Vatic Note: Well, Kenya is the place he was born.... however, it was a British Protectorate, so Obama is a British citizen. Once he rejected his US citizenship in order to attend school in Indonesia, he was suppose to then go through the naturalization process and he never did.
Well, that puts the issue to rest, so now he can be brought up on fraud charges because he is not president since he does not meet the criteria, he can not be impeached either since he is not legally the President. I mean really, HE IS BRITISH.... WHAT AN INSULT. We freed ourselves from British rule and here comes a Brit to claim the Presidency. What gall.
When I read this, the first thought that came to mind was he was not conceived, he was cloned and that would explain all the surgeries on his head where all the scars are located. He also has a double that looks exactly like him except for his ears and a mole on the side of his nose. We posted a blog showing all that a while back. Just a thought. When you read below about both his so called parents, you will begin to wonder as well.
Obama's Kenyan Birth Records Discover In British National Archives
Michael Vara
Posted by Late NIght in the Midlands, On Before Its News
WHERE LIES GO TO DIE – Evidence discovered shows British Protectorate of East Africa recorded Obama’s birth records before 1963 and sent returns of those events to Britain’s Public Records Office and the Kew branch of British National Archives.
(Editors note: The records alluded to in this story were discovered through a May, 2012 search through BMD Registers, a BNA partner site, using the search term "Obama". Corroborating evidence through public sources only implicates the identity of those involved but does not explicitly prove their identity in the absence of the availability of original documents.)
By Dan Crosby of The Daily Pen
KEW, SURREY, GB – The last place anyone would think to look for a birth record of someone claiming to be a “natural born” U.S. citizen is Great Britain. The very inclusion of the Article II eligibility mandate in the U.S. Constitution was explicitly intended by the founding fathers of America to prevent a then British-born enemy usurper from attaining the office of the U.S. presidency and thereby undermining the sovereignty of the newly formed nation.
In the absence of honor, courage and justice on the part of those serving in the U.S. Congress and Federal Judiciary, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case investigative group has concluded the only law enforcement analysis of the image of Obama’s alleged “Certificate of Live Birth” posted to a government website in April, 2011 and found it to be the product of criminal fraud and document forgery.
The seeming endless evidence against Obama has now taken investigators to the foreign archives of Great Britain wherein it has been discovered that vital events occurring under the jurisdiction of the British Colony in the Protectorate of East Africa prior to 1965 were recorded and held in the main office of the British Registrar in England until 1995 before being archived in the BNA.
It now appears the worst fears of the U.S. Constitution’s framers were well founded as investigators working on behalf of the ongoing investigation into the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama have found yet another lead in a growing mountain of evidence within the public records section of the British National Archives indicating the occurrence of at least four vital events registered to the name of Barack Obama, taking place in the British Protectorate of East Africa (Kenya) between 1953 and 1963, including the birth of two sons before 1963.
Recall, investigative journalists working for Breitbart.com have already discovered biographical information published by Barack Obama’s literary agent in which he claimed he was born in Kenya. Prior to Obama’s ensconcement to the White House, many international stories also stated that Obama was Kenyan-born as did members of Kenya’s legislative assembly. Since then information on Obama’s ties has been curtailed by government officials as the Obama administration has coincidently paid nearly $4 billion dollars for capital projects in Kenya.
Also, the presence of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, cannot be accounted for from February, 1961, the alleged month of her marriage to Obama, until three weeks after the birth of Obama II in August, 1961 when she allegedly applied for college courses at the University of Washington. Theories about her whereabouts have included that she participated in the Air Lift America project as an exchange student and traveled to Nairobi as one of many recent highschool graduates (see AASF Report 1959-1961).
The record of birth of a second son prior to Kenyan independence is significant because biographical information about Obama’s family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to Obama II’s birth.
The books containing hand written line records of vital events attributed to Obama are contained in Series RG36 of the Family Records section in the Kew branch of the BNA. The hand written line records first discovered in 2009, indicate several events were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be handwritten and spelled “Burack” and “Biraq”) beginning in 1953 and include two births recorded in 1958 and 1960, a marriage license registration in 1954 and a birth in 1961. Barack Obama is said to have died in 1982 and had married at least once more in Kenya and had at least one more child in 1968, but no record of these were found in the BNA because, according to the Archives’ desk reference, the events occurred after Kenya achieved independence from British colonial rule in 1963.
