Obama releases birth certificate!

[idirtify]

Ok just once I would like to see someone explain why you found this. Instead of name calling, insulting and acting shamefully....logically respond to why this is the way it is. Why does the certificate have a hospital listed that could not possibly have existed under that name back then? How is this possible. Dont ignore the post and call me a name, don't demand it be moved to hot topics, logically sit down and explain to me how this is possible?

I can't figure out why really. Makes no sense. There may well be a valid explanation. But it escapes me.

I’m with you all the way. I cannot fathom any possible way this can be explained away. I probably should not get too excited about it yet, but I can’t come up with any logical explanation. How could a doctor mistakenly write the name of a hospital that would not exist for another 17 years? Wait…I got it…Obama is a time traveler! No wait…that’s backwards. Damn!

Obama sir, you may be fucked. This error is simple and bold enough for any average American to see. You may have been wiser to hold out and stick to your story.

Anyway, we might want to “screen-shot” that web page. Who knows when it might disappear.

 

[TIMB0B]

Snopes says he was born at Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children according to Barbara Nelson, a teacher at Obama's prep school in Hawai'i. Don't know what that proves or disproves.

But who is David Sinclair, which is the name signed under "Attendant"? Is the attendant the obstetrician? Because, again, snopes reports the obstetrician who delivered Obama was Dr. Rodney T. West. And if the attendant is just a "witness" and not an obstetrician, then is it normal for a birth certificate to not have the name of the doctor who delivered the baby? Just curious. Cause I don't know.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

 

[CaliforniaMom]

I posted this in the other thread.. but here is what my uncle had to say on the topic:

This morning I heard that Obama's birth certificate was posted on the Whitehouse website as a PDF file. I later heard that some people were saying it was altered or faked. Not knowing what to expect, I decided to look for myself.

I have worked with PDF files for over 20 years. I'm also hands-on fluent with most major PC graphics applications over the last 30 years.

It's absolutely true that the document has been altered. Big time. In fact, it's worse than poorly done (with many obvious problems).

I actually discovered this before it made the news this morning.

Attached is the original Whitehouse PDF file from 8:00 AM this morning (in case they decide to flatten the layers and re-post it later). You can load it into Adobe Illustrator (not Photoshop) to release the clipping mask. A clipping mask means that sections have been editied, on purpose. Why? Also notice it has 18 layers!! You'd never have all that digital "work" from a simple scanned piece of paper.

If you don't have Illustrator, I attached a JPG screengrab showing all the above. Notice all the edited frame areas. Someone put them there, on purpose.

Obama wants us to believe this is a simple scanned document, made by a typewriter in the early 1960's (long before computers). A simple paper scan would never have all those digital layers (with different fonts and cut-and-paste sections). The errors stick out more than a sore thumb. You'd think someone would at least have the brains to flatten all the layers before attempting to pass it off as a "legit" bitmap page scan.

I have not seen this mentioned on the TV news yet. Maybe it will be ignored, like Dan Rather's faked Microsoft Word documents on president Bush. But others have noticed this. The links below are from 2 other guys that discovered the same thing and they go into more technical detail (with enlargements of text edits and font changes). Remember, typewriters could not do all this in the 1960's:

http://market-ticker.org/post=185094

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=73096

Why is the fake so poorly done? Obviously places like the CIA or FBI could do a perfect job. My guess is that they told Obama to pound salt. And this is what you get when amateurs fake PDF files. Like my dad used to say, "That's the difference between a pro and a schmo"...

There are other things wrong too. Like the hospital name. The name was different in 1961. The name printed on the birth certificate is the "new" name (which changed in 1978).

Also, the National Review article which supposedly "debunks" the layers is complete BS. OCR programs do not create little bitty areas of edited regions (I've been using them for over 30 years). OCR does entire line-by-line logic. The small layer frames on the birth certificate were done by hand, piece by piece, for the purpose of constructing the document.


