 |
| Click Image for a Video Report about Forgery |
By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
May 8, 2011
Putative President Obama’s recently released on-line computer image of his alleged paper long-form Certificate of Live Birth has evidence of “kerning.” Web expert, Karl Denninger, has made this discovery. His article can be read at http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=2534123. This discovery was also reported by WND and is contained in an article written by Bob Unruh which can be accessed at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=295189.
Kerning describes a style of printing letters which causes part of one letter to extend into the vertical space of the letter next to it. The extension appears underneath the letter whose space is being encroached. See the image below which shows the bottom of the letter “p” in the word “Kapiolani” extending to the left under the letter “a.”
 |
| Click on Image for More Information |
Kerning is not possible with real typewriter lettering because of the mechanical and spacing limitations presented by a typewriter. But it is quite normal with “typewriter lettering” simulated by using a computer which has the technological capabilities and programs which when simulating typewriter lettering can produce the kerning style.
This is damaging evidence when we consider that the information on Obama’s 1961 pre-printed Certificate of Live Birth would have been filled in by hand or with a typewriter of that time period and not by a computer. Assuming that the on-line image released by Obama is a true image of the actual paper Certificate of Live Birth in the vault of the Hawaii Department of Health, this evidence conclusively proves that the paper Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
May 8, 2011
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####
Copyright © 2011
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved
76 comments:
Personally, I do not trust AT ALL the Department in Hawaii dealing with the birth certificates!! Why? As there is only one person (Alvin Onaka) that has access to Obama's birth certificate and it is in a vault, if this Onaka is not honest or if he is an Obama fanboy or if he is a very strong Democrat supporter, then it is perfectly possible that he could have produced a forgery to support Obama's claim that he was born in Hawaii!
In any case, experts in forgery must examine and even test thoroughly the Obama's ORIGINAL long form birth certificate at Hawaii! This simple examination probably would need a legal challenge to the current Obama's long form birth certificate in order to be carried out!
Having said that, I still cannot understand why we rarely hear the fact that Obama is NOT eligible because he does not meet the second requirement to be a natural born citizen which is that the President of the USA must be born of parents who are BOTH American citizens at the time of his birth!!!
I still feel very strongly that we simply waste our time with Obama's long form birth certificate when we could immediately demand Obama's resignation based on this second requirement to be a natural born citizen!!
What is going on?
All the law suits challenging Obama's eligibility were thrown out due to lack of standing.
Most, if not all, Congressmen have distanced themselves from the issue. They are satisfied that Obama was born in Hawaii and is therefore a citizen.
State eligibility bills either get dismissed or vetoed. Governor Brewer said elections are a federal responsibility when there is no mechanism to verify a president's eligibility.
The main stream media have concentrated on "birthers" and conspiracy theories. I have not seen any articles that have seriously discussed the definition of natural born citizen.
The Internet is buzzing with many analyses that show the White House birth certificate is a fraud, yet with one exception I have not seen any discussion of this issue in the main stream media.
If the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, there has to be a way to formally challenge the eligibility of the person who claims to be president, both before and after he has taken office.
This is not a political question. It is one of adherence to the Constitution.
I do have a question. If Obama gets reelected and makes it through a second term without his eligibility being challenged, does the issue of his eligibility become moot? Are there any charges that could be brought against Obama before or after he leaves office such as the release of his fraudulent birth certificate?
We do not yet know whether Hawaii in 1961 used IBM typewriters. In any event, let us assume, for sake of argument, that they did. Hence, Hawaii would have used an IBM (probably electric) typewriter when they filled in the blanks on Obama's pre-printed government form known as a Certificate of Live Birth. The name of the alleged birth hospital which appears on the computer image which he recently released, "Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital," would have been inserted onto this form using such a typewriter.
Here is a link to the IBM web site which contains 605 results on the word "kerning." There is a lot of material to go through here. Please review these articles and report your findings on this web site.
Here is the link:
http://www.ibm.com/search/csass/search?sn=mh&q=kerning%20&lang=en&cc=us&en=utf
Here is an interesting thread on Free Republic regarding the Dan Rather-John Kerry fake memo of August 1, 1972. That 1972 typewriter-produced memo also had a kerning problem which commenters called "proof positive smoking gun" that thet memo was a forgery.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1213664/posts
Here is another Free Republic thread on the Dan Rather fake memo and the kerning issue:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214403/posts
And yet another Free Republic Dan Rather thread which also is very good:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214382/posts
Free Republic
Browse · Search News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: kiryandil
As one who spent a lot of my life in graphic arts, I understand your argument. But a word of caution: there were typewriters that could kern. IBM introduced proportional letter spacing in the 40s. From their website:
The first IBM "Executive" Typewriter with proportional spacing, the Model A, was placed on the market shortly after World War II. . .
And I worked on one of their selectric / composer units in about 1972(it was an older unit) or so that produced near typeset quality, including kerning. It worked by your keying in the text, which was recorded on a mag card, and then played back with corrections and letterspacing and kerning applied. At least, that's how I remember it. Whether the Hawaii DOH had one of these units we don't know.
Now, that doesn't mean that the Regime hasn't produced a fraud here, only that the argument that typewriters did not kern is not accurate.
16 posted on 05/02/2011 11:41:46 AM PDT by JoeA (JoeA / Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: JoeA
And I worked on one of their selectric / composer units in about 1972(it was an older unit) or so that produced near typeset quality, including kerning. It worked by your keying in the text, which was recorded on a mag card, and then played back with corrections and letterspacing and kerning applied. At least, that's how I remember it. Whether the Hawaii DOH had one of these units we don't know.
Now, that doesn't mean that the Regime hasn't produced a fraud here, only that the argument that typewriters did not kern is not accurate.
These units were large, bulky, slow machines designed for typesetting, not typewriting. They were totally unsuitable for use with a form.
Proportional spacing, available on some typewriters, is not kerning, it merely makes the fixed spacing of letters proportionate to their width.
27 posted on 05/02/2011 12:01:48 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: JoeA
“And I worked on one of their selectric / composer units in about 1972(it was an older unit) or so that produced near typeset quality, including kerning. It worked by your keying in the text, which was recorded on a mag card, and then played back with corrections and letterspacing and kerning applied.”
The downside of using that argument to explain the kerning is that it then invalidates the other explanations about the vertical misalignments of letters being due to sloppy shift-key usage. If the text is recorded on a mag card, formatted, then typed automatically, there would be no misalignments. They can’t have it both ways.
47 posted on 05/02/2011 12:51:57 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]
Free Republic
Browse · Search News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2713725/replies?c=16
Stranger has left a new comment on your post "'The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law' ...":
I found a new smoking gun that is even stronger evidence of manipulation of Obama's "birth certificate, evidence that is impossible to blame on any copying software.
But first, in review:
Assuming the released "Certificate" is a fake, then the template was likely a copy of the Nordyke twins originals. On their forms, the box for "Twins" had an X in it (not in the Single box) and in the order-of-Birth block if any box was checked, it would have to be "unchecked". To remove those "X"s, blank boxes would have to replace them, and that is what it appears has been done. The "TWINS" check-box is an identical match (clone-copy) to the "Yes"
check-box in block 7g. Examine them up close by zooming in 1600% in Adobe Reader. In block 4, the first two order-of-birth boxes are identical also, both blank, but one could be a copy of the other since the one with a check in it would need to be replaced with one without the "X".
My new findings indicate that they could be identical not due to any manipulation but because of several other insignificant examples of perfect copies.
The first "E" in CERTIFICATE matches the E in "LIVE", The first "T" in CERTIFICATE matches the T in BIRTH, ALL "T"s in DEPARTMENT
and HEALTH match, the 2nd "E" in DEPARTMENT matches the E in HEALTH. These are in addition to the numbers "1" in 151 matching.
The fact that the copying software copied these form entries identically would suggest that they were originally printed identically. But the boxes, it has been said, were not made from any printer stamp-mold but were each individually hand-drawn on the original master form, so they could not be identical, nor produce identical digital versions.
Now here's the new smoking gun. The "M" in PM in the time-of-birth block is a copy of the M in M.D. in the Attendant block. It has multiple differences with the P, since the M is a copied jpg image, is too small, along with the period, and is totally out of horizontal alignment (way below the P),
it is on a separate layer than the rest of the figures, and was not made by a typewriter but was copied from the text of the form.
Also, the last "1" in the document number is an over-enlarge pixelated multi-density jpg image on another layer, indicting replacement of the original number.
Open the BC in Adobe Reader, zoom-in and see the evidence.
http://h2ooflife.wordpress.com
To me, the most damning evidence isn't the kerning, it's the pixel-perfect duplication of elements found by Miss Tickly, et al.
First, let’s address the fact that those elements have no dithering, which means they were either created on the computer by hand (by the paintbrush tool, for instance), scanned in as pure black & white (1 bpp) and then added to a color image or they were extracted from a normal scan and their contrast racked so high as to block up all the midtone pixels. This begs the question of why some parts of the word would be affected but others would stay dithered unless someone altered individual elements. (The only other scenario I can see creating such non-dithered pixels is a manual unsharp mask being cranked up on those elements, which would explain the white halos but wouldn't explain how some words are entirely haloed but contain letters both dithered and non-dithered. If the entire word was haloed, then every letter should have been blocked up, but that isn't the case here.)
