Help fight the
liberal media

click title for home page
Be a subscriber

The stuff you won't see in the liberal media (click "Replies" for top stories)
Calendar Chat

  Author   Comment  

Posts: 1,186
Reply with quote  #1 
wonders and anamolies never cease to keep showing up.....   Obama ought to give it up, he and his team are NOT good enough to be forgers, they leave too many open holes for us to gaze into...  and give us the openings right in front of our faces and then they have the audacity to DENY them against all odds............

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #2 

More evidence that Team Obama has fraudulently presented Obama's long-form birth certificate
A YouTube user by the name of Bigone5555J has a video that identifies a previously unnoticed anomaly in the Savannah Guthrie photograph of Obama's long-form birth certificate (watch in full screen mode).
Savannah Guthrie is the lone member of the media that was allowed to handle and and photograph the document that Team Obama claims was the genuine long-form copy of Obama's Certificate of Live Birth.
Here is the White House copy of the "birth certificate," and here is Guthrie's photograph (click to enlarge).
Here is a snapshot of item 7a of the White House "birth certificate."

Here is a snapshot of item 7a of the Guthrie's "birth certificate."

Remember!  Guthrie's photo has been represented by everyone to be a photo she took at the press conference of the "original, paper copy" of Obama's long-form birth certificate.
But check out the spelling of Hawaii in the Guthrie "birth certificate."
Uh-huh!  It's spelled "Huwaii" -- with a "U"
Who you gonna believe?  Team Obama or your lyin' eyes?

And here's a video that points out other anomalies in the Guthrie birth certificate.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #3 

Investigator: Foreigners bought Hawaii birth certificates

Bob Unruh is reporting that the lead investigator for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse – which already has found probable cause that Barack Obama’s publicly released birth certificate is a forgery – says any Hawaii documentation for Obama’s birth that exists would probably be of little value.
Mike Zullo,  a retired New Jersey detective now heading Arpaio’s volunteer investigative team, explained in an interview that at the time of Obama’s birth during the state’s early years, Hawaii birth documentation routinely was purchased by foreigners for children not born in the state.

Arpaio’s investigation was launched last September after constituents came to the sheriff with their concern that Obama was ineligible for the presidency and would perpetrate a fraud by placing his name on the state’s ballot.
Zullo’s comments came in an interview with Tea Party Power Hour host Mark Gillar.
Gillar described the process in the 1960s: Foreign nationals, primarily from Japan, would fly to Hawaii and buy a birth registration for their son or daughter, not with the goal of one day having them become president, but to obtain the benefits of being a U.S. citizen.
Zullo said that when he was in Hawaii last month following up on leads, he talked to older locals who “informed us about a syndicate operation, a Mafia operation if you will, being run in the early infancy of the state of Hawaii where birth certificates were being sold to Japanese refugees on a black market basis.”
At that time, Japan was still undergoing post-war reconstruction while America was an established superpower.
Zullo said there was a business in Hawaii in “birth certificates … for profit.”
Continue reading here . . .

Video interview with Michael Zullo from the report:

The birth announcements, referenced in the video, are bogus. Here is the proof.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 1,186
Reply with quote  #4 

RIGHT ON,  and a great article, even though there are thousands out there that won't bother reading it, becasue of the taboo, I feel as Chase does, the quest for the truth is a far better thing to do than what is being swallowed up by the genreal public.


Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #5 

Piercing the Cone of Silence

Nick Chase says Barack Obama was undoubtedly born in Hawaii in 1961 - verified not just by his own word (for whatever that's worth), but by the automatic triggering of the registration of his birth in the public State of Hawaii birth index, and by the contemporaneous printing of his birth announcement in the local newspaper, and by eyewitnesses, and by his father's student-visa INS records.

But 13 months ago I found myself among the skeptics who felt that the president was hiding something because of the two years of stonewalling before he released to the public an image of what he claimed was his long-form birth certificate, under pressure because the issue was turning into a political liability for him.

Like most folks, when this document was released, showing a hospital birth with family and medical information, I assumed that the question was settled. I was satisfied.

And I wasn't the only person satisfied at the time. Most all of the public, and everybody in the mainstream media, accepted the image as genuine. There was a brief flurry of interest when Adobe Photoshop aficionados revealed that the PDF had "layers," but the White House said the computer scan of the "birth certificate" was with optical-character-recognition logic turned on, and that created the layers. Sloppy -- but believable (if you didn't pursue the issue further).