To date, Barack Obama II is the only known alleged son of Obama Sr. born after 1960 and before the independence of Kenya became official in 1963.
A request for information from the BNA on the specification of birth information contained in the series of thousands of logs indicates that only vital events registered in Kenya’s Ministry of Health offices were recorded in the registration returns and were placed in the National Archives care before they reached 30 years old (the law was amended to 20 years after creation in 2010).
The line records do not specify the identity or names of the children, only gender. However, the line records are associated with index numbers of actual microfilm copies of certificates, licenses and registration applications filed in the archives. According to researchers, Obama’s line records were discovered in Series RG36, reference books. Not surprisingly, when researchers specifically requested access to the relevant microfilm for the Obama birth registrations, they were told that the records were currently held under an outdated “privileged access” status, meaning researchers were denied access under Chapter 52, Sections 3 and 5 of the British Public Records Act of 1958.
However, evidence shows these records were available for public access before August of 2009, the approximate date of arrival of Hillary Clinton in Great Britain during her trip to Africa that year.
Several sources show that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made a sudden visit to the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the British agency which oversees Public Records Archives from colonial protectorates, to speak with the Chief Executive of the Archives in early August of 2009. African news agency expressed surprise at Clintons arrival since she did not announce her intentions of stopping in Great Britain before embarking on her two week trip to Africa.
OBAMA’S FATHER FAILED TO INCLUDE BIRTH OF “SON” ON INS APPLICATION
For someone who wanted to remain in America, it’s difficult to imagine any reason why Barack Obama’s alleged father, Barack the elder, would omit the birth of an “anchor baby” son on an application to extend his visa, just days after the birth occurred, unless…
The American people were told by Barack Obama, unequivocally, that his father was a former goat herder from Kenya. However, INS documents filed in the very same month after Obama’s birth suggest the goat herding elder Obama didn’t “get the memo” that he was a daddy.
On August 31st, 1961, just weeks after Obama’s birth was allegedly registered in a regional office of the Hawaiian Health Department, Obama the elder neglected to name his newborn son on an application for extension of his temporary visa to stay in the U.S.
Obama’s omission of the birth is astonishing and illogical given the fact that the acknowledgement of the birth would have fortified Obama’s application for an extension. The INS has long been more willing to extend the visa of a foreign parent of children born in the U.S., especially when the other parent is an American citizen.
Despite the recent release of a documentary film “Dreams From My Real Father” presenting evidence that Barack Hussein Obama is not the biological father of the younger Obama, the elder Obama isthe man named as the father on the digital image of Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” which was posted to the internet by the administration in April of 2011. The document image has since been forensically examined by law enforcement investigators and determined to be a digitally fabricated forgery using Adobe software.
THE UGLY TRUTH
However, the sad and pathetic truth about Obama’s covert natal history and his illegitimacy lies at the bottom of a sordid pit of lies surrounding the paternity of his birth. Doubts about his identity, his eligibility, his intentions, his honesty and his honorability as a man stem from what appears to be an ugly truth about his mother’s probable sexual involvement with multiple men associated with the radical socialist movement in 1960’s Hawaii.
Obama and his horde of abettors defend an improbable narrative about his identity. The veracity of this narrative has been damaged under the weight of a steady stream of crushing evidence demonstrating more than 180 disparities and contradictions to Obama’s claims of natal legitimacy as president.
If Obama’s cause as a usurper of power is to avenge his father’s culture, he made the worst possible error in lying about who he is. Vintage America is on to him. Their instincts are slowly turning Obama’s fantasy of a socialist utopia for those he believes are humanity’s offended into a laughingstock. By building his vision for America on clay feet of lies about his who he is, he has undermined any intention of doing something good and right. He is not to be trusted.
Moreover, Obama is learning the painful lesson that a message of “Hope and Change” means something vastly different to vintage America, the most powerful and affluent culture in human history, when that message has been proven to come from someone as audaciously dishonest and deceptively calculating as this son of otherness.