Could compression algorithms have blocked up these elements to a non-dithered state? None that I’ve EVER seen and I’ve worked with a lot of them, both Enterprise and Consumer class. Even if you had one with so high a compression level that it removes enough detail to block up elements like this, it would have done it to all the elements and mangled the document. For instance, the green bars in the safety paper would have become solid green bars as detail was removed and midtone pixels blocked up.
That said, now we get to the pixel identical elements. The odds that similar elements on a document like this coming out pixel identical after being scanned in or processed are astronomically low. Even if they were scanned as pure black & white (1 bpp) it’s not likely to happen (and would show they had been added since the document is in color). So let’s give them the benefit of a doubt that the document was scanned in normally and the elements processed to result in their current non-dithered state. Now we have our first coincidence that if these disparate elements were processed as I described above with contrast, an unsharp mask or the like that they would come out EXACTLY the same pixel by pixel. OK, the one in a million chance this might happen is offset by numerous occurrences of pixel identical elements found throughout the document. (1 of 2)
(2 of 2)
Could elements have been replicated to save space? Visual compression algorithms do not replace similar elements with like elements. Such visual ‘de-duplication’ does not happen with enterprise or consumer class compression software. That jackass' analysis from yesterday said that because one checkbox looked like another checkbox to the computer, it would discard one checkbox and simply duplicate the other. That's ridiculous and visual compression doesn't work that way. That's like scanning in a picture of your child and because both their eyes look similar it discards one of their eyes and duplicates another. What a load of horse-sh*t.
Without seeing the source document, it’s impossible to 100% say this is a forgery but it’s also impossible to 100% say it’s authentic. Add in other rather suspicious findings such as various elements having been rotated and then scaled to varying degrees as well as what appears to be manual overwriting of elements, a missing raised HDOH seal, funky kerning and odd layering (with no hint of OCR, BTW) and we can come to some conclusions with a high degree of certainty. What can be said is that it appears to have been altered manually and that it has all the earmarks of a forged, assembled document. My expert opinion is that it was altered and, along with suspicious content such as father’s race being ‘African’ and his country being ‘Kenya’ before Kenya was an actual country, it begs investigation and authentication.
-bdwilcox
Mario,
I found this on an IBM web site.
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/modelb/modelb_informal.html/
In 1941, the company added a new dimension to typewriter technology which Sholes, Jenne and others probably never dreamed possible: proportional spacing. A new carriage mechanism eliminated the uneven appearance of typewritten material where narrow letters, such as "i" and "1" occupy as much space as wide letters, such as "m" and "w." Proportional spacing gives each letter typed only as much space as necessary, and the development has greatly improved the appearance and legibility of typewritten material. The first IBM "Executive" Typewriter with proportional spacing, the Model A, was placed on the market shortly after World War II, and the "Executive" Typewriter has remained a staple of the company's typewriter line.
The obvious question is:
Was Hawaii using typewriters with proportional spacing in 1961?
Doublee,
It is not sufficient to say that the new IBM Selectric typewriter added a new technology to regular typing, i.e., proportional spacing. You have to show that proportional spacing could create kerning like we see in the Obama on-line image of his alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth.
If proportional spacing could create such kerning, then the next question is did the Hawaii Health Department use IBM Executive typewriters in 1961 to fill in the blanks of pre-printed Certificates of Live Birth. In any event, given the cost of such machines, I doubt that they did. Also, given the scattered fashion in which the "typed" data was entered on the on-line image, I further doubt that such a highly advanced typewriter was used.
@Doublee,
Proportional spacing does not necessarily mean that kerning was being done. Proportional spacing simply meant more space was used by wider characters and less by narrow characters. With kerning, parts of one character overlaps the space of another adjacent character. It is extremely unlikely that the Hawaiian Health Department in Honolulu was using any sort of state of the art (back then) IBM typewriters. They most certainly were using only normal everyday office typewriters such as IBM or Royal brands commonly used back then. That is the most logical common-sense conclusion. The Obots will be grasping at straws to explain the existence of kerning in a document allegedly from 1961 and allegedly typed with a typewriter. But the KISS principle and parsimony are the most logical explanation for the kerning and other anomalities in the new Obama long form BC ... i.e., the Obama long form BC is a FORGERY that was created using modern computer illustration type creation software and then the paper copies were printed out from the original forged image.
The question is, is the document in the Hawaiian system a forgery from which copies were made or did the forging all occur at the White House end? Obviously what was handed out to the AP was simply copies of the forged image since the kerning is in the AP scanned copies too. I still remember the former director saying that the copy she saw was half typed and half handwritten. The long form BC release is all typed except for the signatures. Thus it is possible the Hawaiian officials gave paper copies of what they have in their vault to the Obama lawyer but what the Obama White House released is not a copy of what the Hawaiian authorities gave them. To determine where the forgery was made we need to have an on the record statement from the Hawaiian authorities to confirm or deny the image that the White House put on their servers is identical in appearance to what is in the Hawaiian vaults. If the image on the net is identical to what is in the vaults ... then someone forged the document and stuck it into the Hawaiian Health Department vaults to help cover up for the fraud Obama is. We need more information to know where and when the forgery was made but that all the images on the net of this new long form BC are of a forgery is absolutely clear. The Congress and the FBI should be launching an investigation as to how a forged document image was placed on the White House servers. That would be an excellent starting place to open an investigation and follow the bread crumb trail from there to the vast amount of other fraud and criminal activity perpetrated on the American people by the Grifter-In-Chief in the Oval Office and his team of forgery Czars, deceivers, and liars.
See my new flier: http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/obamabcforgedflier-20110506.jpg
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Lame Cherry: Takeyuki Irei - Private Investigator
http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2011/05/takeyuki-irei-pi.html
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Attorney Apuzzo. I commend you for this recent blog report. You've stuck the old kerning issue right back in their gut! I love it. Others reading your blog report probably aren't aware of what I am talking about but I am certain that you do remember. Your new blog report is brilliant! Well done!
Thanks for information on old typewriters and kerning. I never thought that I would get a tutorial on typewriters on your web site. But after all you do say that this is the place to ask questions :)
I submitted my post not because I was skeptical that the birth certificate was doctored -- there are so many other anomalies, but in the interest of providing potentially pertinent information.
Doublee,
You comment is very much appreciated. Please do not interpret any responses thereto as some attack on you or your question. Rather, the responses are made so as to solicit another response so that we may all arrive at the ultimate truth.
Again, thank you for your input.
Verdict from Top Constitutional Lawyer and Scholar - Obama is NOT NBC!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8
Wouldn't a certificate , like the Nordyke's, been originally typed up at the hospital? Why the different local registrars? Is U K L Lee a real person, if yes what is his/her story? Why is the seal on the short form INCISED instead of EMBOSSED? Why is this incised seal not consistent with the requirements given for the legal seal? Ow, my head hurts.
I would be curious to know if a document filed with the Drake and Barnett cases at the 9th circuit will have any weight with the judges. It basically admonishes them to settle the matter once and for all.
www.pacer.gov, Ninth Circuit, atty "Taitz" or Court of Appeals Docket #: 09-56827 or 10-55084
Here is the description in the docket:
Received non party letter dated 04/30/2011 re: "Express mandates of the US Code require a forced conclusion in this case. PANEL . [7744218] [09-56827, 10-55084] (CW)
I don't know who this guy is. The signature says "Craig T. Frank"
Appreciate any thoughts!
Oops, EMBOSSED should read RAISED.
By chance, I recognize the type as that of a Standard Underwood. The '8' on the Underwood is unique in that it has a lovely serif.
I typed the 'kerned' examples using the Underwood. A better example was the 'ny' part of Kenya.
However, there is an explanation for the apparent kerning.
If you are a very fast typist, or can type the 'ny' or 'ty' in quick succession, the kerning effect is perfectly duplicated on the manual typewriter.
Typists are trained to operate the keys in a steady rhythm, but familiar words or letter combinations can be typed faster, faster than the spring can shift the platen over for the next letter.
Note also the bad capitals, the result of the keystroke missing the top of the Shift key . . . that can't be duplicated easily in a computer font.
As I've been insisting for two years, the Birth Certificate is a bogus issue, except for the Obama name as legal father.
The corruption of naturalization laws by the courts, making any child born on U.S. soil a citizen, regardless of an alien father, is what has tricked us into electing the son of a British subject as a natural born citizen.
By chance, I recognize the type as that of a Standard Underwood. The '8' on the Underwood is unique in that it has a lovely serif.
I typed the 'kerned' examples using the Underwood. A better example was the 'ny' part of Kenya.
However, there is an explanation for the apparent kerning.
If you are a very fast typist, or can type the 'ny' or 'ty' in quick succession, the kerning effect is perfectly duplicated on the manual typewriter.