At that point, most everybody stopped looking. The mainstream media categorized anybody who thought the PDF might be fake as a "crazy birther." The internet sources that we rely on for facts, and, also stopped looking.

Let's be honest -- given the charged political atmosphere, with Donald Trump revealing his long-form birth certificate for political advantage and with a biased press eager to torpedo Trump's pubescent presidential campaign, in the process instantly marginalizing anybody who might have agreed with Trump -- it would be very natural for everybody to stop looking at this point.

The only people who persisted were those who felt that the president is a fraud (on many levels, not just with the "birth certificate") and were determined to prove it. Now, while I felt that the issue had been settled, I always remain curious and receptive to new information -- and what I discovered was that while you might not like the messengers, the research they were performing was valid, because it was based on the document (the digital PDF forgery) itself, not on the biased opinions of people commenting on it without first examining the evidence contained within the document.

I must admit to having had a mental reluctance at that point to accept the possibility of a forged birth certificate. After all, the president was clearly born in Hawaii, so there would be no need to release a fake -- just release the real thing and let the speculation die down. Furthermore, I thought, the president wouldn't have the balls to release a document that could be proven fake. If he did, and the forgery was discovered, and that information became widely known, it would put his presidency at risk. He wouldn't take that chance.

So I began to study the PDF image myself, specifically looking for flaws that didn't require computer expertise or software to understand. By late July 2011 I had developed my "pitch test" which proves forgery (Figure F in "Oblivious to the Obvious," published by American Thinker on April 10, 2012, and the subsequently published Figure FD in "Birth Certificate Whac-A-Mole").

I thought other people might be interested in what I had uncovered. But I had a problem: there was nowhere to publish my findings. The cone of silence that had descended on this story was so enveloping -- so overpowering -- that the subject was taboo even in conservative circles. No publisher would be able to even mention the possibility of forgery, much less research it, for fear of irreparably tarnishing the publication's reputation.

This cone of silence began to crack this spring -- first on March 22, when Lord Christopher Monckton (a Britisher very knowledgeable about climate change and a former policy adviser for Margaret Thatcher's government) said on the Dennis Miller radio show, "And the birth certificate -- I do know that birth certificate isn't genuine -- It appears in layers on the screen in such a way you can remove quite separately each of the individual dates. You use Adobe Illustrator and each of the individual dates is in its own separate layer. This thing has been fabricated -- But the point is, is what he [Obama] has done on the White House website is he has put up a document which is plainly a forgery and I would regard that as a very serious matter." Lord Monckton has the advantage of being beyond the reach of an IRS audit, so he could say what he really thought.

Next, on March 23, was syndicated columnist Diana West's must-read "Silence of the Lapdogs," which took to task the mainstream media for ignoring Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio's "cold case posse" report on the forgery. Most of her syndicated outlets declined to publish this column; it appeared in a few smaller newspapers across the country.

Her comments, as well as Lord Moncton's, were echoed by Thomas Lifson, editor of American Thinker, on March 23, when he concluded: "One does not have to believe that Obama was born in Kenya to be disturbed by the evidence of a digitally-constructed birth certificate being passed off as authentic by a president. Those who are more worried about their public image and about being attacked by the media and political establishment than about getting at the truth will in the end be judged by their actions. Facts are facts, and Sheriff Joe's cold case posse has come up with facts that will not be silenced or controverted by social pressure. History will render its verdict on Obama, his critics, and his defenders."

Then, on March 24, respected author and writer Roger Kimball, in discussing Diana West's column, wrote: "The most effective form of censorship is also the quietest. It operates not by actively proscribing speech but by rendering certain topics hors de combat, literally undiscussable. It does this by propagating an atmosphere of revulsion and taboo. Ordinary censorship prohibits the dissemination of particular opinions or bits of information. The more subtle engine of silence I have in mind goes further. It stanches not only the flow of speech but also the flow of thought. Ordinary censorship occupies itself with the results of human curiosity. What I am talking about attacks human curiosity itself."

On March, 25 in his American Thinker article "Calling out self-censorship on the right," Lifson wrote: "An insidious form of self-censorship has gripped not only the mainstream media but most of the conservative media as well. All Americans who believe in the quest for the truth should be concerned that a rigid taboo is being enforced to prevent the discussion of serious evidence that the President of the United States has presented documents that were constructed on a computer as his genuine birth certificate." With this story, plus stories on presidential eligibility by Monte Kuligowski that were published in American Thinker, I felt that at last there was a conservative publisher (not tarnished with the "kooky birther" moniker) willing to pierce the cone of silence.

