"WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President."

[seekerz]

Ok, I was ASSUMING he thought that. Mostly, i was being somewhat snarky to ChristInTheWay about his idea that it the questions our side has are “ridiculous,” or somewhat to that effect. I already responded to that in the post above mine.

Althoug, to be honest------aren’t YOU assuming that I thought I knew what Obama thought when I made that sentence?
believe, it was basically a combination of snark, frustration, and sincere curiosity. Glad to know YOU know what I think.

I didn’t telepathically transmit that quote into your brain it was your statement. There was nothing left for me to assume .

 

[Sonic]

1. If the document was scanned using OCR then the “layers” would have searchable text. They do not. The different objects are images and not text.

I think you deserve an answer to this question. See my previous posts:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7809176&postcount=680
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7811715&postcount=802

For the record, I think the BC digital file was scanned from his legitimate BC, but has been subjected to a bad graphic editing job by some staff member. The following quotes are from a discussion by graphic artists concerning the pdf document.

Part 1:

Many scanning applications can wrap bitmaps (rows and columns of pixels) in a PDF “wrapper”, which allows scanned images to be viewed in the convenient environment of Adobe Acrobat Reader or other PDF viewer. However, no scanning application creates documents with multiple discrete layers or elements (from the same scan) that can be moved around when opened in Illustrator.

As for the OCR theory, it doesn’t hold up: A. there would be no reason for a straight scan of a birth certificate to be OCRd before distribution to the public, B. The resulting text block OCR elements would be sitting on a layer in front of the corresponding letterforms in the underlying scan (they wouldn’t eliminate the underlying scan pixels they came from), and C. there is no way Acrobat can accurately interpret and reproduce every typeface shown on the birth certificate, particularly when the original contains smudges, checkboxes, offset letterforms (typewriter letters that “accidentally” struck high and low) and lines. OCR in even the most expensive version of the program simply isn’t that good.

---

you can open the document in Adobe Bridge and it will give you the WHEN data. WHEN it was altered. This document has been worked on since October 2010 and has been altered many times. A simple document scanned into a PDF would not have this at all.

---

I also work on Photoshop and Illustrator. All the bs about stuff is fine, but when you open the originally posted pdf document in Illustrator and examine the history file, you see a number of manipulations that are not part of any scan and/or OCR processes. There are linked files who’s names have been erased, however the actual links are still there, and the history files tell you exactly how they were manipulated to create this document….I’m laughing so hard….all this work and a stupid amateur at Illustrator [messes] it all up….ya, way to go boys and girls!!!

---

There’s many anomalies on this thing. Like the foldover at the top left that doesn’t extend to the bottom which would leave the crease at an angle down the left side, not parallel to the edge as it is…. and number two if that’s from photocopying it, it would be white around the safety paper’s edge, not continue to be a safety paper background outside the perimeter of the actual document, get it?

It’s like it’s folded over with the same paper laid over it upside down on the copier face. That’s goofy, you would expect it to be black all around the cert if the hood was raised while the copy was made, or white if the document was placed itself on the glass with the hood down.

Do that on your scanners with a colored piece of paper, you’ll see what I mean.
I’m a 30 year pressman and 20 year graphic design and film person with ten years at the Chicago trib by the way, so I know a bit about this.

It’s just not proper. There’s little things. The white area around the letters, that’s how the PDF looks from the white house, yet mine in Chicago is perfectly black to the edges of the type and it’s a copy of an original as well.​

I use Acrobat, Illustrator, CorelDraw and Photoshop and have done so since they came out with computers. I have scanned images with OCR multiple times and brought them into Illustrator, Photoshop and CorelDraw. Illustrator DOES seperate the OCR into layers. HOWEVER, and it’s a BIG HOWEVER, it pulls out ALL of the black and not just some of it as this scan has done- if in fact it was an OCR scan exported as a PDF. The underlying white areas do match up with the corresponding black areas. However, I have never seen the halo effect around all of the black lettering. Upon examination of the original in Photoshop at 200% there is a clear degredation of image quality as soon as you move away from the printed area.