Typists are trained to operate the keys in a steady rhythm, but familiar words or letter combinations can be typed faster, faster than the spring can shift the platen over for the next letter.
Note also the bad capitals, the result of the keystroke missing the top of the Shift key . . . that can't be duplicated easily in a computer font.
As I've been insisting for two years, the Birth Certificate is a bogus issue, except for the Obama name as legal father.
The corruption of naturalization laws by the courts, making any child born on U.S. soil a citizen, regardless of an alien father, is what has tricked us into electing the son of a British subject as a natural born citizen.
paraleaglenm,
Please forgive me but your explanation sounds a bit hard to believe. How does someone like you, who has been working the Obama eligibility issue, just happen to be someone who by chance recognize letters of a Standard Underwood used in 1961?
Why do you say that the "ny" part of Kenya is a better example?
I fail to see how the speed of a typist can cause physical impossibilities related to space to become realities?
Do you have any expert source other than your alleged personal experience that supports your kerning theory?
A sample of a types document in 1961
http://museumvictoria.com.au/collections/items/1455520/document-kodak-australasia-pty-ltd-order-of-photographs-of-coburg-opening-1961
Another sample of a typed document, types 1961.
http://www.historyforsale.com/productimages/thumbnails/171486.jpg
Another types document sample.
http://www.ehistorybuff.com/pres/fordnixonpardonpage1wm06.jpg
the paraleaglenm explanation does come off a bit silly, obviously, if this was something that was so easily replicated by the typists themselves doing their normal job, then we'd see examples of this popping up everywhere in all these other BC's. but also, why on earth would ny be a better example than ap. If we were talking about Albany, NY. then yes, I'd agree, but otherwise I don't think "ny" even registers as a common two letter combination, and I can be pretty sure the typist wouldn't be typing Kenya all that often, further negating the explanation.
Mario,
He recognized the funky little squiggle (serif) at the top of the '8' which he says is characteristic of an Underwood. He may have had one for years and can recognize that unique trait. As to the authenticity of his claim of an Underwood, I can't vouch myself. But while the kerning is suspect, a good typist may be able to type faster than the carriage can move, which would allow subsequent strikes before the carriage can move the prior letter completely out of the way. I'm not saying it happened here or not, but it IS possible.
This is why the real damning evidence is the lack of dithering (no grey or colored noise pixels) and pixel-exact duplications of elements. These are signs of a constructed document and don't happen in a color scan of a document. Even if the source document is pure black and white, a color scan will always result in dithering or colored noise as the scanner tries to digitize an analog image. And there will always be slight pixel variations between like elements by the same mechanism.
Stranger has left a new comment on your post "'The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law' ...":
New info about the letter "M" in P.M. It made no sense but it turns out that the same thing is seen in the Nordyke twins birth certificates. So that means that the form creator decided to "spare" the typist from having to type the letter "M" which is present in both AM and PM. So "P" is typed but M is printed. by straight-shooter
A commentator called Stranger has left a comment on this blog at my article entitled, "'The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law' as U.S. Federal Common Law Not English Common Law Define What an Article II Natural Born Citizen Is." I quote the comment in relevant part:
"Were Barack Obama's parents actually married?" If the answer is "No", then he would be a natural born citizen by the common law description (if he was born in the US). But if they were married, as recounted in his "Dreams of My Father" then his foreign father would have denied him natural born citizenship status.
There is no proof that his parents were ever married. The proof would exist in the archives, along with a divorce, but such documents haven't been sought -or found, or haven't been made public. So without that evidence, there is no proof that a foreign father had any place in the mother's & child's lives aside from the accepted "fact" of his role in conception. Thus he would be eligible for the Presidency."
My response: The historical record and case law from our U.S. Supreme Court show that an Article II "natural born Citizen" is a child born in the United States to U.S. citizen parents (both father and mother under the doctrine that the wife's allegiance and citizenship merged into that of the husband upon marriage which prevailed during the Founding). This is the only American common law definition that we have ever had of the clause and it has never changed, not by any case law, Congressional Act, or by the 14th Amendment.
Obama's alleged long-form birth certificate shows that his father was Barack Obama Sr. and his mother was Stanley Ann Dunham. His father, being a British citizen, never became a U.S. citizen. His mother was a U.S. citizen. Hence, when Obama was born he was born to an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother.
The Obama-Dunham marriage has been publicly accepted. U.S. Immigration has acknowledged it as happening. There is even a final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction dissolving that marriage. There is a strong public policy that the marriage is valid. The marriage is valid unless a court of competent jurisdiction voids it.
In any event, even if the marriage is void for whatever reason (e.g. because it was a bigamous marriage), Obama who was born to that "marriage" is still under Hawaiian law a legitimate child. Hence, his citizenship status for purposes of determining if he is an Article II "natural born Citizen" under natural law, the law of nations, and American common law is inherited from both his parents. Since Obama inherited at birth a foreign allegiance and citizenship from his British citizen father, he cannot be an Article II "natural born Citizen."
For these reasons, Obama is not an Article II "natural born Citizen" and is not eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.
bdwilcox,
So then you, like Doublee, are also not only familiar with the 1961 Underwood typewriter but also able to discern its characters from an on-line image of a 1961 birth certificate. That is amazing! What is also amazing is that you can read Doublee's mind and can speculate how he came to his conclusions regarding the Underwood typewriter.
Your theory of how a fast typist on some 1961 Underwood typewriter can produce kerning is also fantastic. You have not shown that any Underwood typewriter in 1961 had the technological capacity to produce a kerning effect.
I also do not understand why you believe a government clerk in Hawaii filling in a pre-printed form of a birth certificate would be typing at such amazing speed. On the contrary, the lack of any logic to how the on-line document was allegedly typed shows that the clerk was quite slow at inputing the information.
Finally, you fail to understand that no matter how fast the typist typed, she could not put two characters into a space physically reserved for only one character. You are advocating that an engineering physical impossbility that existed in 1961did not exist.
You state that the real damning evidence of the forgery is "the lack of dithering (no grey or colored noise pixels) and pixel-exact duplications of elements." But you missed the point of my article. The question is what is a forgery? My article shows that, assuming the on-line image of the underlying alleged paper long-form Certificate of Live Birth is real, the underlying document is a forgery because of the kerning. Your points go to show that the on-line image of the alleged Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery. I think that it is more probative to show that the underlying alleged paper document is a forgery rather than to show that some on-line image is.
Executive Summary Re NBC Defined in Constitution Plus 4 SCOTUS Cases | by Patriot35 | @ SCRIBD.com
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55105383/Executive-Summary-Re-NBC-Defined-in-Constitution-Plus-4-SCOTUS-Cases
Five Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution | by M Publius Goat | @ SCRIBD.com
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-Used-in-the-US-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
First off no on line image should be accepted as real even with a seal.
@ paraleaglenm
Said " I typed the 'kerned' examples using the Underwood. A better example was the 'ny' part of Kenya."
I am in hopes you can scan that and send it to Charles or Mario so they can post what you are talking about.
I am thinking you have this underwood and can reproduce the results but can get a better reproduction when you type ny than you can when you type other letters.
Then maybe you also have me confused.
Mario,
I'm not trying to get into a p*ssing match with you here and I'm not sure why you're getting so defensive. We're trying to weed out the technical possibilities in order to avoid false accusations. Not only do uninformed, hasty accusations make us look bad, but they undermine our credibility.
paralegalnm said he recognized the typewriter from a unique serif on the number '8' that was peculiar to an Underwood typewriter. I'm sure that can be easily checked out because I've never seen such a font used on an IBM typewriter, old or new.
As far as the kerning goes, the typewriter used for this would most likely have been mechanical. The mechanical process would be such. 1) A key is pressed and the first arm strikes the paper and pulls back, 2) the carriage moves over one type block 3) the next key is pressed and the second arm strikes the paper and pulls back, etc. Unfortunately, mechanical typewriters are imprecise beasts and it was easy to override their timings with quick successive keystrokes. (Anyone who had typing in class will remember slapping the keys on the keyboard all at once so the typing arms would jam together and you had to reach in to unjam them.) Well, let’s say you have a typist who is pretty fast. Here’s what can happen. 1) Key one is pressed and the first arm strikes the paper and pulls back. 2) Carriage begins moving over one type block 3) Second key is pressed in quick succession causing that second key to strike while carriage is still in transit to the next block, tightening the apparent kerning by intruding in on the first character’s text block. Plus, there is also the possibility that a misaligned arm for the ‘p’ would offset it to the left and intrude on the ‘a’ type block.
As far as the speed of the typist, who knows? But if my job was to type forms all day, I’d get pretty fast at it too. I sort of 'hunt and peck' and still type at 70WPM so I could definitely see a clerk getting pretty fast, too.
“My article shows that, assuming the on-line image of the underlying alleged paper long-form Certificate of Live Birth is real, the underlying document is a forgery because of the kerning.” And my assertion is that the document was assembled, so it’s impossible to tell what’s real and what isn’t. Instead, what I’ve proffered up is proof of manipulation. Without the original, it will be impossible to tell what’s real and what isn’t. Proof of manipulation means that the original needs to be offered to rule out forgery.