So I then wrote and submitted my first article, "Oblivious to the Obvious," which was published on April 10, and which has led me to author a series of articles on the Obama "birth certificate" forgery, of which this is the fifth.

Have we reached the point where the forgery can be discussed by conservative commentators, and where it can be researched, while the authors and researchers retain their respectability? I think so -- marginally. I would be happier if more of this information were syndicated and if it appeared in print, not just electronically on the internet -- but it's a beginning. Have we reached the point where the liberal media are willing to review the research rather than shut down discussion by labeling its proponents kooks and racists? No way.

If you have been reading my articles, along with the articles by Thomas Lifson and Monte Kuligowski and others, you know by now that the Obama long-form "birth certificate" is forged.

You also know that you put your own reputation for credibility at risk if you try to show others the evidence you've seen. The cone of silence suppressing the truth has been so powerful that you will automatically be guilty by association with the "lunatic fringe" should you even dare to bring up the topic. It is impossible to open the mind of somebody trapped by this cone of silence; that person's mind is made up -- facts and evidence are irrelevant, case closed. But you know the truth -- if others won't listen, that's their problem. Don't make it yours, and you will sleep well at night.

My wife says I've become obsessed with the topic. She's right. I am obsessed partly because there have been very, very few instances in my life where I know I'm right on a subject (because it's within my area of expertise) and most of the rest of the world is wrong -- but this is one of those times. My sense of self-worth compels me to prove it, even in the face of nasty appellations being hurled at me.

I am also obsessed because we have here a real-life mystery -- a bold scam, but also a scam that is tenuous because it relies on the silence of the media for its perpetuation (and the media can be fickle). What is it, exactly, on the genuine long-form birth certificate that is so politically inconvenient that the public is not allowed to see it? We do not yet know -- and because we don't know the motive for releasing the forgery, it's that much harder to convince others to take a look for themselves, even when the physical evidence overwhelmingly supports our view.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #6 
Having played with the April 27, 2011 version of Barry's BC in Adobe Illustrator on a number of occasions (and confirming for myself what others have already discovered), over the weekend I thought I'd import it into AutoCAD and see if that would reveal anything new.  Mainly I was trying to use the scaling function to accurately measure the type characters and info fields. 

Does anyone know the official perimeter measurements of this long form birth certificate?

I would love to be able to analyze the document from a more geometric point of view based upon its actual size using the precision and almost infinite zoom cababilities of AutoCAD.

Again, I just need the original dimensions of the doc...

Posts: 1,186
Reply with quote  #7 
I read about the BC Surprise last night and that IS the kicker on the forgeries list, this guy has BALLS to believe that any person in the whole world would believe a NEW BC to be FOUND at this late date, let alone to shove it up our noses just in time for election.......  if that is going to be his plan.  I personally believe that he woud be stinking enough to try, but will the general public of America and the world be stupid enough to actually fall for it a third time, and if it doesn't have the place of birth or the father changed or the name of the father amended to be someone ELSE and BORN IN MAINLAND AMERICA what - pray tell - would make it stand any kind of scrutiny and what is the POINT to do it at all???  Just to create another distraction so he can sign more Executive Orders or declare Martial Law......

He has to think that all of the WORLD and especially Americans are the totally dumbest people on the face of this earth and that NO ONE CAN TELL HIM ANYTHING about RIGHT or WRONG and the doing of it.....  if it goes against his plans to be DICTATOR,

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #8 

Birth Certificate Whac-A-Mole

Nick Chase asks, would you like to play a neat parlor game with your friends? Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate forgery contains so many forger's errors which are visible to the naked eye or which can be seen on your computer under slight magnification that you can play a fun game finding them, either alone or in a contest with your friends. It's similar to the arcade game Whac-A-Mole, where you pound a mechanical mole back into its hole before it disappears on its own and randomly reappears in another one of the five holes in the game. You can score by time per defect -- five points for each one found within two minutes, for example -- or by total score -- five points for each defect for the length of the game. (Note: Conservatives will generally spot these defects more quickly than liberals do.)

To see these defects, we need to use the digital PDF of the forgery released at (You can download your copy from here.) The reason for using the digital PDF is that it is the original forgery -- rather than the Savannah Guthrie photo or the T-shirt I used in my article "Oblivious to the Obvious," published in American Thinker on April 10, which are a generation removed and can introduce distortion -- camera-lens distortion or twisted T-shirt fabric. Also, you need to view the PDF on your computer screen, because some of the defects are not visible if you print the PDF on a computer printer and then look at the printout.