 

[Sonic]

Part 2

@CMYK: I work with Illustrator and electronic documents every day, too. And your post raises some questions:

First: How do you define “scanned PDF”? Some scanning software can indeed create PDFs, but as I pointed out, the scanned content remains bitmapped by default. It is simply rows and columns of pixels (much like the JPGs we are all familiar with from digital cameras, but not necessarily compressed) with a PDF file header and metadata attached to make the scan readable in Acrobat Reader and other PDF viewers (because these widely distributed applications can’t display bitmaps “in the raw”).

I’m also unclear on what you mean–precisely–by “importing into Illustrator.” When I open a test scan saved as a PDF into Illustrator (via File-Open, not double-clicking, which would make the filetype invoke Acro Reader by default), there is exactly one layer–the layer containing the scan–and one clipping mask to represent the document’s boundaries. If I use the “Place” command–which is arguably closer to the literal meaning of “importing,” there is also just one layer created–the layer with the scan.

Yes, Illustrator is indeed “vector-based,” and it is indeed capable of converting bitmapped art to vector art on command. But A. It does not by default create vectored art of layers containing bitmaps, B. scans don’t prompt Illustrator to arbitrarily create the large number of discrete layers from a scan that the White House’s file displays, and C. None of the layers have vector-based objects on them–they are all bitmaps, which suggests these distinct graphic elements were assembled within Illustrator from bitmap sources (such as raster-based applications like Photoshop, or scanners) before being exported from the Illustrator to a PDF.

I know this wasn’t your point, CMYK, but I’d also invite those who find the magical OCR arguments convincing to see the link I included in my earlier post. In addition to the arguments I made earlier, the PDF contains no blocks of ASCII text (i.e.: text you could highlight with your mouse and copy as text for pasting into a word processor) which would be indicative of OCR having taken place.

Also, if this image represents a black and white copy of a birth certificate that was optically scanned or photocopied onto green security paper (the comeback against those who point out the crosshatch pattern doesn’t “curl” with the document’s left edge), why didn’t the White House’s scan of the document simply produce a single-layer PDF containing just the scan? I suppose Hawaii’s document management system could produce some funky output with layers (though such a policy–if even technically possible–would fly in the face of proven document management security principles because it would allow easier image data manipulation), but everything in the coverage I’ve read indicates the documents were physically printed and physically sent to the White House. Why then are we getting these funky multi-layered files?

---

The OCR theory falls apart when you examine the partial words, the different colors like on the stamped date (green and black). The last digit of the sequential numbering at the top has mixed resolutions, the last digit being different from all the others. There are different resolutions throughout the document, bitmap type and greyscale type. The page edge looks very phony, the back paper was not even used when he was born, the background paper is absolutely flat with no imperfections after 50 years??? I think not. The white halo around the type is not typical of any PDF.​

Just to add, the PDF was created on a Mac. Open up Doc properties and you can see that, using Quartz PDFContext. Two, the document is just not a negative of the original, because at the bottom of the PDF it’s stamped with “April 25 2011″ on it. So we’re at least looking at a scan of a piece of paper, if this thing is legit.

---

First of all – for those talking about “layers” who have not actually opened the thing in AI, there’s only one layer. Within that layer there are a whole bunch of individual objects. You can highlight those objects and click the little circle next to them and see them highlighted in the birth certificate. Scans simply do not work that way, no matter what format you scan to.

If you open the pdf in AI and Select All, you get multiple containers. The ‘Non” in the mothers occupation area is one. The “e” in None is not selected. There are stray containers on the large page that do not seem to have nay content.

The bottom left date stamp shows “Aug 8,196″ and not the “1″ in the date. On the bottom right stamp, “Aug 8,19″ gets selected but the “61″ does not. There is no scanning app, or pdf creator in the world that will break up those stamps that way.

Both the date and the registrars certification get selected.

All of the above can be selected and moved individually using the direct select tool.
If you open the links palette you see these elements there. That simply does not happen with any scan. The only way any component object ends up in the links palette is it an object is placed. You can easily make them disappear and appear by clicking the show/hide in the links palette. If you double click any of the objects in the links palette to get info, you see that they show “rotate -90 degrees”. Again, no scan in the world rotates objects.