Recall, in 2011, it was reported by The Daily Pen after an investigation of the State of Hawaii’s birth statistics collection protocols and vital records history that birth certificates are often amended after the birth while the original paper document is sealed under strict confidentiality rules when the identity of the father is either determined after birth or when the father named on the new version of the certificate has adopted or assumed paternal responsibility for the child.
In the latter case, the original birth record may not contain the biological father’s name because the mother does not provide it, or it may list paternity as “unknown”, but this version is kept confidential under HRS 571. In some cases, the biological father may not even know he is the father if the mother has had more than one sexual partner prior to the pregnancy. There was no DNA test in 1961, however the 1961 Vital Statistics of the U.S. Report shows there were more than 1000 such “illegitimate” births reported in the state of Hawaii during that year, about 1 in 17.
Therefore, the paternity of the child at the actual time of the birth is not disclosed while the new amended certificate is upheld as the original version displaying the name of the newly identified or adoptive father as indistinguishable if different from the biological father. This law is meant to protect the child from stigmas resulting from illegitimacy, rape, incest or adultery. Under these circumstances it is not possible to know the paternal status of a child at birth unless the original birth record is made accessible by authorized persons under Hawaiian law.
However, notations indicating that a certificate contains updated paternal information would be typed or printed in the lower margin of the new certificate, below the signature section. This lower margin of the image of Obama’s certificate has been shown by computer experts to be concealed by forgers using a “clipping mask”. A clipping mask is a feature available in Adobe software which limits the viewable area on a document image through which only selected information can be seen.
In the case of Obama’s forged certificate, the information we have been allowed to see within the frame of the clipping mask may merely reflect an amended birth record while concealing notations of the amendments which exists in the lower margin outside the frame of the clipping mask.
Regardless of any level of truth about any individual piece of information in the image, overall, the final image is the product of criminals and liars.
If Obama is not the biological father, or if paternal information is listed on the original certificate as “unknown”, the state of Hawaii keeps this information secret until a court orders the documents to be released for discovery purposes in determining Obama’s eligibility.
Thus far, courts have lacked courage to uphold the Constitution thereby propagating the greatest political fraud in American history. Judges are simply washing their hands of the issue by refusing to even consider actual evidence against Obama, denying citizens of justice and their Constitutional right to a redress of grievances, because they simply do not have the courage to face the legal crisis such a revelation would cause. (VN: We should send all those judges a copy of that video of the 5 year old girl risking her life to stand up for what was right. We can all learn lessons from the courage of that 5 year old girl. We all know children have been shot by these IDF soldiers and she must have known it as well, but she didn't care. She just wanted to save her little friend. That is what these judges need to see.... what real courage looks like. They should all resign from the bench.)
Cowardly judges refuse to allow any exposure Obama’s actual natural born identity and, in their dereliction, have conjured a legal fantasy filled with pressurizing wrath in which a candidate’s eligibility for president is not only declared legally uncontestable but is also automatically preeminent.
In allowing this, judges have allowed a dangerous precedent in which any foreign invader can covertly usurp the power of the U.S. government simply by lying about their citizenship status and hiding documentation with the help of the American media and a complicit legal system.
THE MARRIAGE SHAM
On his application, when asked the name and address of his spouse, it appears Obama may have first written the name of his actual wife in Kenya before blacking it out and writing “Ann S. Dunham”.
Despite evidence indicating that Obama was simultaneously married to a woman in Kenya, it is suspected that he claimed to be married to Dunham in order to use the marriage as leverage to remain in the U.S.
There is no evidence or testimony that Obama ever loved Dunham or that the two had ever been engaged. The two did not live together before or after being married and there were no letters, no ring, no announcement or, most importantly, no legal marriage registration with the State of Hawaii.
Despite a complete void of documented proof of the marriage, it appears Dunham was granted a statutory divorce from Obama in 1964. However, images posted of the court documents from the decree contain no original documented proof of a marriage or legal documents showing that Obama was the father of Dunham’s child. A review of the court documents shows that at least one document, perhaps an original birth certificate for baby Obama, was missing from the numbering sequence.