Marquee Zoom:


What the writer doesn't tell you is that you can inspect the White House document (link) yourself using Adobe's "Marquee Zoom" feature.


1.  Open the document at this link

2.  Right click the document -- a list appears

3.  Left click "Marquee Zoom" -- from the list

4.  Left click the document to enlarge -- each click enlarges more


Use the "sliders at the right and bottom of the display screen to move about the document.


Look at the certificate number -- it's clear the "1" at the end is counterfeit


Look at the certification at the bottom -- see the "smiley face" -- Team Obama is laughing at you.


Read the certification -- "abstract of a TXT file" -- a TXT file is a text file -- this thing is not a copy of an original birth certificate.


What can you find?

So let the game begin!

Mole Hole #3: Is the mole black and white or gray? The forgery has several instances of bitmap -- that is, all-black -- information, and grayscale -- shades of gray -- adjoining. In a true scan of a paper document, all information would be either full-color or shades of gray, so this is an indication of the forger's sloppiness. The most obvious is the certificate number "61 10641" in the upper right-hand corner -- the digits "61 1064" are stark black, and the last digit "1" is grayscale, not dense black. Even if you're not computer-literate and you can't tell grayscale from tree scale, you can still see that there is something "funny" about that last, blurry digit.

Two other obvious examples are in Line 11, Birthplace, where the "K" of "Kenya" is blurry grayscale and the rest of the information is solid black -- and in Line 13, Full Maiden Name, where the "S" of "STANLEY" is pale grayscale and the rest of the word is stark black. All three defects are shown below in Figure GS. You score 5 points for each additional occurrence you find in the forgery (and there are quite a few of them).

Figure GS. A mixture of bitmap (all-black) and grayscale (blurred shades of gray) information appears in the Obama "birth certificate" forgery.

Mole Hole #5: Who lost the comma? The (grayscale) comma following (bitmap) "August 4" in the forgery is way too far to the right of the digit "4" to have been typed as the next character on a typewriter.

Figure FD. The text "6085 Kalanianaole Highway" is a third of a character shorter than the text "y & Gynecological Hospital." Also "out of pitch" in the forgery is the day "August 4," here compared with the word "None" from Line 17a.

Actually, the forger did a pretty good job of maintaining typewriter pitch throughout the document. There are only a few places where the pitch goes noticeably awry. That wayward comma is in pitch; the day "August 4" is a half-character out of pitch, as you can see in Figure FD after I vertically moved up a copy of the word "None" from Line 17a. The test I showed in Figure F in "Oblivious to the Obvious" also works for the digital PDF, and, additionally, you can see that some of the letters in "Kalanianaole" are in vertical alignment with "Gynecological" and some are not. The pitch discrepancy is especially noticeable with the characters "8" and "&," and with the last "l" in "Kalanianaole" compared with the final "l" in "Gynecological." I have vertically lowered the word "HUSSEIN" in Line 1b to show that the space between "Gynecological" and "Hospital" is more than a single character wide. Of course, none of these discrepancies would exist if a real typewriter had been used.

Mole Hole #2: Kern you top this? "Kerning" describes where one character intrudes into another character's space. It's done by computers all the time for displaying and printing text which has letters of varying widths, to close up extra space between certain combinations of letters, such as "ay." But monospace typewriters can't kern.

Figure K. In Line 12a the first "t" in "Student" intrudes into the letter "u" which follows -- this is not possible on a typewriter.

Figure K shows one instance of impossible kerning in the forgery -- the letter "t" intruding into the subsequent "u" in the word "Student" in line 12a. There are at least two more clearly identifiable character overlaps in the forgery, and a number of "maybes." See if you can find them, for 5 points each.

Mole Hole #1: "T" for two? There are at least two different typewriter typefaces used in the forgery, and likely three or more.

Figure TT. Typeface differences -- letters "t," "H," and "i" in three different words in the forgery.

In Figure TT you can see that the two letters "t" in "Student" (from Line 12a) are differently shaped at the base and in the crossbar, and the "t" in "Hospital" (from Line 6) is different from the other two, as it has the shape of the first "t" in "Student" but a shorter crossbar. By computer I measured the widths of the two "t"s in "Student"; the first "t" is 5% wider than the second.

Also in Figure TT you can see the differences in the letters "H" and "i" in "Highway" (Line 7d) and "Hospital" (Line 6c). You score 5 points for each additional typeface discrepancy you find.

