(This is a repost of a post I wrote a year ago, the day Obama released his long-form birth certificate, but given recent events, having another look at the “fake but accurate” birth certificate seemed in order. I believe Obama was born in Hawaii, but I *also* believe his legal adoption by his mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in Indonesia, compromised his eligibility to hold office. We know he was adopted there because his daughter, Obama’s half-sister Maya, the only sibling he’s taken out on the campaign trail, posted on her FB page that Lolo adopted him, thus rendering his birth certificate “fake but accurate.”)
Okay… I was 99% convinced until about an hour ago that the birth certificate was legit.
Gosh, kind of a lot’s happened since then.
How could he put out such a ham-handed fake? This ONE image ALONE blows it and all you had to do was zoom in to see it. Below is a screenshot I took of the original birth certificate pdf downloaded from the White House website. I was viewing it in Adobe Acrobat. All I did was zoom. That’s it.
Look at the pixelation on the last 1!!!!
There’s also the problem of the lack of ‘chromatic fringe’ around the letters. It’s PURE white around the edges of the numbers. That’s NOT what happens in COLOR SCANS and we know this is a color scan because the safety paper is clearly green.
I wish I could say I knew about ‘chromatic fringe’ 2 hours ago but I didn’t. A detailed, mind-blowing examination of the document is here. But before you go, look what happened when I just tried to ‘control-C’ copy the selection above:
Barry… Didn’t the Nixon years teach you ANYTHING? It’s not the CRIME. It’s the COVER-UP.
If the ‘mind-blowing’ exam link is broken (as it likely is since I have lately been embed hexed) you can cut and paste this one:
http://t.co/crhhCeP
UPDATE 19 May 2011:
Just figured out why & how the last ’1′ is different from the numbers that precede it.
If you’ve ever used Adobe Photoshop Elements, you know there’s a select tool called the ‘magic wand.’ Basically it selects whatever you ‘touch’ with it, so if you have an irregular area, like the inside of a number (or series of numbers) you lifted off another person’s birth certificate, you can ‘select’ each one then ‘fill’ it with something else, like, black. That explains why all the numbers except the last ’1′ are so nice and inky black. They selected areas to ‘fill.’ They probably reasoned that if they ‘selected’ & ‘filled’ all the irregular areas and filled them with black it would give the document consistency. But what to do about that last number that has to be changed?
They typed it. Dumb choice. Rookie mistake. (Did Obama himself do this?) Look at the hard edges around the bottom of that last ’1.’ Now look at the irregular edges of the other numbers. How do you explain that? One suggestion is that it was made by one of those rubber stamp things that advances a click every type you stamp something. Uh… No. It’s too sharp… too COMPUTER GENERATED. The only thing I can’t figure is why didn’t the genius who did this who presumably can ‘select’ and ‘fill’ just ‘select’ and ‘copy’ one of the other 1′s? That would have been the thing to do, then just rough up the edges a little to distinguish it from the others. That ain’t hard. They AT LEAST could have ‘inked in’ the pixels on the typed ’1′ ferkryssakes. Like I said before, my kids could make a better fake.