Finally, let me add one other twist. There is the possibility that this document was partially generated with free typewriter fonts available all over the web such as this one. Most of these fonts have very peculiar patterns to them and a good researcher should be able to determine if a ‘typewriter’ font was used rather than actual type samples, especially for any letter, numbers or symbols they didn't have an original sample for.
"Silly?"
With Mr. Apuzzo's permission, please go to http://paraleaglenm.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/debunking-birth-certificate-forgery-claims/
There, you can download a JPEG file of an unfiltered scan (720 dpi) of actual keystrokes from a Standard Underwood.
Follow the instructions, and you can measure for yourself normal and forced 'kerning' due to keystrokes made faster than the platen indexes. Very simple, and very common in typing on a manual typewriter.
Bdwilcox,
You come over to my blog and attempt to debunk my article regarding kerning. I defend my position and then you say you do not want "to get into a p*ssing match" and that "[w]e're trying to weed out the technical possibilities in order to avoid false accusations."
I would not call it a "p*ssing match" but rather defending one's position. After all, as you said, "[w]e're trying to weed out the technical possibilities in order to avoid false accusations."
Now you come up with all these possiblitites as to what could or could not have occurred with the typewriter. But you conveniently do not come up with all these possibilities when it comes to your own theories. So you look to poke holes in other peoples' work but avoid pocking holes in your own work.
Your whole presentation regarding kerning is based on conjecture and worse, based on what you personally do. You offer no opinion from any expert on the issue of kerning.
You keep talking about an Underwood typewriter but yet do not tell me that you know that such a typewriter was used to create the Obama birth certificate.
I never said that an IBM typewriter was used. That was someone else also pocking holes in my work by saying that the IBM Executive typewriter had proportional spacing which could produce kerning and that such a typewriter could have been used. Of course, I have not seen any evidence that proportional spacing can produce kerning.
Your typist speed theory did not make sense before and it still does not make any sense.
I support the work of the many researchers regarding the manipulation of the on-line image of the alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth. But I do not appreciate someone taking shots at me without any foundation and for what appears to be some ulterior motive.
A hunt and peck typist may be quite proficient. However, a trained "touch" qwerty typist would be more likely to hold a secretarial job in 1961.
With that in mind, my Jr. High typing training (I had a real stickler for a teacher, God bless her!) and that provided by the respected Mavis Beacon (a popular computer program) typing system provide that the "n" and the "y" keys both are executed by the index finger of the right hand. Thus, I think it would have been a very amazing typist that could beat the speed of the machine regarding this specific letter combination.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that Hawaii had such a typist in their office in 1961. Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that same typist to execute many other even more compressed letter combinations with key sequences involving less complicated patterns using more than one finger?
I went over and took a look at:
http://paraleaglenm.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/debunking-birth-certificate-forgery-claims/
It seems the tail of the "y" does go over into the space of what ever letter is next to it.
Can you do that with any other letter that doesn't tail off to the left as the "y" does?
Again it doesn't really matter we all are just spinning our wheels so to speak, until someone in a place of power cares to do something about all this.
The courts have sure shut it down. As did all of congress and the media.
Common folk care about putting food on the table and doing what they do.
That is just the way most people are. Those in power know this better than I do.
Take a look at this Free Republic 2004 article on the Dan Rather-CBC forged documents caper.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214504/posts
It's like 2004 all over again. I thank FS for sending me the email with this article included as a link.
A new site which has some new features dealing with the far left controlled and increasingly pro-Obama controlled speach Facebook and also for the other social tools and communication tools such as Twitter, etc. that are pretty impressive. Check out this new site and online tool kit for patriots to spread our message and fight back to save and protect our Republic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP5PPMv-rTU&feature=youtu.be
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Robert, I had the same thoughts how the left-right hand qwerty letters had a better chance to result in typewriter 'kerning.'
While a secretary in the 60's would have extraordinary typing skills (My Mom could type like a demon, and shorthand too!) a clerk filling out forms might not require such skills.
As for the rest of you, I covered most of your questions on the linked blog . . . and you can download the image scanned from a sample typed from my Underwood. The '8' on the Underwood is unique. There is an Olivetti TT Typefont out there, as well as Typist . . .
I am not a Birth Certificate guy . . . I researched naturalization law and was the first to suggest that Haw Stat 338-5 would allow a Kenyan-born Obama to have a Hawaiian birth record (not a certificate).
Obama had British citizenship at birth, and was a statutory U.S. citizen at birth upon abandonment of the bigamist father . . . he dealienaged of his Indonesian citizesnship at age 19, meeting the five-year continuous residency requirement of 1952 INA.
DixHistory,
I also took a look at http://paraleaglenm.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/debunking-birth-certificate-forgery-claims/.
You stated that it "seems" that there is kearning.
On the contrary, I do not see any kearning by the "y."
The first "y" clearly shows that there is no kearning. The second "y" could have some slight bleeding of ink from the letter "y" which makes it appear as though part of the "y" is extending a bit to the left under the letter next to it. But this is not kearning.
There is no kerning in the examples.
Also, the kearning in my article is with the letter "p" onto the letter "a" which precedes it in the word "Kapiolani." Why does paraleaglenm not work on "debunking" that?
"But I do not appreciate someone taking shots at me without any foundation and for what appears to be some ulterior motive."
I'm not taking shots at you, I'm trying to warn you off of declaring a document a forgery because a couple letters in a typewritten document appear 'kerned'.
So what's my foundation for such an opinion? Unlike your 'expert' Karl Denninger aka the Market Ticker Guy who posted this info, I'm actually an expert in the field who does legal document imaging for a living, graphic arts for a second job and specializes in digital photo restoration. I have seen innumerable numbers of typewritten pages in their original paper form and digital scanned form and I can tell you I have seen this type of letterspacing issue before, oftentimes to the degree where letters are actually overlapping each other. So let's look at what could result in this type of 'kerning' in a typewriter?
1) As discussed, a typist who types letter combinations faster than the carriage advance mechanism of the typewriter can keep up
2) Bent strikers on a typewriter that make them strike too far to the left or right. Notice that the main offender here in multiple places is the letter 'a' and it goes too far to the right.
3) Paper slippage on the roller when the carriage advances. This could also account for the vertically misaligned characters in some words.
4) Worn teeth or slipping belts of the carriage advance mechanism not uniformly advancing the carriage after each key strike.
5) The carriage being backspaced at a point and the backspace not being proportional to the space originally advanced
6) Dithered pixels in the scan getting blocked up if someone cranks the contrast as it appears they have done here. The scanner dithers edge pixels to smooth out the image (called anti-aliasing) but when the contrast is spiked, that formally grey edge pixel becomes black and makes the letter appear wider than it was in the paper original. Also note that one of the kerning examples Mr. Denninger offers appears to be a double strike of the letter 't' in "University" which would makes the letter bloom farther to the right than it normally would.
So here we have six possibilities that could have resulted in odd 'kerning' like we're seeing here. Back in 2008, someone asked a question why their typewriter was overlapping letters and the answer was that it needed service.
I have made it clear that if you want my background in this field you can just shoot me an email. But if you don't believe me or think what I'm saying is bunk, there are licensed forensic examiners who specialize in typewritten documents you could check with.
"But you conveniently do not come up with all these possibilities when it comes to your own theories. So you look to poke holes in other peoples' work but avoid pocking holes in your own work."
I gave you a detailed overview of possible scenarios that could have resulted in the bizarre pixel arrangement we're seeing in this document. I could have written pages concerning these technicalities but kept it as short as possible to keep from flooding your blog. If someone has any other explanation I'd love to hear it because there really isn't any other way to explain the lack of dithering in a color scan and multiple elements being pixel-exact duplicates of each other.
"Silly?"
YES!
You say that his happens with familiar words or letter combinations, and I just think it would be silly for Kenya to be one of those such familiar words. So then I thought, well maybe "ny" is a popular letter combination, so i looked that up, http://typophile.com/files/most%20common%20digraphs.jpg
and again your theory isn't gaining any ground with me. I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just saying it sounds silly.
So then I think, well this typist is not going to say to themselves, I'm going to make this specific form for this specific person look real nice by typing these few specific letter combinations real fast and all the other letter combinations at a regular speed just for this specific form, either they do it for all of them or none of them, you wouldn't decide to do it for one and not another. So when we looked at the other birth certificates and it doesn't show up it further makes your explanation sound even more silly, at least to me.
The p and a would be executed with the pinkies - the weakest fingers - not good candidates for kerning.
It might also be worth noting that a person, trained or not, who is completing a legal document would be more conscious of accuracy than speed.
While I am an adequate typist on my good days most of my perspective comes from my musical training. Finger dexterity is a really big deal in my field.
In any case, it might be a better use of our time to develop simple presentations explaining NBC and Mr. Obama's lack of qualification that could be given at town hall and precinct meetings. We may also gain more attention if we start going in groups to our representative's and senator's offices to give them clear documentation and let them know that they are accountable.