Here is my brother-in-law's response as well

I have also worked with technology for almost 14 years and heavily with PDF documents and scan/conversion tools (especially recently). I can COMPLETELY confirm that scanned (or converted) PDF documents do NOT contain layers. They, by design, contain a single layer (no clipping paths as well) and I will explain a little about why.
PDF [portable document format] was designed by (or at least made popular by, and enhanced by) Adobe. The reason they created this type of document was because all other methods of sending documents electronically (excluding fax) were modifiable (MS Word and Word Perfect). This type of document became so secure, and popular, that Bill Clinton signed the Digital Signatures Act in 1997 allowing people to actually sign Real Estate and Mortgage documentation (and more) as long as it was a PDF (with verified certificates).
Since then, people have come up with ways of editing these documents, ironically using tools developed by Adobe. Even the most high end scanners with OCR technology and conversion tools, there is a layer (no, not the same "layers") of security ingrained to prevent people from modifying the document. PDFs are almost ALWAYS a single layer.
As Don stated, a professional would always flatten a document to reduce the evidence of modification, especially considering it is literally 2-3 clicks of the mouse. Why this wasn't done is a mystery. The idea of having more then a single-layer flattened document from a scanned image is absolutely ludicrous. There is absolutely NO excuse to have more than one layer on this document; period.
I did not believe for one moment that the birth certificate was fake; until now. Don, what you sent proves to me, without a doubt, that there is foul play happening here. Again, there is NO reason this document should have been modified. What Don has found is incredible.

 

[Stary Hickory]

Snopes says he was born at Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children according to Barbara Nelson, a teacher at Obama's prep school in Hawai'i. Don't know what that proves or disproves.

But who is David Sinclair, which is the name signed under "Attendant"? Is the attendant the obstetrician? Because, again, snopes reports the obstetrician who delivered Obama was Dr. Rodney T. West. And if the attendant is just a "witness" and not an obstetrician, then is it normal for a birth certificate to not have the name of the doctor who delivered the baby? Just curious. Cause I don't know.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

Hospital name is just fine, debunked already. The website simply used one of the unofficial names for the hospital. Whoever wrote it did not necessarily go back and use the technical name that appears on BCs from that period. I don't know who said this stuff about West, very possible they are either lying or are confused.

 

[idirtify]

Looked into it a bit more, the names they list on their website don't match anything. I think they have called their hospital different generalized names for the public and on official documentation its different. Just saying that is a logical reason why its listed as what it is. Kapiolani Maternity home is the first hospital, where I imagine Obama was born right? That means it might had have an internal name of Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital, or people refered to it as a Maternity home without the Gynecological part attached(not very tasteful to say the whole name).

So I don't think the name of the hospital is an issue. Easy test, get someone else's certificate from that time and look at it.



debunked for sure

http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress....d-kapiolani-maternity-gynecological-hospital/

Well apparently the hospital name WAS imagined long before it was officially changed in 1978.

 

[idirtify]

I posted this in the other thread.. but here is what my uncle had to say on the topic:

This morning I heard that Obama's birth certificate was posted on the Whitehouse website as a PDF file. I later heard that some people were saying it was altered or faked. Not knowing what to expect, I decided to look for myself.

I have worked with PDF files for over 20 years. I'm also hands-on fluent with most major PC graphics applications over the last 30 years.

It's absolutely true that the document has been altered. Big time. In fact, it's worse than poorly done (with many obvious problems).

I actually discovered this before it made the news this morning.

Attached is the original Whitehouse PDF file from 8:00 AM this morning (in case they decide to flatten the layers and re-post it later). You can load it into Adobe Illustrator (not Photoshop) to release the clipping mask. A clipping mask means that sections have been editied, on purpose. Why? Also notice it has 18 layers!! You'd never have all that digital "work" from a simple scanned piece of paper.

If you don't have Illustrator, I attached a JPG screengrab showing all the above. Notice all the edited frame areas. Someone put them there, on purpose.

Obama wants us to believe this is a simple scanned document, made by a typewriter in the early 1960's (long before computers). A simple paper scan would never have all those digital layers (with different fonts and cut-and-paste sections). The errors stick out more than a sore thumb. You'd think someone would at least have the brains to flatten all the layers before attempting to pass it off as a "legit" bitmap page scan.

I have not seen this mentioned on the TV news yet. Maybe it will be ignored, like Dan Rather's faked Microsoft Word documents on president Bush. But others have noticed this. The links below are from 2 other guys that discovered the same thing and they go into more technical detail (with enlargements of text edits and font changes). Remember, typewriters could not do all this in the 1960's:

http://market-ticker.org/post=185094

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=73096

Why is the fake so poorly done? Obviously places like the CIA or FBI could do a perfect job. My guess is that they told Obama to pound salt. And this is what you get when amateurs fake PDF files. Like my dad used to say, "That's the difference between a pro and a schmo"...