THE INS’ PERSPECTIVE
Being legitimately married to a U.S. citizen would be a benefit toward allowing a foreign spouse to remain the U.S. However, no marriage license application or public announcement has ever been found to indicate that Obama and Dunham were ever married or that Obama had even divorced his Kenyan wife prior to an alleged wedding with Dunham.
This fact supports the contents of memos from college and INS officials who expressed doubts about the legitimacy of Obama’s relationship with Dunham, even questioning the motive of such a union between a teenage woman and a foreign student facing visa expiration just days after the birth of her child.
From the perspective of an INS agent, the circumstances surrounding Obama’s relationship with Dunham would have raised suspicions. Immigration fraud was rampant during Hawaii’s foreign birth accommodation era in the 1960’s.
Since Obama was a foreigner wanting to extend his temporary visa, the INS certainly understood that by claiming a marriage to Dunham, it would promote INS approval of an extension, but in Dunham’s case there was an added risk to the relationship for Obama…she was pregnant.
It appears, from the contents of documents in Obama’s INS file, when pressed by INS agents and school officials on the actual validity of his relationship to Dunham and baby Obama, having certainly been advised of legal ramifications for lying, he refused to name Obama as his child but maintained that he was married to Dunham. This indicates that Obama was either not certain if he was the biological father, or that he knew he wasn’t.
Under child protection laws in many states, including Hawaii, when the biological father is deceased or unidentified by the mother, the man who is married to the mother at the time she gives birth automatically becomes the father named on the official birth certificate until it is proven in court that he is not the biological father. “Mandatory Legitimacy” applies even if the birth is the result of adultery, when the mother is married at the time of birth, until paternity is successfully contested.
Today, DNA testing allows for conclusive determinations about paternity, but in 1961, it was more difficult to determine paternity. Hawaii’s child welfare statutes indicate the “statutory” father’s name on the certificate may be removed by court order, if paternity is successfully contested, after a judge has decided the case in the interest of the child’s welfare. This law is intended to protect the child if the mother dies.
DELUSIONS OF LEGITIMACY
Government officials in Hawaii, including Governor Neil Abercrombie, Lt. Governor Brian Schatz and former Hawaiian elections official, Tim Adams have all indicated that they could find no original record of Obama’s alleged birth in any hospital in Hawaii in the course of their duties to verify his eligibility.
The absence of verifiable birth documentation was so apparent that Schatz, serving as the chairman of the Democrat Party of Hawaii in 2008, refused to certify that Obama was indeed constitutionally eligible to hold the office of president when he submitted the Official Certification of Nomination of Obama. Schatz deferred the responsibility to Nancy Pelosi and DNC, and then Chair of the Hawaiian Elections Commission, Kevin Cronin. Cronin resigned suddenly after controversy surrounding his decision began to strain his relationship with the commission.
Ignorance, lies and lack of understanding about the difference between a medically verified birth and a legal registration of birth has confused the public about Obama’s natal history and eligibility.
Liars and abettors in media and government, drudging on behalf of the Obama administration, have anchored their Alinsky-style ridicule of those questioning Obama’s eligibility in a delusion that he must be legitimate because his birth was announced in two Hawaiian newspapers.
The elder Obama’s name appears as the father of a newborn son in images of two birth announcements appearing in two Honolulu newspapers on August 13th and 14th, 1961. Birth announcements in Hawaii in 1961 were published automatically from a birth registration list provided directly to the papers by the Hawaiian Department of Health. The notifications of births provided to the Health Department, however, were not only the product of information provided by hospitals and doctors, alone.
The distinction between the information used by the hospital to create a “Certificate of Live Birth” and the information used by the Department of Health to create a birth registration is that information used to create birth registrations were allowed to be submitted from anyone possessing credible information about the birth, including family members, witnesses or attendants, regardless of the actual location of the birth.
Contrarily, the information on a “Live Birth” record must be verified and attested by a licensed medical doctor qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth event. This is important in cases when a distinction was needed between a “still birth” and a baby that may have been born alive but then died upon delivery. In the latter case, both a birth certificate and a death certificate are required while a still birth requires only a death certificate because of the definition of a live birth under HRS 338-1.