Of course, you can use the direct select tool to click in the birth certificate and move the vast majority, but not all of the text – both the entries and the the titles. Some stuff stays.
All of the above is nothing like any scan I’ve ever seen. I tried replicating any of this opening documents that I scanned directly to pdf last week. I couldn’t come close.
If you open the pdf in Acrobat pro and look at the metadata, you see that the pdf came from Preview, on a Mac running 10.6.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Part 2

Thanks for all of the material, Sonic!!!

I’m actually not that familiar with OCR----that question came out of a conversation I had with a "doubter like myself. He mentioned that “discrepancy” and thought I’d run it past the folks here who know about stuff like this. Again, thanks.

Glad to know I’m not the only one who said “no way” to the OCR thing. And I DO agree this was a horrible editing job. Leave it to the government to not even be able to give out a decent copy of a BC.

 

[ChadS]

I don’t think even in Hawaii was the term “African” used in those days. The whole “African-American” and “African” designation did not really come about until the 1980’s. Certainly not in the American South or Middle America, where barry’s mother was from.

This simply isn’t true. I’ve seen historical research quoting student newspapers and other sources of literature dating from as early as the 1910s referring to blacks at various times as African-American or Afro-American. It wasn’t very widespread as the typcial convention in both the black and white press was to write “negro” either with a lowercase “n” or capitalizing it. But, to say this whole thing is an invention of the 1980s is erroneous.

I can’t really comment on Hawaii’s designation standards but I suppose that a U.S. born black man would’ve been labeled “negro” while a black person that came from elsewhere could’ve been given the appelation “African.” Or perhaps whatever Obama’s father self-identified as was simply transcribed over from another form he filled out.

ChadS

 

[seekerz]

This simply isn’t true. I’ve seen historical research quoting student newspapers and other sources of literature dating from as early as the 1910s referring to blacks at various times as African-American or Afro-American. It wasn’t very widespread as the typcial convention in both the black and white press was to write “negro” either with a lowercase “n” or capitalizing it. But, to say this whole thing is an invention of the 1980s is erroneous.

I can’t really comment on Hawaii’s designation standards but I suppose that a U.S. born black man would’ve been labeled “negro” while a black person that came from elsewhere could’ve been given the appelation “African.” Or perhaps whatever Obama’s father self-identified as was simply transcribed over from another form he filled out.

ChadS

That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking myself, since the non-white parent’s race is what (even today in some places) decided the child’s race. It would have been natural in those days (don’t know about Hawaii) to simply have referred to his father as ‘African’, since he was from Kenya. But all this quibbling over terminology really isn’t the point, I’m afraid.

 

[Big_Ro]

That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking myself, since the non-white parent’s race is what (even today in some places) decided the child’s race. It would have been natural in those days (don’t know about Hawaii) to simply have referred to his father as ‘African’, since he was from Kenya. But all this quibbling over terminology really isn’t the point, I’m afraid.

Please help me to understand. This issue that the Certificate states Obama Sr.'s race as African is somehow further evidence that the released documents authenticity may be in question. It’s somewhat demeaning quite honestly to give this argument any sort of serious consideration but the confines laid out for participating on this thread leave me no other choice, but I digress. I am also aware that Oly Taitz a famous and well known advocate of the line of questioning that suggests the President is ineligible to serve in the office due questionable place of birth, citizenship status or other questionable circumstances surrounding his birth suggested that the term “negro” should have been used instead. She suggested that this was further evidence that the document relaesed by the WH was questionable. Whether her assertion is underpinned by racism, I’ll leave for others to decide. I know from my own studies that this odious term (and yes I am well aware of its epistomolgy so please I don’t need a lecture on its origins and relative validity) was common at the time of the Presidents birth, where ever that might have occured. When I first viewed the document, I didn’t think that term was in any way untoward because Mr. Obama Sr. was a citizen of Kenya studying in Hawaii, at that time. It seemed pretty straight forward that a typical clerical worker would have simply put African because he was, well, an african. It seems just so obvious. But, am I supposed to believe instead that it somehow reveals that the document is a fake or forgery or was somehow altered because the term is now the more “politically correct” way to refer to African-Americans? I personally detest any sort of hyphenated terminology. I am either an American or am not. Although, I must say that I have been all too often refered to as being a non-American becasue I am blessed with a higher level of melanin in my skin even though you would have to go back to the mid-1800 to find a relative that was not born in the USA or what would become the USA. These are the minor indecencies that we must endure, I make no complaint. I’m proud to be an American.