There are other things wrong too. Like the hospital name. The name was different in 1961. The name printed on the birth certificate is the "new" name (which changed in 1978).

Also, the National Review article which supposedly "debunks" the layers is complete BS. OCR programs do not create little bitty areas of edited regions (I've been using them for over 30 years). OCR does entire line-by-line logic. The small layer frames on the birth certificate were done by hand, piece by piece, for the purpose of constructing the document.


Here is my brother-in-law's response as well

I have also worked with technology for almost 14 years and heavily with PDF documents and scan/conversion tools (especially recently). I can COMPLETELY confirm that scanned (or converted) PDF documents do NOT contain layers. They, by design, contain a single layer (no clipping paths as well) and I will explain a little about why.
PDF [portable document format] was designed by (or at least made popular by, and enhanced by) Adobe. The reason they created this type of document was because all other methods of sending documents electronically (excluding fax) were modifiable (MS Word and Word Perfect). This type of document became so secure, and popular, that Bill Clinton signed the Digital Signatures Act in 1997 allowing people to actually sign Real Estate and Mortgage documentation (and more) as long as it was a PDF (with verified certificates).
Since then, people have come up with ways of editing these documents, ironically using tools developed by Adobe. Even the most high end scanners with OCR technology and conversion tools, there is a layer (no, not the same "layers") of security ingrained to prevent people from modifying the document. PDFs are almost ALWAYS a single layer.
As Don stated, a professional would always flatten a document to reduce the evidence of modification, especially considering it is literally 2-3 clicks of the mouse. Why this wasn't done is a mystery. The idea of having more then a single-layer flattened document from a scanned image is absolutely ludicrous. There is absolutely NO excuse to have more than one layer on this document; period.
I did not believe for one moment that the birth certificate was fake; until now. Don, what you sent proves to me, without a doubt, that there is foul play happening here. Again, there is NO reason this document should have been modified. What Don has found is incredible.

OK. Just trying to keep up with the latest…
Wrong hospital name: debunked.
Multiple layers on PDF copy: active.

 

[Stary Hickory]

OK. Just trying to keep up with the latest…
Wrong hospital name: debunked.
Multiple layers on PDF copy: active.

Unless this OCR thing will do that. The thing is some parts of the text are not layered. I mean it makes no sense that someone would leave the "E" on none still attached...and erase the rest. Unless these were "markers" for overlaying new text down. But that is unlikely as it is all old typewriter style. If you look at it objectively why are there parts of the text that remain on the background? Why would someone do this? Split letters out and look at the dates, some of them are hand written...yet we are to believe that someone altered other dates leaving the 1 in place and working around it.

This all leans towards a computer program doing it automatically...but a little imperfectly.

 

[Maestro232]

here's my question...

It's fake. And because it is so obviously fake, Why? Incompetence? Political ploy? Coup? What's going on here?

 

[kahless]

It's fake. And because it is so obviously fake, Why? Incompetence? Political ploy? Coup? What's going on here?

One take on this is debating over the certificate is exactly what they want. The race card is now in play to be used to crush the opposition over this issue if they can keep it going up until the election.

 

[Maestro232]

One take on this is debating over the certificate is exactly what they want. The race card is now in play to be used to crush the opposition over this issue if they can keep it going up until the election.

The reason that doesn't seem likely to me is that it's so obviously fake that even non-birthers know it. So how does this help Obama isntead of just make him look like a jerk to even his supporters? ....or maybe I'm overestimating the rationality of his supporters....

 

[idirtify]

Update on latest:
Wrong hospital name: mostly debunked.
Multiple layers on PDF copy: active.
Wrong race name (“African”): active.
Wrong country name (“Kenya”): active?

 

[jmdrake]

Because it never friggin ends. The more evidence thrown at you the more BS you throw back. At some point enough is enough.

The whole point of asking for the document to be released is to scrutinize it to see if it's authentic. Maybe it will be shown to be authentic, maybe it won't be. But to summarily dismiss all challenges because an unverified PDF is put up on a website is silly.

 

[moostraks]

The reason that doesn't seem likely to me is that it's so obviously fake that even non-birthers know it. So how does this help Obama isntead of just make him look like a jerk to even his supporters? ....or maybe I'm overestimating the rationality of his supporters....