Hawaii has a long history of allocating foreign births to the mother’s claimed Hawaiian residence regardless of the actual location of the birth, which was in compliance with guidelines established by the National Center for Health Statistics in order to accurately attribute data from births with decadal Census figures. Unfortunately, these vital statistics reporting guidelines are not conducive with determining the natural born status of the child.
For example, the Bureau of Census in 1961 counted all residents by county regardless of their temporary absence at the time of the Census when the Census worker was able to identify residents of a county through the information provided by others. This applies even today.
Therefore, beginning in as early as 1933, it was determined that births must be accounted the same way for all usual residents regardless of the mother’s location at the time of the event when that resident mother intended to return to that county. In Hawaii, if a child did not have an official certificate prior to the mother’s return, the local Health Department was obligated to provide one under the Model State Vital Statistics Act of 1942, Section 8 of Hawaii’s Public Health Regulations and HRS 338.
The impact of population figures on the Hawaii’s economy and agency resources was very significant in 1961. The accuracy of the Census takes precedence over the accuracy and veracity of vital statistics in the U.S. Vital statistics are reported annually, but the Census only occurs every ten years which means there is large volume of population which goes untracked between Census years.
If births and deaths were not allocated to the residents of each county, regardless of the location of the vital event, the results would cause large disparities when compared with the Census data.
www.latenightinthemidlands.com/profiles/blogs/obama-s-kenyan-birth-records-discovered-in-british-national-archi
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Dream on. Only 21 people. I repeat twenty-one. Only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961.
ReplyDeleteOh, and perhaps you did not know it, but at one time Obama's father had another wife, a Kenyan wife.
And, guess what, the name of Kenya was not "the British Protectorate of East Africa" in 1961. The name was changed from that in 1920. In 1961, the name of Kenya was "the Kenya Colony." So the unnamed researchers who have claimed to have looked into the British files are lying.
He is a light worker.
ReplyDeleteHe is where he belongs at this moment in time.
Patience is a virtue. All will be revealed soon.
Well, once they take the guns we will find out if your right or I am right. I hope and pray you are right.
ReplyDeleteIf not, I will see you in the camps and then you have to decide if you want to be sterilized and live in a slave society or die. I hate telling people the brutal truth but unfortunatley that was my mission and that is what I am doing. God bless you and keep you safe my friend.
Anonymous, we are open to any information you can document to prove what you say is true. Please provide the links so I can share them on an update with my readers. our mission here is truth and truth only.
ReplyDeleteSo if you have evidence to what you are saying, I promise I will publish it once I verify the source is legit. OK???? Is that a deal???
Camp my A-------!Fight or Die is exactly right,and if they some how get me to a camp it will be escape escape escape,aggravate manipulate whatever it takes
ReplyDeleteHere is the link to the 21 figure on arrivals from Kenya. It is in the middle of the Web page, after the handwritten note.
ReplyDeleteYou will see an INS document on this page. Kenya is in the bottom under Africa, in the middle of the Africa listings, after Ivory Coast and before Liberia.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/06/authentic-but-not-true/
You will see that only 21 people total came from Kenya. Of these 14 were aliens and only seven were US citizens. (For those who have followed the birther story in some detail, you will recall that the claim was that Obama's mother traveled by air. But the INS record shows that only one person came by air, and that was an alien.)
The handwritten note above the INS file is also interesting. It is a report by an INS agent who says that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. I cannot see the date of the report, but it is likely to have been in the 1960s or early 1970s. It is highly unlikely the a William Wood, the author of the report, would have said that Obama was born in Hawaii without checking Obama's birth certificate, so at that date the birth certificate must have existed. In other words, it was in the files in Hawaii in the 1960s or early 1970s---and could not have been inserted by a forger recently.
Here is the proof that Obama's father was in Hawaii.
The next document from the United States Department of Justice (INS division) shows that in 1964 the checked on whether Obama's father should continue to stay in the USA, and concluded that he should not.
HOWEVER, look closely at the middle of the document. Notice where it says "Data place and manner of last entry into the USA."