Mole Hole #3 (again): Elastic letters? Look at the word "HUSSEIN" in Line 8.

Figure H. The letters "U" and "IN" in "HUSSEIN" are taller.

Does it seem to you that the letters "U," "I," and "N" are a bit taller than the other letters in the word? No, it's not your imagination -- computer measurement shows that they are 5.5% taller, by virtue of their bottoms being lower than the other letters. (All of the tops of the letters are at the same level horizontally.) Score yourself 5 points for each oversized (or undersized) letter you find in a word.

Mole Holes #1 and #4: Forgeries are not angelic; why the white halos? All throughout the forgery you can see that the text has halos of white around each letter (or image). Figure WS is a typical example (as is also Figure H):

Figure WS. Definitely non-angelic "halos" surround each character or graphic image.

This halo effect is proof positive that the "birth certificate" is a digitally created forgery. In a genuine scan of a document of black text copied onto real security paper, the scan into the computer would not produce any halo effect whatsoever. These halos exist because the forger extracted the typewriter-character images from who-knows-where, then attempted with software to render the green security-paper image white in the areas where text was to be applied. We can only speculate as to the exact method the forger used; we know only that the process used was imprecise, because white halos were created.

This halo effect appears throughout the forgery, so you don't get points for each instance you find. Rather, it's worth two whacked moles; give yourself 10 points for each additional whole-document defect you find. (I know of at least three.)

Nobody knows what a perfect score is for our little game of Birth Certificate Whac-A-Mole. A winning score is 100 points; when you reach it, take your chit to the arcade redemption center for your prize of a matched set of four shot glasses, each bearing a different etched view of the White House on a dark and stormy D.C. night.

Note: Except for the pitch tests, none of this information is original with me, and I am indebted to the many other researchers who first noticed defects and published their findings on the internet.


Related:  Birth-certificate "surprise" in October

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #9 

$3,321,030.17 paid through year-end 2011


I just went to run the query for 1st quarter, 2012, but it is not up yet.


When posted, the 1st quarter, 2012 report should bring that amount up to $3.6 million.


Here are the Obama Campaign Disbursements To Perkins-Coie since 2008.


A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Longknife 21

Posts: 2,024
Reply with quote  #10 

When dealing with Sheeple, the question to ask is - why bother with all this fraud and cover-up?  Produce the real one. And the College records. Passport records. All of it.

Why spend $2.4 million to seal records if there is nothing to hide?
You don't have to convince the Sheeple, just get them to question the whole fiasco. If they question, the illusion collapses. Obama, his administration, and the Socialist Democrat Party are a fraud built on lies, jealousy, & greed. The worst of human emotions, not logic.


Super Moderators
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #11 

Do-It-Yourself proof of the Obama Birth Certificate fraud

Giuseppe Gori says, I think the work of Nick Chase, simplifying "for the masses" the analysis of the forged copy of the Obama long-form birth certificate circulated a year ago by the White House, is absolutely brilliant. I suggest that you read his articles in the American Thinker.

In his first article, "Oblivious to the Obvious," Nick explains pitch in typewriters.

In his second article, "How I Learned to Love Savannah Guthrie," Nick explains how he obtained an original picture and how he used "cut and paste" to move things around.

I do not mind "getting my hands dirty," and so I decided to try it out myself.

Proving that there is a serious problem of authenticity with this document was easier than I expected.

You can do the same, using the same source picture, but using an even a simpler procedure than what Nick Chase described. You can do it on a PC, without having to rotate or touch the images at all. Here is how:

First, I went to the original site showing the copy from Savannah Guthrie.

The following is the original picture of the paper certificate that Savannah Guthrie took on April 27, 2011, as you can find in the above-mentioned site:


View artifacts and process here . . .

The above proves that at least two different typewriters were used to type the same certificate.

Is this a conclusive proof? As Nick Chase says:

If you think that the reason why there are two different typewriter typefaces in the document is because two typewriters were used in its preparation, the second typewriter being used because the first broke down -- forget it. ...

Second, three different typewriter typefaces (and likely more) appear in the document.

First, remember that the proof of forgery in Figure F is not a unique proof [of forgery.] ... Researchers have conclusively demonstrated that the "birth certificate" is fake in many different ways, and that it was digitally constructed. [The above proof] is simply an additional proof of forgery that more people are able to understand because it requires very little technical expertise to comprehend it.