If responses on various websites are indicative of his supporters rationality you are way overestimating them. I agree with kahless this puts the racist issue back in to play hard core. Look for the newsletters to again become an issue.

 

[fisharmor]

Wrong country name (“Kenya”): active?

Well, just wikipedia research, but...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_Colony
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kenya#Kenyatta_regime:_1963-1978
Kenya was still a British colony in 1961. It didn't gain total independence until 1963 as mentioned. But it was in the works from about the mid-50's.
I think the larger question is this:
Would anything be put on his birth certificate denoting the fact that his father was at the time probably still a British subject?
GB generally takes these things seriously. I don't know if that would translate into his son's birth certificate.

 

[Pericles]

The whole point of asking for the document to be released is to scrutinize it to see if it's authentic. Maybe it will be shown to be authentic, maybe it won't be. But to summarily dismiss all challenges because an unverified PDF is put up on a website is silly.

And if it had been released 3 years ago, it probably would not have gotten the scrutiny it is now going to get.

 

[politicsNproverbs]

I read somewhere that Kenya was not "Kenya" until 1963, when it became independent. Can anyone verify this? If this is true, then this would be another interesting mistake, besides the hospital name.

That would have been a great blunder, but per wiki, 1963 is merely the year Kenya became an Independent nation. The territory of the same name was around long before that. Per Yahoo Answers, the British came up with the name Kenya as follows:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_did_the_name_kenya_come_from

Where did the name kenya come from?

Kenya is named after a mountain of the same name. It was given by the Kikuyu people who lived around present day Mt. Kenya which they referred to as Kirinyaga or Kerenyaga, meaning 'mountain of whiteness' because of its snow capped peak. Mt Kirinyaga which was the main landmark became synonymous with the territory the British later claimed as their colony. However, the name Kenya arose out of the inability of the British and others to pronounce Kirinyaga correctly.

The British began moving into the area in the late 1800's, so I'm guessing the area became known as Kenya from around that time forward:

http://www.kenya-information-guide.com/kenya-history.html

The colonial history of Kenya dates from the Berlin Conference of 1885, when the European powers first partitioned East Africa into spheres of influence. In 1895, the U.K. Government established the East African Protectorate and, soon after, opened the fertile highlands to white settlers. The settlers were allowed a voice in government even before it was officially made a U.K. colony in 1920, but Africans were prohibited from direct political participation until 1944.

 

[pacelli]

 

[BlackTerrel]

The whole point of asking for the document to be released is to scrutinize it to see if it's authentic. Maybe it will be shown to be authentic, maybe it won't be. But to summarily dismiss all challenges because an unverified PDF is put up on a website is silly.

Nope. There are some people who will never be convinced. Watch.

 

[Bruno]

Nope. There are some people who will never be convinced. Watch.

There are some such as you who strangely refuse to question. I posted this on another thread, but it applies to you as well.

Everything is fake.

How do we know that Obama isn't manipulating our computer and television screens?

He may not even have a forged birth certificate. It may all be a computer generated image. Has anyone who was not under Obama's control seen the actual piece of paper? I think not!

Wrap your heads around that one, tin foil hatters!

For that matter, how do we know Obama is real? Has any of you actually seen and touched him?

This may go even deeper than the Mossad, SPECTRE, the Bilderbergers, et al.

It's possible that we are being controlled by agents from the Planet Rejak 9 who have installed the fake Obama into the Presidency to keep us calm until they come to take us away and turn us into Soylent Green!

Make sure your tin foil hats on tight, my fellow birthers, we're in for a bumpy (and insane) ride!

This is the model I recommend (the male model here is shown posting on RPF, even as Obama tries to control his mind):

I wish I could blindly believe things like you and others, and accept them at face value when they have been oddly hidden from the public for years and millions have been spent to hide them from the public. When this birth certificate was released, I wish I could just say to myself, "See, there ya go, people within the first few hours are already finding many issues with its authenticity, but I will choose to think they are crazy , must be racists, and that Obama has nothing to gain, so why would he lie?"

It must be blissful.

 

[Bruno]

By the way, myself and other always said if it does get released it should be independently verified. Why would it not be? There a a dozen isses with it. Is it so wrong to question?