The date of the last entry is given as 1959, his original entry. Since there is no entry later than 1959 Obama senior did not leave the USA between 1959 and the date of the report in 1964. So he could not have traveled with his wife to Kenya---if she had traveled there at all.
Here is the citation:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/born-in-africa-myth-crushed-under-weight-of-complexity/
As for Kenya being known as "The Kenya Colony" and not "The British Protectorate of East Africa."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_Colony
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kenya
Since Obama senior could not have traveled with his wife, the chance that
Did you want to finish that sentence before I respond??? First of all, this all looks pretty good, but again. I have no idea where that note came from.... however, I think you have enough here to be taken seriously and pursued.
ReplyDeleteMy only question is, if what you say is true, then why are they hiding the birth certificate if it will show he was born in Hawaii??? Could parentage be the problem?? Could the possibility he was not born, rather cloned by the problem?? I read that one somewhere and the case made for it was compelling, especially later when we received photos of surgery on Obama's head was shown.
However, like this, I have a pretty rigid standard I like to try and follow before I post it, so I had not been able to connect Israel's blue brain project to Obama or his family, other than his grandfather and mother were dual Israeli citizens.
Anyway, give me some time on this and I promise if it pans out as it shows right now, I will post this. OK? Thanks, I love my readers because they contribute as much as they gain by coming here.
Re: "then why are they hiding the birth certificate if it will show he was born in Hawaii??"
ReplyDeleteIs that a serious question? Did you think about it before you asked it?
The answer is that Obama has already shown BOTH his short form birth certificate and his long form birth certificate. And he has shown both the images of the documents on the Web and he has shown the actual physical documents themselves, with the seal on the back, where it is supposed to be.
If you are asking why they do not show the original in the files. The answer is that they never show the original EVER. No one is allowed into the files other than the state employees who are allowed to access them. And, if you think about it, the original is not even the official document. That is because it is not on security paper and does not have the seal or the signature---which are added to the official physical copy.
Legally, in any court, the official physical copy is sufficient. (If you ask now why Obama does not show it in court, the answer is that no court has ever asked to see it.)
Romney, you may have noticed, did not show the original of his birth certificate. No one went to the files in Michigan. All that he showed was an image of the photostat of his birth certificate---and a short form birth certificate at that (it doesn't even show the name of the hospital).
So, in Obama's case he has shown the real official legal birth certificate twice (short form and long form), and the officials in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed the facts on it.
In the most recent confirmation (which was accepted as evidence by the CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona), the officials in Hawaii answered all Secretary of State Bennett's questions, and then added that it had reviewed ALL the facts on the image of the long form BC that Bennett had forwarded to them, and that they MATCHED (that was the word) the facts on the document in the files.
Similar confirmations from Hawaii came under both Republican and Democrat administrations, and the existence of the birth certificate is also confirmed by the Index Data:
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/04/in_hawaii_its_easy_to_get_birt.html
And it is also confirmed by the birth notices in the Health Bureau Statistics section of the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961, which as the name says were only sent to the papers by the DOH, and the DOH at the time sent out those notices only for births in Hawaii.
Continuing the sentence I left unfinished: Since Obama senior could not have traveled with his wife, the chance that Obama's mother traveled ten thousand miles to Kenya ALONE is virtually nil. Add that extremely low chance to the fact that only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961, and the birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii, and what is the absurdly low chance that Obama was born IN KENYA---which is what the "researchers" in this article claim.
Well, that was a long diatribe, but I like to cut to the critical points. I asked the question because forensic experts have already shown that birth certificate on his website was photoshopped and bogus, so that is why I asked the question.
ReplyDeleteI assumed you knew about the results by computer forensic experts, two of them independantly confirmed the same conclusion. I thought everyone knew about that but apparently you did not, so I apologize for making an "assumption". I should have asked if you knew about that. Well, I guess we are at a standstill. I have no doubt Obama was probably born in Hawaii, so why bogus up his birth records??? Is the "father" the issue??? I don't know and you have not answered it or addressed the forensic findings on the issue and I don't want to get into the forensics since I did it on a blog here that you are welcome to go read. Thanks, or even google it from someone else. That maybe better yet.