Of course, none of the above has anything to do with where Mr. Obama was born, but it all has everything to do with a forged document released by the White House. I think this is pretty relevant, when such a document is required during the nomination process for the election of the president of the United States, to verify that the qualifications of the candidates comply with the requirements of the law.

If I have a doubt, it is the following: will the non-technical people in the media understand, or accept, this simple demonstration?


A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #12 

Or the whole thing was done by the same teenager working from his liberal parents basement that also hacked into Sarah Palin's email account.

Lou E Brown

Posts: 516
Reply with quote  #13 

Bravo! This is a beautiful piece of work, even the parts I don't understand at all. Thanks, and you have gained your factualness(new word?) with me.


Posts: 55
Reply with quote  #14 

Article from The Daily Pen -- additional long-form stuff from The Obama File archive here . . .

Wednesday, April 4, 2012


Commentary by Dan Crosby

New York, NY - Speaking of ludicrous conspiracy theories, here’s one defenders of the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” want you to believe.

In 1961, a 23-year-old graduate electrical engineering student at MIT named Ivan Edward Sutherland was toiling in the computer science labs where he invented the first electronically generated computer imaging application called “Sketchpad” (This is the true part of the story).

At the time, Sketchpad was an innovative computer program which influenced today’s graphic interaction with computers and served as the foundational technology for digital document production, graphic user interfaces and computer aided design applications.

Sketchpad utilized axial constraints, like “clipping masks”, and precision relationships among segments (straight lines) and arcs (curves and circles) to produce graphic images and alphanumeric characters from electrical currents conducted between nodes of microscopic computer circuitry. Operators could use Sketchpad to produce both horizontal and vertical lines and combine them into figures and shapes which could be stored in the form of personal signatures, typewriter font letters, block letters and official looking stamp templates, all of which could be viewed at a later time when converted to visual graphic format for human beings on a television-like monitor or screen.

Most importantly, as they relate to the case of Obama’s forged birth certificate image today, these digital images were designed by Sutherland to be copied, moved, rotated, reassembled or resized while retaining their basic properties as reusable elements. Sketchpad also had the first window-based drawing program and clipping algorithm which allowed users to replicate drawings as they would appear on paper when printed.

Now, this is where the Obotic horde gets a little sketchy.

Apparently, those desperate to defend Obama’s fraudulent presidency want us to believe that Sutherland, while working in his lab at MIT in 1961, was contacted by the Hawaiian Department of Health and asked by the government of Hawaii to produce a digital image of Obama’s birth certificate, apparently, the very first of its kind.

They contend that Sutherland, who was the only individual with the expertise to produce such a digital image record at the time, took time away from this graduate curriculum at the Institute to travel four thousand miles to Hawaii and create the image of Obama’s birth certificate which, as Sutherland was told, would be used to confirm Obama’s Hawaiian birth in the year 2011.

Sutherland created the image with very convincing elements representing official looking signatures, typewriter fonts, an official looking registrar’s stamp, complete with smiley face and a misspelled word which he forgot to correct after demonstrating Sketchpad’s sense of humor, bearing the name of a teenager named Alvin Onaka who would be installed as the state’s Registrar at the appropriate time in order to confirm Obama’s birth record.

Sutherland even created an attractive basket-weave patterned green safety background to make it look even more genuine and official, which the State of Hawaii would not actually use until 2000, but which looked “Feng Shui” so he included it on Obama’s record, which was the only certificate in Hawaiian history before 2000 to contain such a patterned image background.

Prior to his return to the east coast where he was simultaneously helping the Department of Defense develop new information security technology, he took time to construct a special secret computer, also the first of its kind, which was kept hidden in Hawaii for 50 years, upon which to store the digital image of Obama birth certificate.

Sutherland even had the wherewithal to make the image data compatible with a much more sophisticated computer and a graphics program, called Adobe, which would not be invented for another 40 years.

Then, 50 years after Sutherland created and stored the first digital birth certificate for any baby born on earth, which happened to be Obama, Obama called the Hawaii’s state Department of Health in April of 2011, right on schedule, with Mr. Onaka appropriately officious to match the stamp with the man, and asked them to retrieve the image file from said secret computer and send it to him.

Upon retrieval of the image from Sutherland’s secret computer, Onaka never bothered to ask, in more than 950,000 paper birth records created by the state of Hawaii between 1890 and 1961, why was Obama’s the only digital computer image with green safety pattern background on the entire planet and, more importantly, why was a digital stamp bearing his name placed on the document almost 40 years before he even became the state’s registrar.