 

[Big_Ro]

nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding

National Review Online has a story that allegedly debunks the OCR Theory for rendering the released document a fake or forgery. I do not personally posses sufficient technical expertise to begin to understand the arguments for and against this Theory. And, so were clear, I don’t need it explained to me. Their supposed debunking seems pretty straight forward, logical, and plausible. I will await for others to enlighten me as to why I should believe otherwise.

 

[JHow]

Regarding the use of the term “African”, consider how the form gets filled out. In the case of my children, there was an original block form handed to mom, who fills in the baby name, race, mother and father information, etc. Hospital staff have already supplied time of birth, and checked “male”. The rough form then goes to the typist who prepares the actual certificate, that form is then returned to Mom and Doctor for signatures. My guess is that Mom selected the terminology and as long as it is accurate, no-one really questions it. Hence, if you put “Caucasian” or “White” that would work. If you put “Black” or “African”, either of those would work too. It’s not like there was a drop-down box with pre-selected category names. I think the simplest explanation is that Obama’s mom wrote “African”, which O. Senior manifestly was, and that’s how it got there.

 

[Big_Ro]

Regarding the use of the term “African”, consider how the form gets filled out. In the case of my children, there was an original block form handed to mom, who fills in the baby name, race, mother and father information, etc. Hospital staff have already supplied time of birth, and checked “male”. The rough form then goes to the typist who prepares the actual certificate, that form is then returned to Mom and Doctor for signatures. My guess is that Mom selected the terminology and as long as it is accurate, no-one really questions it. Hence, if you put “Caucasian” or “White” that would work. If you put “Black” or “African”, either of those would work too. It’s not like there was a drop-down box with pre-selected category names. I think the simplest explanation is that Obama’s mom wrote “African”, which O. Senior manifestly was, and that’s how it got there.

I can’t speak to whether or not the process you described was used in the mysterious case of Mr. Obama’s certificate, but it sounds quite plausible. I have no trouble with it. I am also in agreement with the rest of your post. I figure that’s about how it happened. I am just trying to figure out if there is an alternate theory that is being posited on this thread or if I’m simply misunderstanding the back and forth. Thanks for your help.

 

[TMC]

I can’t speak to whether or not the process you described was used in the mysterious case of Mr. Obama’s certificate, but it sounds quite plausible. I have no trouble with it. I am also in agreement with the rest of your post. I figure that’s about how it happened. I am just trying to figure out if there is an alternate theory that is being posited on this thread or if I’m simply misunderstanding the back and forth. Thanks for your help.

I agree with your comments. As to whether an alternative theory is being put forth - the whole “African” vs. “Negro” idea was put out by Orly Taitz and is being blindly repeated by some without any evidence that the underlying premise is true. Like all things that come out of Ms. Taitz mouth, it appears to be based on nothing more than her desire to keep her name in the news and her face on TV.

 

[ManOnFire]

Gotta love that signature…so I gather divorce and cheating show and ideological divide??

Sorry, off topic I know.

Well, when the leftist media is the one selling the lust, drugs and materialism in movies, TV, and music for gross profits, then broken homes and dreams result, then the left pretends to be the hero by claiming that taxes need to be raised on others to pay for the dysfunction while the rest of the country becomes reduced into spiritual and economic poverty, yes, I’d say I love my sig. Theirs is a system that keeps them at the top of power and influence over society at the expense of society while announcing themselves to be the good guys. It’s very effective at keeping others down.

 

[Big_Ro]

I agree with your comments. As to whether an alternative theory is being put forth - the whole “African” vs. “Negro” idea was put out by Orly Taitz and is being blindly repeated by some without any evidence that the underlying premise is true. Like all things that come out of Ms. Taitz mouth, it appears to be based on nothing more than her desire to keep her name in the news and her face on TV.