Here, I have an idea. Why don't you go read this article, look at the photos and tell me if my take on this with respect to the birth certificate might have some merit with respect to
ReplyDeletewhy they messed with the birth certificate. Is he a clone? Just asking.... when you read your own comments and do so from the perspective of cloning, they would fit nicely. Keep an open mind like we do. We are tracking down what you have offered and it will all go up on the blog if it seems viable. OK?? we ask you do the same.
Remember, we are not enemies, we are all going to be affected by whatever they try to do to us, so if you keep that in mind, you should be able to keep that mind open and curious about unanswered questions.
Damn, I forgot to give you the link. Duh. lol
ReplyDeletehttp://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-obama-result-of-israels-project-blue.html
Re: "I assumed you knew about the results by computer forensic experts, two of them independantly confirmed the same conclusion. "
ReplyDeleteOnce again, it is important to think before making claims. The "computer forensic specialists" you refer to were people who claim to be computer forensic specialists posting on Birther sites.
If you were to go to a communist Web site, and it said that the Marxist dialectic was "proved" by the following facts, would you believe the claim?
Well, the people who have posted on the birther sites are making claims and manufacturing "tests" that they say proves that the birth certificate is forged. But it is only their claims and their tests, and they have not shown that they are real experts, and they certainly have not shown that they are fair and impartial.
So, let's go back to the latest confirmation by the officials in Hawaii. It said that
in the most recent confirmation (which was accepted as evidence by the CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona), the officials in Hawaii answered all Secretary of State Bennett's questions, and then added that it had reviewed ALL the facts on the image of the long form BC that Bennett had forwarded to them, and that they MATCHED (that was the word) the facts on the document in the files.
So, let's use logic. Either the officials in Hawaii are lying, or if the birth certificate is forged, then it is forged with ALL the facts on it being exactly the same as on the birth certificate in the files. All of the facts are the same.
So, ask yourself----who would do that, and why? Who would forge a birth certificate with all the facts the same????
There was early speculation by birthers that even though Obama has a birth certificate from Hawaii (proven by the confirmations, the Index Data and the notices in the 1961 newspapers), Obama might still have forged the birth certificate in order to hide the name of his real father or to hide some other fact.
But the officials in Hawaii state that ALL the facts are the same, and that includes the name of the father, the fact that "African" appears on the BC (explained by Hawaii allowing people to enter whatever word they wanted to describe their race and "African" being the world that African exchange students generally used), and all the other facts were the same too. All of the facts are the same, and that includes the name of the hospital, the place of birth, the father--etc.
So, once again, what would be the motive in forging a birth certificate in which all the facts are the same??
Continuing:
ReplyDeleteOkay, so you may at this point say that the officials in Hawaii must be lying. But, if so, that means officials of both parties, and it would be a stupid lie to make because it is likely that many people in the DOH in Hawaii have had a chance to see Obama's birth certificate, and if it were any different, or did not exist, they would have said.
So it is extremely unlikely that the officials in Hawaii are lying. In any case, the CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona does not think so, since he accepted their confirmation as evidence.
Nor do Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and the National Review, or John McCain accept the claims of forgery. They have called birthers crazy.
The following experts say that Obama's birth certificate is not forged:
http://gratewire.com/topic/tea-party-conservative-refutes-claims-of-obama-birth-certificate-forgery
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/473-Keystone-Kops.html
http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/03/on-the-release-of-report-from-sheriff-joe-arpaio-stating-barack-obamas-birth-certificate-is-a-forgery/
Nathan Goulding, chief technology officer of the National Review magazine, dismissed the matter of “layered components” found in the White House PDF by suggesting “that whoever scanned the birth certificate in Hawaii forgot to turn off the OCR setting on the scanner.” and adding “I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”
And:
Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said: “The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”
And:
Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily: “All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.”
It should be noted that WND commissioned Zatkovich to write an article on Obama's birth certificate, and when he did not say that it was forged, they used only selected quotes from it. He was pissed, for sure. And this does not give a good indication that the birther Web sites are telling the truth.