Hi folks,
I learned to type on a manual in a high school typing class, and used electric (then computers) at various jobs (worked as an engineer - when NONE of my fellow engineers could type). So my experience is unprofessional in a forensic sense but I can remember keys sticking and letters typing out of alignment on several occasions when I got up to speed.
We're missing the larger picture, I think, and our frustration is showing! Obama is already actively campaigning for 2012 and is as of yet unstoppable.
I got to thinking - surely there are various examples in US history of candidates who have tried to run for President and who submitted the requisit ballot petitions who were turned down for lack of eligibility. Some dude from Nicaragua or such comes to mind. There should be at least a few examples from almost every state if we could look through historical election board archives.
Would that then indicate prior proof that local or state ballot officials DO have sway in determining whose name goes on a ballot? Couldn't some of these various cases then be re-opened?
Also, the US attorneys in last week's Taitz/Kreep pow-wow at the Ninth Circuit seems to intimate that it was CONGRESS's job to ensure that eligibility requirements were met, not the courts. Doesn't that give more credence to Kercher v Obama, also allowing a re-opening of the case?
Praying for the first DEMOCRAT who will finally throw Obama elibility under the bus in his or her own attempt to maintain power in the House or Senate...
Check out this link:
How to run for President in Massachusetts (from 2004!)
http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleprim/runforpres.htm
Maryland is similar:
"The Secretary of State shall certify the name of a presidential candidate on the ballot when the Secretary has determined, in the Secretary's sole discretion and consistent with party rules, that the candidate's candidacy is GENERALLY ADVOCATED OR RECOGNIZED IN THE NEWS MEDIA THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES (emphasis mine) or in Maryland... "
"The names of the candidates for President qualifying under this section shall be certified to the local boards by the State Board..."
per Maryland Code 8-502 (2)at http://michie.lexisnexis.com/maryland/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=
So Obama openly campaigning for 2012 gets recognition in the news that he is doing such so that the DNC can say "Obama is recognized as actively running for President so we are putting his name on the ballot." NO petition necessary, and DW Schultz, new DNC chair (as radical leftie as Obama) says "he's cool, we vouch for him" and all the little State Election Board officials (including Democrat-heavy Maryland) comly because no one's got the guts this time to say "NO." Or at least, not those states with the most number of congressional electors...
Isn't that why BHO finally released his LFBC? So as to be shown in the "news media" that he is supposedly born in Hawaii? Knowing full well, of course, that the FATHER ISSUE has not - and is not - being acted upon by any court or by Congress?
Let's not forget that the sudden release of this document coincided with the full knowledge (on his part, not ours) that Usama bin Laden was sitting in his fancy hut in Pakistan at least since last fall, and the Navy SEALS were already in training operations (April 7 and 13) to take him out, and by the time the BC was ferried back from Hawaii and/or computer-altered and hit the presses, SEAL Team Six was already basically on its way to the hit job? Wag the dog, anyone?
BHO flubbed up - he should have had UBL killed first, THEN released the BC... the BC would have maybe gotten less notice...
BUT! All the debates on whether the released BC is fradulent or not are entirely MOOT unless we can actually get a judge to (1) give us standing, and (2) actually examine the evidence!
(and we better hire a team of nationally-recognized professional forensic analysists...)
Is the best we can hope for to combat the "media recognition
of BHO as a candidate is to have equal "media recognition" of a fraudelent birth certificate? Who is going to air it? WND, for ex, is regarded as a kook site, and the big heavies aren't touching it. Drudge pulled the first post I saw (about one day after the BH release) about layering down within a day of its posting...
@Puzo1
I totally agree. That is why I asked him if he could do this with any other letter that doesn't tail off to the left.
In no way do I think what he is showing is what you are showing.
No doubt this BC is a fake just on how it was offered up. Seems to be done to throw it in our collective faces.
In your opinion what do you make of this on that so called BC, Were it states in part, I certify this is a true copy or "abstract" of the record on file.
It seems to me were abstract is I have often seen the words true and correct copy.
Is this wiggle room?
From day one I knew obama was a fraud. I didn't know all of Congress, The Media and our Courts were in on it.
Powers that be, doubled down on most people in this country not knowing any thing about our United States history. Even if they did what could they really do about any of it?
Seems they got it right. I also don't think Obama is smart enough to even think of this on his own, much less pull it off.
To me obama is a yes man. Take the money, have fun, do what he is told and keep his mouth shut unless he is told to speak.
Just my opinion.
bdwilcox,
Can you give us an explanation of what was the final word on the kerning issue in the Dan Rather/CBS fraudulent documents case. Since you say you are an expert on kerning, please provide us your expert opinion on the Rather/CBS kerning.
You do not address the specific case of the "Kapiolani" kerning? Why not? Why do you continue to talk about the "Kenya" kerning but do not touch the "Kapiolani" kerning?
You do not show how your proffered possibities of kerning could have actually produced the "Kapiolani" kerning which Karl Denninger has discovered.
Given all your proffered possiblities for a clerk typist producing kerning with a typewriter in 1961, you do not provide any explanation why kerning, whatever is the cause, occurred in the "Kapiolani" word but not in others.
For those following this issue, I recommend they read Mr. Denninger's analysis found at
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=2534123
Mario,
Concerning the authenticity of the Rathergate documents, there was no final word on the Rathergate story. All document forensics experts had to go on were a bunch of low-res faxes that are impossible to authenticate without access to source documents. Some experts say they could be forgeries while others still insist they could be authentic. What sunk Dan Rather was his unprofessionalism in not researching the source of the documents and not authenticating them before shouting from the rooftops that they were proof of anything, exactly what I've been trying to warn you of here.
So what led experts to think the documents might have been a modern forgery? Multiple things. What appears to be a Times New Roman typeface that wasn't in use at the time of the document's creation, super-scripting that wasn't in use on typewriters of the time, improper date formatting, signature inconsistencies, and proportional letter-spacing not available on a typewriter.
Proportional letter-spacing is related to kerning in that relative white space around the letters of a word are adjusted to avoid excessive white space within the word and to make the word's appearance more "solid" or proportional, pleasing to the eye and easier to read. For example, if I have the word 'itinerary' on a typewriter, the beginning of the word looks odd because the letter-spacing for each character is a fixed width but the letters "iti" are very thin, creating a lot of white space around them. The computer will examine the letters of the word and scrunch the "iti" together to avoid excessive white space between those letters. There was no manual kerning with this method and each letter of the word is 'kerned' by the computer to make the word have a consistent density. But this affects the whole word and each letter in it, especially the thin letters and numbers like i, t, l, f and 1 as well as various symbols and punctuation.
My conclusion with the Rathergate documents is the same as most experts. It looks like a forgery, has the hallmarks of a forgery, but without source documents I can't say that it's definitely a forgery. (which I've been consistently saying about this long form).
"You do not address the specific case of the "Kapiolani" kerning? Why not? Why do you continue to talk about the "Kenya" kerning but do not touch the "Kapiolani" kerning?"
Actually I did by saying that one of the main culprits appears to be the letter "a" that is striking too far to the right and intruding on the space of the letter next to it. This is not only seen in the "ap" of "Kapiolani", but also in "Caucasian" between the "au" and the "an". The "an" in Kapiolani actually appear to be striking over each other and the "a" is too close again multiple times in "Kalanianaole" and in "Oahu".
Let me put it this way. The overlap of one character with the other is by 1 pixel. Ultimately, you're trying to determine 1 pixel accuracy from a low-res scanned document that's been processed by unknown means. This odd spacing of letters is just that: "odd". But it's not 'proof' of a forgery. The document has many other hallmarks of manipulation with curious letter-spacing being one more suspicious artifact that needs to be looked into. Unfortunately, the most glaring discrepancies in this document are of a technical nature and will go over the heads of people who aren't familiar with image processing. But if you've worked a lot with digital images, you only have to take one look at this document to realize its been manipulated, is highly suspect and demands authentication against the source document to determine its veracity.
Mario,
Re: May 10, 2011 9:57 AM post
So then you, like Doublee, are also not only familiar with the 1961 Underwood typewriter...
I submitted no posts regarding an Underwood typewriter, so I am a bit confused why you attributed something to me of which I have no knowledge.
I am definitely not familiar with the Underwood typewriter.
bdwilcox,
Did anyone argue in the Dan Rather/CBS kerning matter like you do now that a typewriter could have produced the kerning?
Mario,
"Did anyone argue in the Dan Rather/CBS kerning matter like you do now that a typewriter could have produced the kerning?"
First, I'm not saying a mechanical typewriter in normal operation kerns anything. What I'm arguing is that there are ways it can generate what appears to be kerning either through user input or malfunction from wear and tear.
Second, the issue with the Rathergate memo wasn't kerning; it was proportional letter-spacing. And, yes, Bill Glennon, a technical consultant with 13 years of typewriter repair experience, said some typewriters of the time (1972) could produce proportional letter-spacing like that scene in the Rathergate documents. Conversely, typeface engineers from Adobe (Thomas Phinney) and others argued not that typewriters of the time were incapable of proportional letter-spacing, but the proportional letter-spacing on the Rathergate documents was too fine for a typewriter of the period. In other words, they analyzed whole words, sentences and paragraphs and compared them to both typewritten samples from period typewriters and modern word processor samples. What they didn't do is take two letters out of context and claim they were proof of forgery.
