world should question Obama, they merely get called bad names by empty headed servants of Obama.”

  16. I absolutely love it. Punks, the lot of them.

  17. empty headed servants of Obama.”
    PERFECT!!!! 🙂

  18. h/t Papoose. I’m putting this here because this writer talks about the “ink” in the BC#, which relates to Linda’s similar arguments about the “ink” in SAD’s so-called signature:

    It’s yet another analysis of the “document” proving forgery. His points, some of which repeat some of Linda’s points (most of below are quotes):
    1. [I]t was constructed from digital snippets.
    2. [M]agnifying the PDF about 4x, visible to the naked eye is the mixture of bitmap and grayscale elements which would not have been possible with an ordinary computer scan of a paper document. This is most obvious in the Bates-stamped certificate number, “61 10641” in the upper-right corner of the certificate; the “61 1064” digits are stark black, and the trailing “1” digit is shades of gray, and blurred. Certainly, somebody tampered with this number. Bitmap and grayscale mixtures can also be clearly seen in Line 18a, the parent’s signature.
    3. [A]t least two different typewriter fonts (maybe more) being used in the single document.
    4. It fails the “pitch test.” Manual typewriters (and monospace electric-motor-powered typewriters) have a “pitch” — so many typed letters per inch. There were many different manual typewriter type styles in the 1960s, but by far the most common were “Courier 10” — ten characters per inch, including the space bar — and “Elite 12” — twelve characters per inch — with “Courier 10” predominant. Thus, all of the typed characters in a row of text would, if placed over another typed row of text, be in perfect vertical alignment (including typed spaces), because each typed character occupies exactly the same horizontal space in its row. That’s what “monospace” means. … I took a line of typewritten text from the Obama document and positioned it just above another typewritten line from that same document, if the “birth certificate” were authentic, then the individual letters in the two rows should be in perfect vertical alignment — one letter directly above another — right? … As you scan your eyes to the left, you can see that by the time you reach the “6” of “6085,” the vertical alignment is half a character off with the “y” of “Maternity.” This is not possible on a manual typewriter. (Note: He used Guthrie’s photo and not the LFCOLB on the WH blog, because it was allegedly the actual paper document. It’s easiest to see his point if you notice that after being 1/2 character off, the alignment suddenly becomes perfect as you move along the page.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s