Either Obama owes Sutherland a debt of gratitude, or some forger owes Sutherland an apology for hijacking his technology to commit the greatest hoax in American history.

Since we have learned that Sutherland was never contacted by the State of Hawaii in 1961, nor, is there any evidence supporting a relationship between Sutherland and Obama, we must conclude that the image of Obama alleged Certificate of Live Birth was produced by someone other than Sutherland for Obama at a later date.

Of course, Dr. Sutherland had nothing to do with the forgery of Obama's birth certificate. However, given the position of Obama's abettors in the media and the scarcity of information backing this absurd remnant, the "Sutherland Conspiracy" is as available as any explanation.

Even after an ongoing, six-month forensic investigation by a constitutionally empowered team of law enforcement professionals and technical experts, Obama continues to appeal to those he apparently realizes are too stupid to understand the difference between paper and computer imagery.

Unfortunately, some ideologically corrupt letches wrapped in their Obama delusion also willfully refuse to accept the fact that the lone scrap of information submitted by Barack Obama supporting his farcical presidential eligibility is nothing more than a fabricated digital rendering of an alleged record produced by unknown individuals within the virtual imagination of cyber space.

Meanwhile, Obama continues to milk a deception from those who lack the mental acuity to understand that when information is taken from physical form of media, such as paper, and transformed to an electrical form of media, such as a computer image, it can then be changed and, unfortunately, misrepresented through dishonest reproduction in order to exploit human ignorance and limited sensory capacity.

When information becomes electronically reproduced, at the very moment of its inception, it can be altered in ways which are difficult to detect by human senses without the aid of experts or other electronic technology.

Forgers counted on this when they fabricated Obama fake Certificate of Live Birth. Sadly, among many idiots who swallowed it whole, there are a few innocent people who gagged on it in pieces as it went down. The rest of us rightly rejected it in its entirety for the following reasons.

The modern form of paper we use today was first invented around the time of the birth of Christ. Ironically, computer imagery, on the other hand, was invented in the same alleged year of the birth of Barack Obama, in 1961, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

For many, those two ironies end the case against Obama in perpetuity. For them, sentencing is long past due. For defenders of Obama, however, there remains an apparent market for a more thorough explanation of the difference between paper media and electronic media.

Aside from the lop-sided ramifications of an identity contest between Christ and Obama, the historical comparison between paper and computer imagery reveals rather an interesting disparity between those engaged in a rational pursuit of truth about Obama and their deranged obotic counterparts desperately seeking to defend the most prolific liar in American political history. This disparity is rooted in the latter’s lack of understanding of the difference between an authentic paper record of one’s birth and a counterfeit digital image of that same information and how these two forms of media lend value to one’s credibility as an eligible political leader.

In the beginning, the word “paper” was derived from the name of the reedy plant papyrus, which grows abundantly along the Nile River in Egypt. However, paper, as we know it today, is made of pulped cellulose wood fibers and is said to have been invented around 8 B.C.
Jesus may have a paper birth certificate somewhere…but, apparently, Obama does not.
Nearly 2000 years after Christ, logic dictates that, upon Obama’s emergence from his mother’s womb, someone wrote information about his birth on a paper birth certificate using permanent ink. The paper upon which this information was printed has its roots in trees, pun intended.
Here’s where Obama’s abettors become confused.

This document originated from a pulp substance derived from processed wood fiber acquired from trees which were most likely harvested by strong, burley, flannel-laden lumberjacks wielding axes and saws. We can be confident that the lumberjacks then were not informed of the plan to counterfeit Obama’s birth information 50 years later, so let’s not start hating loggers too. They simply cut the trees down, hauled them to a mill where they were reduced by machinery into little pieces (Note to Obama supporters: This illustration should not be confused with “bits”, which we will discuss forthwith) which would eventually become a fibrous pulp material.

In the latter stages of the fiber’s processing, the pulp was bleached, flattened and dried until it became a useful component of modern media which we call “paper”. In the wake of Obama’s birth certificate forgery case, it is important that we clarify the difference between paper pulp and silicon which is used to make computer circuitry or flat screen monitors. Apparently, the distinction becomes blurred when Obama is involved.

The paper was cut to the appropriate size and eventually imprinted, with permanent ink, information and a document title header which indicated to municipal and hospital employees that it was an official document which was to be used uniformly to record births in their
Today’s digital imagery applications, on the other hand, have the widespread potential to be used to misrepresent mass media in order to promote a desired false conclusion in the minds of individuals who either are not aware of other information which counteracts the lies or who are not aware of the facts used to produce the image to begin with.