But the Rathergate conclusion is moot when it comes to the authenticity of Obama's long form birth certificate. Rathergate was possibility of document-wide, highly precise proportional letter-spacing and font hinting employed by a word processor which would be impossible from a typewriter. (But even that conclusion is still questionable since the documents they had to analyze were so low res and skewed from the fax.)
On the other hand, Obama's long form would be the possibility of true kerning done in a graphic arts program like Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop or InDesign. Unlike the Rathergate documents, there are ways such isolated anomolies can be generated with a manual typewriter or image post-processing as I've described in the above six examples.
re: Silly and Kerning
The 'expert' said kerning on a manual typewriter was impossible. I proved I can produce a 'kerning' effect at will on my Underwood.
If you want any combination of letters 'kerned,' I can do it as described, and illustrated. And there was NO BLEEDING . . . on paper or due to pixels from the scan. In fact, I specified that I ignored the faintest row of pixels to avoid error.
The real question is, for your consideration: if Obama's mother was a French exchange student with legal, long-term residency in Hawaii, would Obama be a U.S. citizen upon abandonment of Obama, Sr., or French?
This involves two questions of law. Does the 14th Amendment require one U.S. citizen parent to satisfy 'under the jurisdiction thereof'? And, is citizenship by one U.S. parent a Natural Born Citizen.
There is more law involved, and I included that legal analysis in two blogs, but everyone is too lazy to actually read the damn law!
These are the critical questions, and have NOTHING to do with a bloody Birth Certificate.
paraleaglenm,
I do not see where you proved that you can "produce a 'kerning' effect at will on [your]... Underwood." I looked at your exemplars and simply do not agree with you that they show kerning. One can see that there is no kerning if one uses a vertical line visual tool.
You asked "if Obama's mother was a French exchange student with legal, long-term residency in Hawaii, would Obama be a U.S. citizen upon abandonment of Obama, Sr., or French?" In keeping with current application of the 14th Amendment and 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401(a), Obama would be a "citizen of the United States" "at birth." This is a "born" citizen (naturalized at birth) and not an Article II "natural born" citizen which he is not.
Pursuant to current U.S. Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment per Wong Kim Ark with which I do not agree, a child born in the U.S. to alien parents who are domiciled and not serving in a foreign diplomatic capacity or serving an invading army is a 14th Amendment "citizen of the United States." Such a result cannot be gotten from a common sense reading of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment. Hence, under the court tortured interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the Amendment does not require at least one U.S. citizen parent in order to satisfy the jurisdictional element and thus produce a "citizen of the United States." But again, the 14th Amendment does not nor was it ever intended by Congress to define an Article II "natural born Citizen." Rather, it only constitutionally guaranteed that former slaves and their descendents, who for generations had not been subject to any foreign power, would as a minimum become "citizens of the United States," the same type of citizen which appears in the Article II grandfather clause and which today is obsolete as a citizen class for purposes of becoming eligible to be President.
You also ask if U.S. citizenship of one parent can create a Natural Born Citizen. The answer is “no,” because a U.S. citizen father and mother are both needed, along with birth on U.S. soil or its jurisdictional equivalent in order to produce an Article II "natural born Citizen." Both U.S. territorial jurisdiction (giving rise to jus soli allegiance and citizenship) and U.S. parents (father and mother either one of whom give rise to jus sanguinis allegiance and citizenship) are needed in order for a child to be born under U.S. law with no foreign allegiance which is what a "natural born Citizen" is. I have addressed the need for two U.S. citizen parents in my legal filings with the federal courts in the Kerchner v. Obama/Congress case and in many of my essays on this blog. To read one of these essays, see my September 8, 2009 essay entitled, "The Natural Born Citizen Clause of Our U.S. Constitution Requires that Both of the Child’s Parents Be U.S. Citizens At the Time of Birth," which can be accessed at this blog at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html
I also agree with you that the birth certificate, i.e., place of birth, issue is not dispositive of the question of whether Obama is an Article II "natural born Citizen," for he must still show that he was born to a U.S. citizen father and mother. Since he has conceded and all the available evidence shows that his father never became a U.S. citizen let alone be one at the time of Obama’s birth, we know he cannot. I have been arguing this since at least December 2008.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=297273
I agree that Wong Kim Ark misinterpreted the 14th Amendment. Your further analysis is to the point and dead on, i.e., the 'jurisdiction' clause operated upon the fact that slaves had no foreign ties introducing alienage.
My example, however, proved that Horace Gray's interpretation was ridiculous to the absurd, for upon birth, that child had THREE nationalities.
As tradition, history, and law must dictate, the nationality of the father must be looked to first.
Of course, in a Feudal or Socialist societies, all issue from the womb or soil either belongs to the Lord, or the State.
According to legislated Act, not Gray's misconstruing of the 14th Amendment (Congress still can claim Plenary Power and void Wong Kim Ark by adding a short definition in 8 USC 1401a), the father as legal parent is looked to first; upon his absence the mother . . . the place of birth is incidental to any residency requirements of the former or latter.
As for kerning, the sample I uploaded was ravaged by compression, but using the vertical line or rectangular marquee tools, the 'ty' shows the first (typed normally) having no kerning, and the second significant kerning.
This recent alleged Birth Certificate released, even IF it were an actual copy of one on file in HI, would be a copy of the THIRD birth certificate created for Obama that is in the HI records.
Do not forget that Obama WAS IN FACT ADOPTED by his step father. We know for a fact he went under his step father’s name. This adoption would have caused for a NEW birth certificate to be created which would cause for his ORIGINAL birth certificate to forever become SEALED! Not even Obama himself can get a copy of that original after it has been sealed by the State without obtaining a court order to force the State to release it.
Then after he was adopted at some point he had his adopted name changed back again which would have cause for his second birth certificate on record to be SEALED forever and the State created a THIRD birth certificate on record to reflect his new name again.
I was adopted by my step father. My name was changed to my step father’s last name and the State created a NEW birth certificate that shows my step father listed on it as my birth father. There is NOTHING on my birth certificate that indicates there was ever any kind of change made to my birth certificate. No one would ever know that was not my birth father or that I was adopted and my name was changed. The ONLY way anyone would ever know is if I told them.
I recently called our State vital statistics office and inquired about getting a copy of my ORIGINAL birth certificate that showed my real birth father listed and my original last name before I was adopted. The State told me that I can NEVER get a copy of that because that record is SEALED. Even though I know I was adopted, and know who my birth father was, and the fact he even deceased now, there would be no reason to have to prevent me from getting a copy, the State said it did no matter. They said the ONLY way I can ever get a copy of that ORIGINAL birth certificate is by getting a court order from a judge, which is highly unlikely unless you have a good enough reason for needing to get a copy.
Remember how many times the State of HI stated that even if Obama requested his ORIGINAL long form birth certificate that they could not release it to him? This went right over everyone’s head. HI was telling the truth but no one caught what they were actually saying. What HI was saying was basically, because Obama’s ORIGINAL birth certificate on file has been SEALED because of an adoption that NO ONE can ever get a copy of that. The ONLY way anyone can ever get a copy of that ORIGINAL birth certificate that has been FOREVER SEALED is only by obtaining a court order!
Also recall how many times the State of HI has referred to this as Obama’s birth records! Records as in PLURAL meaning they have more than one birth record on file. And the ONLY birth certificate that can be released is the most current birth certificate record that was created by the State of HI which would be the birth certificate that was created and updated after Obama had his ADOPTED NAME changed back to Obama from Soetoro.
So even “IF” this recent long form BC that was released is legit, that is NOT a copy of the ORIGINAL on file. This can only be a copy of his THIRD birth certificate that the State of HI has created and issued for Obama. The ORIGINAL would be the one that was created right after his birth. Then a SECOND birth certificate would have been created to show his adopted name after he was adopted by his step father. Then a THIRD birth certificate would have been created by the State of HI after Obama had his adopted name changed back to Obama again. So this birth certificate released would be a copy of that THIRD birth certificate created and NOT a copy of the first ORIGINAL birth certificate because that birth record is forever SEALED and can NOT be released absent a court order!
Horus,
You do not really expect that I would approve for publication your death threats and charge of racism against me contained in your comment.
I will address one question that you raised. You said: "[S]how me where it says that BOTH parents must be citizens to convey NBC.
Show me!"
Read my many essays on this blog and my court filings in the Kerchner v. Obama/Congress case and you will be shown.
FollowTheConstitution,
A simple point that is missed by persons arguing about an amended birth certificate in relation to a possible Obama adoption is that while they are correct that the amended birth certificate resulting from an adoption contains the names of the adoptive parents and not of the natural parents, it still must and does contain the true place of birth. Hence, if Obama was born in Kenya or someother place, the amended birth certificate would still say so and would not say he was born in Hawaii.