Nor do the "experts" that WND quotes indicate impartiality, or, even always sanity. Among WND's "experts" for example, are Paul Irey, who claims that Obama never went to Columbia College (despite Columbia University saying that he did, and that he graduated) and Doug Vogt (who claims that he found the original altar of Abraham0.
So, getting back to your original question. (1) Obama has shown his birth certificate, short form and long form, Web image and physical copy, and the facts on it were confirmed by the officials in Hawaii, the Index Data and the notices sent to the newspapers by the DOH in 1961. (2) There is no proof, and no sensible person in authority believes, that Obama's birth certificate was forged.
HOWEVER, Birthers have lied and manufactured fake "Kenyan birth certificates" in the past, and it sure looks like Sheriff Joe was lying when he based so much on the meaning of the Numeric Codes, which now has turned out to be wrong:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indicting-the-sheriff-joe-and-the-cold-case-posse/
Re: "
ReplyDeletehttp://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-obama-result-of-israels-project-blue.html"
None of this is proof either that Obama was born in some place other than in Hawaii or that his birth certificate is forged.
OK, my goodness, you have given me a lot to digest and I will do so. Right now I am in the middle of research and posting about the coming event for August 17, and will get back to this as soon as I finish.
ReplyDeleteWhat I think I am going to do is do an editing of all your arguments, links, proofs and put it up as a counter argument to the birthers.
By the way, those you listed in the neocon category are no different than the neolibs who are trying to globalize this planet and work closely with the Rockefellers, Rothschilds and international bankers and Definitely Israel. So, unfortunately, since Obama has been the designated winner since 2008, it doesn't mean much that they agree.
They all work for the same people.
But be that as it may, I intend to put up your well presented info for others to read and decide for themselves. I will even do a Vatic note to precede it.
Forgot to ask, would you like credit for this and if so, give me a name and state you are in and I will use it as the author of all of this above. Thanks for contributing. Ask yourself why the bankers want Obama in again??? If you would, I would appreciate it so I can include that since I know the anti-Obama faction would ask that right off the bat. He has 32 dual Israeli citizens as advisors or as the opponents would say "Handlers" and he has generated more wars and killing of civilians in the middle east than Bush did. Why did he keep Bush people in key positions after winning the election?
ReplyDeleteLost of unanswered questions. It is not necessary since the birth has nothing to do with that but its the underlying understanding of his being controlled. But it would certainly be helpful in making the case for him.
Go ahead and post the details. I will check them out.
ReplyDeleteOk, I will. I have to work on my income producing work this summer which is making jewelry for sale. So I am taking this week off. I promise I will get back to all of this either before I go which is tomorrow or when I get back in a week. OK?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, here is something I found you might want to take a look at for discussion purposes. Like I said, I will be checking my email periodically during the next week while I am working on my jewelry, so check this out and tell me what you think while I work on the rest of what you asked me to give you details on.
ReplyDeletehttp://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185094
Re market ticker site:
ReplyDeleteIvan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily: “All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.”
The answer is that, yes, software can and does alter in the process of enhancing. But enhancing is not forging, and it is not illegal, and it is not even immoral.
For the document to be forged, the FACTS on it have to be different than the original, but the officials in Hawaii state that the facts are exactly the same, that they match.
Try this for yourself. Take a photocopy of your birth certificate. Go to the letters that look faint or blurry. Take a dark pencil and fill in the letters to make them more clear. Do you consider that you forged your birth certificate?????
Re: "
ReplyDeletehttp://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185094 "
This is simply another birther, another person who hates Obama, making claims that the image of the birth certificate was forged based on other claims that the software would behave differently than it in fact behaved. The answer is that the software behaved the way that it is supposed to behave. PDF uses layers, etc.
Once again, the officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a birth certificate to Obama, and that the facts on the birth certificate that the White House published are EXACTLY the same as on the birth certificate in the files. Can you tell me why anyone would forge a birth certificate, when he has a birth certificate, and to so to make the forged birth certificate EXACTLY the same as the birth certificate in the files?
You forge a birth certificate when you don't have one, or when you want to change the facts.