14 minutes and counting.

 

[JHow]

Okay, you made me link to it. Here’s the real proof… in song no less.

youtube.com/watch?v=4Xkw8ip43Vk

 

[Big_Ro]

Well, when the leftist media is the one selling the lust, drugs and materialism in movies, TV, and music for gross profits, then broken homes and dreams result, then the left pretends to be the hero by claiming that taxes need to be raised on others to pay for the dysfunction while the rest of the country becomes reduced into spiritual and economic poverty, yes, I’d say I love my sig. Theirs is a system that keeps them at the top of power and influence over society at the expense of society while announcing themselves to be the good guys. It’s very effective at keeping others down.

I do have one other question related to Mrs. Taitz. I watched with my usual amusement as she pushed her case to the SCOTUS. I’ve been wondering whether this might be the premise for the oft stated accusation that the President has spent $2mm or $3mm defending/resisting the release of the said document. From what I can tell, the claim originated from a story on WND. It has been, to my understanding, allegedly debunked, but has been continuously put forth as fact by many on this thread especially our thread captain kimmielittle. (I don’t mean thread captain in an uncharitable way. It’s just that she has continuously demanded that her assertions be responded to and has taken it upon herself to determine which members posts are germaine to this topic in a somewhat over bearing way. She has also, IMHO, displayed an uncharitable attitude to those that disagree with her or find her conclusions lacking. I am guilty of same but have tried to reform my ways. I hope I’m succeeding. She has a right and I’ll leave it to the Mods to decide when or if she has breached the bounds of this thread.) Is there any evidence that the President or his minions have in any way taken affirmative steps to prevent/resist the release of the so called long form document? I would be happy to entertain the evidence and I can be persuaded with credible evidence. It would go a long toward helping me to disabuse myself of my current belief that there is nothing to this whole birth certificate stuff.

 

[seekerz]

Got the luck of the Irish, does he?

 

[Big_Ro]

I knew it!! Actually, I thought this was the blockbuster fact that he was trying to hide in the BC. I was sorely disappointed. I’ve heard of the term Black Irish and am familiar, in basic terms, of how the term came to be. On a funny aside, I had a co-worker some years ago (a preacher in his off time no less) that had an overt aversion to people of color including myself. He was in my employ and still had no compunction for saying the most horribly racist things to me. In any case, he one day mentioned that he was of black Irish decent. I explained my basic understanding of the history of the term and he was mortified. Flat out denied it and called me aliar. Good times.

 

[seekerz]

Okay, you made me link to it. Here’s the real proof… in song no less.

youtube.com/watch?v=4Xkw8ip43Vk

Thanks for that light-hearted moment. Of course, he’s Irish - they just don’t have long form BC’s over there: when you’re born they tattoo the date, time and place on both tiny ‘sit-upons’ with indelible ink! Sorry, no doctor’s names by virtue of successful legal protests lodged by the Royal College of Ob/Gyns! There’s a clue in here somewhere for the inquiring mind…the question is, will Trump catch on in time?!

 

[seekerz]

Well, when the leftist media is the one selling the lust, drugs and materialism in movies, TV, and music for gross profits, then broken homes and dreams result, then the left pretends to be the hero by claiming that taxes need to be raised on others to pay for the dysfunction while the rest of the country becomes reduced into spiritual and economic poverty, yes, I’d say I love my sig. Theirs is a system that keeps them at the top of power and influence over society at the expense of society while announcing themselves to be the good guys. It’s very effective at keeping others down.

Interesting, but not the question I asked. But the ‘lefties made me do it approach’ is hardly original anyway…Some guys even cheat (on regular wives, dying wives…take your pick) because they’re so stressed out saving the country from “the left”.

 

[JHow]

…they just don’t have long form BC’s over there…

You know, the real question no-one is asking is why we have any birth certificates at all. The real indignity is not being forced to produce your birth certificate in public, but that you have to have one in the first place. My grandfather born in 1898 did not have one, for instance. My grandmother born in 1904 did have one, but it was a city document, not a state document. The birth certificate is like the halter on a horse - he forgets he’s wearing it, but you can still pull his nose in any direction.