Well if HI has a birth record for Obama and if he was not born in HI, the HI birth record would still show HI as a place of birth if the birth was merely a registered birth where someone signed off swearing he was born in HI. Such as a home birth. And for all anyone knows, Ann or her parents may have even known a doctor that was willing to sign off on it stating it was a home birth. The biggest issue is being able to see the actual original birth record to see if it did in fact name a hospital and what doctor signed off on the BC if there was a doctor involved.
Also, assuming it was a legal adoption where they had to create and new BC and then create a third BC when he had his name legally changed back, WHO provides the information on what forms when a new birth record is created? Is it possible through two birth record changes that someone could have slipped a hospital name in where HI never verified it with the original birth record where the future birth records would now show a hospital name listed? The only thing that is ever going to resolve anything is to see the original birth record that was created, as far as place of birth is concerned.
There was a problem with the google blogger. They were down for some time. My blog lost some of the latest comments. I will cut and paste them in.
bdwilcox has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
Mario,
"Did anyone argue in the Dan Rather/CBS kerning matter like you do now that a typewriter could have produced the kerning?"
First, I'm not saying a mechanical typewriter in normal operation kerns anything. What I'm arguing is that there are ways it can generate what appears to be kerning either through user input or malfunction from wear and tear.
Second, the issue with the Rathergate memo wasn't kerning; it was proportional letter-spacing. And, yes, Bill Glennon, a technical consultant with 13 years of typewriter repair experience, said some typewriters of the time (1972) could produce proportional letter-spacing like that scene in the Rathergate documents. Conversely, typeface engineers from Adobe (Thomas Phinney) and others argued not that typewriters of the time were incapable of proportional letter-spacing, but the proportional letter-spacing on the Rathergate documents was too fine for a typewriter of the period. In other words, they analyzed whole words, sentences and paragraphs and compared them to both typewritten samples from period typewriters and modern word processor samples. What they didn't do is take two letters out of context and claim they were proof of forgery.
But the Rathergate conclusion is moot when it comes to the authenticity of Obama's long form birth certificate. Rathergate was possibility of document-wide, highly precise proportional letter-spacing and font hinting employed by a word processor which would be impossible from a typewriter. (But even that conclusion is still questionable since the documents they had to analyze were so low res and skewed from the fax.)
On the other hand, Obama's long form would be the possibility of true kerning done in a graphic arts program like Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop or InDesign. Unlike the Rathergate documents, there are ways such isolated anomolies can be generated with a manual typewriter or image post-processing as I've described in the above six examples.
Posted by bdwilcox to Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers at May 11, 2011 12:16 PM
I followed the kerning research links and read what was there. My conclusion is this;
1.Vertical kerning is a natural phenonena on keyed typewriters.
2. Horizontal kerning is an intentional type pattern that was available only for custom commercial printing in 1961.
3. A document from 1961 may have been produced with kerning in the form text.
4. No field text in 1961 could have horizontal kerning but could have vertical kerning.
5. A computer can be used to horizontally or vertically kern through programming but on certain computers only may both be done simultaneously. Windows and OS/2 exclude this function.
In summary, the image presented as a copy/ facsimilie is not a copy of original documents. It is a facsimilie of a form only. The data in the form is not old data or original data but data inserted in the form using computer graphics and digital fonts unavailable in 1961. In other words, it is an image of an image created to satisfy a purpose.
Puzo1 has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
paraleaglenm,
I do not see where you proved that you can "produce a 'kerning' effect at will on [your]... Underwood." I looked at your exemplars and simply do not agree with you that they show kerning. One can see that there is no kerning if one uses a vertical line visual tool.
You asked "if Obama's mother was a French exchange student with legal, long-term residency in Hawaii, would Obama be a U.S. citizen upon abandonment of Obama, Sr., or French?" In keeping with current application of the 14th Amendment and 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401(a), Obama would be a "citizen of the United States" "at birth." This is a "born" citizen (naturalized at birth) and not an Article II "natural born" citizen which he is not.
Pursuant to current U.S. Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment per Wong Kim Ark with which I do not agree, a child born in the U.S. to alien parents who are domiciled and not serving in a foreign diplomatic capacity or serving an invading army is a 14th Amendment "citizen of the United States." Such a result cannot be gotten from a common sense reading of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment. Hence, under the court tortured interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the Amendment does not require at least one U.S. citizen parent in order to satisfy the jurisdictional element and thus produce a "citizen of the United States." But again, the 14th Amendment does not nor was it ever intended by Congress to define an Article II "natural born Citizen." Rather, it only constitutionally guaranteed that former slaves and their descendents, who for generations had not been subject to any foreign power, would as a minimum become "citizens of the United States," the same type of citizen which appears in the Article II grandfather clause and which today is obsolete as a citizen class for purposes of becoming eligible to be President.
You also ask if U.S. citizenship of one parent can create a Natural Born Citizen. The answer is “no,” because a U.S. citizen father and mother are both needed, along with birth on U.S. soil or its jurisdictional equivalent in order to produce an Article II "natural born Citizen." Both U.S. territorial jurisdiction (giving rise to jus soli allegiance and citizenship) and U.S. parents (father and mother who either one give rise to jus sanguinis allegiance and citizenship) are needed in order for a child to be born under U.S. law with no foreign allegiance which is what a "natural born Citizen" is. I have addressed the need for two U.S. citizen parents in my legal filings with the federal courts in the Kerchner v. Obama/Congress case and in many of my essays on this blog. To read one of these essays, see my September 8, 2009 essay entitled, "The Natural Born Citizen Clause of Our U.S. Constitution Requires that Both of the Child’s Parents Be U.S. Citizens At the Time of Birth," which can be accessed at this blog at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html
I also agree with you that the birth certificate, i.e., place of birth, issue is not dispositive of the question of whether Obama is an Article II "natural born Citizen," for he must still show that he was born to a U.S. citizen father and mother. Since he has conceded and all the available evidence shows that his father never became a U.S. citizen let alone be one at the time of Obama’s birth, we know he cannot. I have been arguing this since at least December 2008.
Posted by Puzo1 to Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers at May 11, 2011 6:57 PM
MichaelN has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=297273
Posted by MichaelN to Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers at May 11, 2011 9:55 PM
paraleaglenm (http://paraleaglenm.wordpress.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
I agree that Wong Kim Ark misinterpreted the 14th Amendment. Your further analysis is to the point and dead on, i.e., the 'jurisdiction' clause operated upon the fact that slaves had no foreign ties introducing alienage.
My example, however, proved that Horace Gray's interpretation was ridiculous to the absurd, for upon birth, that child had THREE nationalities.
As tradition, history, and law must dictate, the nationality of the father must be looked to first.
Of course, in a Feudal or Socialist societies, all issue from the womb or soil either belongs to the Lord, or the State.
According to legislated Act, not Gray's misconstruing of the 14th Amendment (Congress still can claim Plenary Power and void Wong Kim Ark by adding a short definition in 8 USC 1401a), the father as legal parent is looked to first; upon his absence the mother . . . the place of birth is incidental to any residency requirements of the former or latter.
As for kerning, the sample I uploaded was ravaged by compression, but using the vertical line or rectangular marquee tools, the 'ty' shows the first (typed normally) having no kerning, and the second significant kerning.
Posted by paraleaglenm to Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers at May 12, 2011 8:58 AM
FollowTheConstitution has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
This recent alleged Birth Certificate released, even IF it were an actual copy of one on file in HI, would be a copy of the THIRD birth certificate created for Obama that is in the HI records.
Do not forget that Obama WAS IN FACT ADOPTED by his step father. We know for a fact he went under his step father’s name. This adoption would have caused for a NEW birth certificate to be created which would cause for his ORIGINAL birth certificate to forever become SEALED! Not even Obama himself can get a copy of that original after it has been sealed by the State without obtaining a court order to force the State to release it.
Then after he was adopted at some point he had his adopted name changed back again which would have cause for his second birth certificate on record to be SEALED forever and the State created a THIRD birth certificate on record to reflect his new name again.
I was adopted by my step father. My name was changed to my step father’s last name and the State created a NEW birth certificate that shows my step father listed on it as my birth father. There is NOTHING on my birth certificate that indicates there was ever any kind of change made to my birth certificate. No one would ever know that was not my birth father or that I was adopted and my name was changed. The ONLY way anyone would ever know is if I told them.
I recently called our State vital statistics office and inquired about getting a copy of my ORIGINAL birth certificate that showed my real birth father listed and my original last name before I was adopted. The State told me that I can NEVER get a copy of that because that record is SEALED. Even though I know I was adopted, and know who my birth father was, and the fact he even deceased now, there would be no reason to have to prevent me from getting a copy, the State said it did no matter. They said the ONLY way I can ever get a copy of that ORIGINAL birth certificate is by getting a court order from a judge, which is highly unlikely unless you have a good enough reason for needing to get a copy.
Remember how many times the State of HI stated that even if Obama requested his ORIGINAL long form birth certificate that they could not release it to him? This went right over everyone’s head. HI was telling the truth but no one caught what they were actually saying. What HI was saying was basically, because Obama’s ORIGINAL birth certificate on file has been SEALED because of an adoption that NO ONE can ever get a copy of that. The ONLY way anyone can ever get a copy of that ORIGINAL birth certificate that has been FOREVER SEALED is only by obtaining a court order!