The Daily Pen demonstrated this phenomena last month in our story titled “Vital Records Indicate Obama Not Born in Hawaii Hospital, Part 2”, when we intentionally altered the content of one, single computer image for the experimental purpose of misleading those we identified as attentive to such practices under Obama’s spell. We were proven right when we used digital image editing software to remove one word from a footnote of a data table found in an image of a historical document published in 1945.

The image was erroneous and benign and did not affect the content of the report which was that the information shown in Obama’s alleged birth certificate is invalid with regard to vital records collection for proving natural born citizenship which, in turn, contradicts claims that he was not born in Hawaii. Removing this word shortened the footnote which referred to a quantity in an unrelated but easily confirmable table of data taken from the VSUS report. We did not alter the numeric data, just the reference to the scope which it applied for the purpose of determining just how vigorous our adversaries are in their repulsive defense of this larger crime. Then, we sat back and waited.

Sure enough, the response was a resounding success. Prior to this test, we sent emails to supportive readers informing them of the miniscule alteration before we made it. Since we were not offering explanations to Obama supporters, we sought to demonstrate how being deceived by a digital image affects an uninformed perspective about the character of those perpetuating the deception. In the case of Obama’s supporters, we discovered they are more psychologically motivated to sound the “gotcha” alarm about a minor alternation in a digital image of peripheral information unrelated to Obama, which is easily confirmed by anyone, than they are to actually consider the possibility of fraudulent images being created which directly benefit Obama’s legal qualifications, personal history and character.

Needless to say, our test produced all the confirmation we needed to confirm that we are right about Barack Obama and his abettors in America. Their perceptions are ideologically driven and fail, not only the standards of logic and reason but, most importantly, they fail the standards of morality and decency. This means they are more willing to excuse criminal behavior in someone who shares their beliefs even when that behavior is harmful to their own future, or to innocent people with no power to prevent the crime, than they are of unknown bloggers and private citizens working to expose the truth.

Our experiment revealed that the same morally corrupt individuals Obama relies upon to defend his altered digital birth certificate image and absence of biographical information also have the capacity to identify even the smallest “fraud” in digital image content when they apply their investigative ability, and when they are provided with the original paper media content to compare it with, yet they are willing to overlook the mountain of probative evidence mounting against them.

They are terrified of the psychological pain coming with the truth about Obama. They trusted Obama and now they have to face the fact that he lied about who he was in order to confiscate presidential power in order to implement a selfish agenda based on his remote ideas of reparative justice. They are afraid of the stored wrath which finds that Obama is truly a usurper and the most prolific deceiver in American political history because they know instinctually that his brand of justice does not apply to them favorably. Therefore, they are forced to seek mental sanctuary by fighting against those who are bringing the truth upon their poor minds.

They are desperate to not be forced to face the facts about Obama. They are delusional and mentally ill because they understand, deep inside, that Obama has actually set an ideological trap for them. They realize they have been ambushed and it is confirmed by a moral truth which is: The only reason for a man like Obama to hide information about himself is to draw them in like ideological prey, into his control and influence (i.e. Obamacare) on a message of “Hope and Change” for them, before slamming that trap of enslavement and, eventually, physical death on them.

Instinctually, they know Obama is a liar but because they have invested so much of themselves into the false truth they wanted to believe, they can’t face the actual truth. So, they seek sanctuary in resistance and willful dissonance which takes the form of ridiculing those who doubt Obama’s eligibility. If they can’t call them racists, they call them conspiracy theorists.

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

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

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

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

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

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

However, the positive effect of such a tactic is that they have used their adversaries as unwitting advertisers to introduce a previously unknown platform of information which can be used by those innocent people to look into the matter themselves.

It brings us a great sense of satisfaction knowing that so many have taken interest in this matter on Obama’s dime. Sure, we get verbally assaulted by mentally inferior liberal cowards and haters. Haters will hate anything, even the truth. They hate us not because we are wrong but because, well…they have to feed an unredeemable hate monster within themselves.

Using Obama letches to carry the heavy water of truth for those thirsty for it is a worthy cause. To others for whom we have failed to uphold an otherwise pristine standard on this occasion, we ask for your forgiveness and understanding. As we grow, we realize that you include us as one of many who need to be a trusted source of diligently sought, honest facts. We seek that status in your heart and mind for the future.
Previous Topic | Next Topic

Help fight the

The United States Library of Congress
has selected for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscriber

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2017
All rights reserved