Also recall how many times the State of HI has referred to this as Obama’s birth records! Records as in PLURAL meaning they have more than one birth record on file. And the ONLY birth certificate that can be released is the most current birth certificate record that was created by the State of HI which would be the birth certificate that was created and updated after Obama had his ADOPTED NAME changed back to Obama from Soetoro.
So even “IF” this recent long form BC that was released is legit, that is NOT a copy of the ORIGINAL on file. This can only be a copy of his THIRD birth certificate that the State of HI has created and issued for Obama. The ORIGINAL would be the one that was created right after his birth. Then a SECOND birth certificate would have been created to show his adopted name after he was adopted by his step father. Then a THIRD birth certificate would have been created by the State of HI after Obama had his adopted name changed back to Obama again. So this birth certificate released would be a copy of that THIRD birth certificate created and NOT a copy of the first ORIGINAL birth certificate because that birth record is forever SEALED and can NOT be released absent a court order!
Posted May 12, 2011 12:16 PM
Puzo1 has left a new comment on your post "Obama’s On-Line Image of His Alleged 1961 Long-For...":
FollowTheConstitution,
A simple point that is missed by persons arguing about an amended birth certificate in relation to a possible Obama adoption is that while they are correct that the amended birth certificate resulting from an adoption contains the names of the adoptive parents and not of the natural parents, it still must and does contain the true place of birth. Hence, if Obama was born in Kenya or someother place, the amended birth certificate would still say so and would not say he was born in Hawaii.
Posted by Puzo1 to Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers at May 12, 2011 12:44 PM
Puzo1:
The Apr. 27 WHBC, however gives every indication that ii is some sort of abstract from a document delineating SAD/BHO as parents and the certificate number is close to that of the Nordyyke twins.
Tat seems to me to indicate that the answer lies elsewhere than "adoption" and sealing of BCs though I don't doubt he was "adopted" in some fashion in Indonesia - it may not have been a "normal" adopbion. Keep n mind all parties involved in this on-going soap opera are themselves serial scofflaws.
I think the paper I've done fromn the standpoint of assuming the WHBC is real (even though we know it isn't) as the Flying Monkeys insist is much more telling of the real situtaion ... and it shows Barky was not only not born in Kapiolani but was not born in an hospital in HI which means he was born outside the US of A. My paper uses the actual facts the WHBN presents and shows that most likely to be the case.
Dr. Conspiracy had the Lucas Smith Kenyan birth certificate examined by an expert. Below is what the expert wrote. The word “Kenya” appears on the pre-printed part of the Lucas Smith Kenyan birth certificate, not on any part that was typed with a typewriter. In any event, you can see how critical the kerning issue is.
Also, the problem with Dr. Conspiracy’s kerning analysis of the Smith birth certificate is that the alleged kerning on the pre-printed form could have been done in 1961 at a professional printer but it cannot be done with a typewriter. Lucas Smith explains: "Offset Lithography became the most popular form of commercial printing in the 1950s. The birth certificate template, of form, was most likely created on an offset lithography printing press. . . and NOT a letterpress."
Dr. Conspiracy responds: "However, you fail to say how offset lithography explains the kerning of “ny” that is probably the central argument of the article. . . . Should you at any time wish explain the “ny” . . . feel free to drop by."
Here is what Dr. Conspiracy’s expert said about the Lucas Smith certificate:
“The nail in the coffin that this is a forgery comes from a type issue we take for granted these days. In the line at the top which reads, Mombasa. British Protectorate of Kenya…. The give away is the kerning of the letters n and y in the word Kenya. The y is nestled beneath the n and it is impossible to duplicate that on a Linotype or in handset. No ligatures exist for that combination in metal or in mold. I know this for fact. When digital computer fonts are designed, the metrics or mechanical way letters sit together are refined into what is called kerning pairs. Two letters that will look better when set is what type designers do for a living. The word Kenya has this kerning pair of the n and y. This can only be done on a computer. There are a few other instances of this kerning issue in the document as well.
One other thing to consider. What is the actual size of the document? You cannot use the PDF for extracting that info, because it has been distorted by copying many times and poor scanning. European paper sizes are much different than US paper sizes.
I will examine this closer when I have a moment, but off the cuff, it’s a fake."
Then, Dr. Conspiracy adds his comments: "To illustrate the writers point, here are two images: the first showing 'ny' from the Smith certificate, and the second showing 'ny' from a book printed in 1942 I happened to have in my library. The descender on the 'y' actually tucks under the 'n' in the Smith certificate, but clearly not in the book example."
Note his expert called the kerning issue “the nail in the coffin.” You should see Dr. Conspiracy and his followers salivate at having what they erroneously believed was such a wonderful discovery about the Smith document. You can follow them along at
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/03/typography-on-the-lucas-smith-kenyan-birth-certificate/ where you will also find the above quotes.
I wonder why Dr. Conspiracy did not have that same expert address the kerning issue raised about Obama’s alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth? After all, he is such an expert on typewriters, printers, and kerning but we do not hear a single word from his expert. Rather, Dr. Conspiracy writes some weak article about his personal view on kerning which can be read here: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/05/cottage-industry/.
So what can we say about Dr. Conspiracy? He hires the big guns when he wants to debunk others on some issue (which he did not do with the Smith birth certificate). But when that same issue is used against him, we do not hear from that same expert but rather get Dr. Conspiracy's little kerning experiment explanation. Does that sound like some truth seeker to you?
New video release comparing of the obvious Kerning in the Obama alleged long from BC put on the White House servers on 27 April 2011 to the lack of same Kerning in the Nordyke long form BC, born within one day of each other and according to Obama, at the same hospital.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58vFN2FFu2U
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Dr. Frankstein created Obama's April 27, 2011 long-form Certificate of Live Birth.
A retired typographer who worked in the industry for 50 years has analyzed the Obama April 27, 2011 alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth. He concludes that the document contains different typewriter typeface letters which come from a number of different typewriters. Paul Irey, an expert in typefaces and typography, concludes that the forger(s) used different pieces of actual 1961 valid birth certificates from Hawaii to create the Obama birth certifificate. The problem for Obama is that the different typewriter letters which come from different typewriters prove that the document is a forgery, for a valid birth certificate would not contain typeface letters created by so many different typewriters.
"My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter," Irey told WND.
The anlaysis is presented by Jerome Corsi in his WND article which can be accessed at
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=308397
I wonder why Irey did not comment on the kerning that exists in the Obama released alleged birth certificate. Again, kerning is a way to type letters in such a way as to space them together so they look better. With letters extending into each other's vertical space, kerning cannot be done on a 1961-era typewriter which is what a clerk at Kapi'olani Hospital would have used to fill in the requested information on a valid pre-printed form of a 1961 birth certificate.
Again, where is the FBI and Congress who need to be doing a full-blown investigation of this serious crime which presents a serious security threat not only for the United States but for the entire world.
Another expert speaks out on the April 27, 2011 internet image of the Obama alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth. See http://thepoliticalsandbox.blogspot.com/2011/06/flat-scan.html and http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=314717. Gary Poyssick, an Adobe software expert, while not going as far as to declare the document a forgery, makes the following conclusions.
1. The image is assembled in layers which contain suspicious “Clipping Masks” which he says should not be found in a normal scan of a document.
2. The scanned birth certificate does not contain a background which would be consistent with scanning it. Scanners contain a white plastic that is glued to the underside of the cover of the scanner and which is placed upon the document that rest on the glass surface when the cover is closed. That white plastic background creates a certain image on the scanned document. The Obama birth certificate image does not contain any such image which one would expect to be there. Rather, it contains a background of security paper which paper would have to be placed underneath the actual scanned document as it rests on the scanner glass. The way all the images line up perfectly, it is virtually impossible for someone to line up two papers documents to such perfection so that such a perfectly aligned image is produced.
3. The resolution of the surrounding pattern is different than the ledger paper on the long-form birth certificate.
4. The image contains letters which could have been made with either a computer or a typewriter. The way some letters appear in the document shows that some of the letters were processed differently.
5. The birth certificate image shows evidence of kerning. Mr. Poyssick would like to see either another document without kerning or that the typewriter used to fill in the long-form birth certificate in 1961 actually had the capability to do kerning. He does state that old typewriter were not able to do kerning.
Mr. Poyssick is not willing to say that the Obama birth certificate image is a forgery. He does say that it is the product of “a document that was, in fact, merged from several originals.” Hence, he sure gives us enough information to doubt that it is authentic. Again, where is Congress and the FBI to do an appropriate investigation and to report to the American people their findings?
Yes Article II specifies stronger requirements for eligibility to be president than to be a US citizen. In 1961, as today, the requirement to be a citizen was merely to be born on US soilm Thete wss an option then to take the citizenship of the father, but not the mother, if the birth wss not on US soil, i.e. citizenship was patriöineal then.
Post a Comment