Pic- Obama Long Form Birth Certificate

ABC Newswire reports-

The White House has released the long form of President Barack Obama’s birth certificate in response to festering questions about whether he was born in the U.S.

The certificate, released Wednesday, says Obama was born in Hawaii, which makes him eligible to hold the office of president. Obama had earlier released a standard short form, but requested copies of his original birth certificate from Hawaii officials this week.

Click to enlarge.

[Note Father’s place of birth. Kenya, not America. Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and therefore not eligible to be President.]

55 thoughts on “Pic- Obama Long Form Birth Certificate

  1. Pingback: Top American Baseballer Publicly Questions Obama’s Birth | TrueblueNZ

  2. You’ve GOT To Be Kidding Me (Birth Certificate)

    Anyone who thinks this is over is nuts. This is the red herring that just keeps on working. Even the debunker asks the question: Why is this forgery so amateurish?

    It is the privilege of a tyrant to pee in your ear and expect you to shrug and agree that it must only be rain.

    As the burgeoning State gains more power, expect more of this.

    And you will continue to go along providing distractions as one neighbor after another disappears — if you know what is good for you.

    Like

  3. Pascal – that is very interesting. But don’t worry, the media will be crowing about how it shows Obama is legit and not even look into the possibility of forgery.

    I must say that when I looked at it I was amazed at the similarities in hand writing between Dunham’s and the medical doctor’s – the shape of the loops, the angle of slope and the ‘m’s in particular. The two registrars have also suspiciously similar hand writings. Cheap forgery or just keeping the number of people in the know down to a minimum.

    What about the Hawaiian governers comment that he could not find a certificate?

    This BC asks more questions than it answers.

    Like

  4. This BC asks more questions than it answers.

    Yep. Let’s add another old-timer’s metaphor that makes sense. They’re just “stirring the pot.” It is my guess that Statists felt the “red herring” wasn’t swimming fast enough on its own. 😀

    So what is coming up that requires that we be even more distraction? The Fed’s report coming up? I dunno.

    Switching metaphors, Bummer’s handlers released a lame new bird for some foul reason.

    Like

  5. He has released the long form birth certificate. Thats what you wanted. It shows he was born in Hawaii. Thats what he claimed.
    Surely now this issue is over.

    Like

  6. The two registrars have also suspiciously similar hand writings.

    Obama always claimed he was a uniter and not a divider. Won’t you guys ever get it? Here he is forging new relationships. 😀

    Like

  7. “Surely now this issue is over.”

    Are you completely clueless? Se if you can digest these simple facts and this simple train of thought.

    1) To be President one has to be a natural born citizen. The only people who qualify as natural born citizens are those with both parents BORN IN THE US.

    2) In space 11 on the newly released form, the father is clearly identified as Kenyan. BORN IN KENYA.

    3) Obama, with one parent BORN IN KENYA is not a Natural Born Citizen and is therefore unqualified to be President.

    Like

  8. BTW, I reserve my opinion on the authenticity of this document. Leaving aside the questions raised over the digital image, the circumstances preceding its release, all of the denial, and the contradictory statements from so called officials, make this event smell to high heaven. As Pascal suggests, the whole thing has the stench of thuggery.

    Like

  9. Scott – just a brief whizz around the intenet will enlighten you. It would seem that the certificate has been produced with modern computing programs, alterations have been made while doing so and the donkeys who did it forgot to hide the alterations being made.

    Something stinks.

    Or maybe this is a conjurors trick tp take your eye off his fraudulent Social Security Number, his missing school and Uni grades, the unproved claim of a Magna Cum Laude from Havard, his Thesis, etc.

    As I said, something stinks.

    Like

  10. One of the problems around the birth issue is that EVERYBODY (Left and Right) is scared of it being true – because if it is, then the whole nation would have to face up to the true horror of what it has done to itself.

    Like

  11. I must admit to be flabbergasted by this disclosure. It doesn’t make sense that Obama would have spent millions to avoid producing this, even have one proud military officer assigned to jail for it (Lakin), and then produce it a day after his press officer makes a whole dog and pony show of not doing so, while in the mean time letters had been sent by his attorney to obtain it.
    Then the thing itself. As many have already pointed out, it is the weirdest sort of obvious bungled forgery. There must be something much larger behind all these strange events, bar the obvious obfuscation of the masses.
    It’s high time (actually well past time) for a proper investigation by someone or a committee who are highly reputable. I’m not holding my breath though.

    Like

  12. the true horror of what it has done to itself. — WAKE UP (Hey — I think I signed off today’s blogpost with your name)

    Adolescent Americans will simply request a do-over. [insert thumbnail of Alfred E Newman if you can RB]

    Like

  13. It’s high time (actually well past time) for a proper investigation by someone or a committee who are highly reputable. — Bez

    Yes, let’s. Like Feinstein at the Ruby Ridge investigation, where the sniper admitted taking out the wife with the baby in her arms. They got us to accept that pee in our ear as rain.
    Like Lugar’s hearing over Waco, and telling us the FLEER pee in our ear was only rain.

    Like the whole world seeing the cuddly storm trooper sticking his assault rifle in little Elian Gonzales’ face and convincing us that pee in our ear was rain.

    We all oughta get used to speaking Russian since it was them who gave us this charming little analogy of Urine Reigning.

    Like

  14. These comments are from Free Republic by someone who knows more about these things than I do.

    What these people are saying is if you scan a piece of paper into Adobe Acrobat, to create a pdf from the image, it will create a single image, kind of like a polaroid photograph.

    Here, Obama claimed this is a scan of his long form. Yet when you open it in Illustrator or Photoshop, or Preflight it on Acrobat Pro, you see this is a layered image.

    When you “Photoshop” an image, you lay down a base layer, Kind of like a single polaroid. When you add stuff to it, it’s like taking a snippet of another photo and laying it on top of the polaroid. The polaroid is still underneath. After you are done altering the image, what you have is a digital version of a polaroid photo with a bunch of snippets taped on top of it. You can later remove a snippet, hide it, or alter it alone, without altering the rest of the image.

    When you open the file in a program, it will show this, and this BC image does. Amazingly amatuerish, and almost would reek of setting up some type of ambush, if it wasn’t so stupid.

    What is signifigant here is that somebody scanned Obama’s Long form, took some snippets from it, and created a new BC from them, and it is easy to see this, digitally. When you open the file in the image editor, you can actually move the snippets around to different places, and re-edit it. If this was simply a scanned image, with a single layer, that wouldn’t be possible.

    Obama may still be hiding some piece of information on the long form. He pulled the minimum needed to create this one, and excluded whatever embarrasses him. Of this is a phoney, but it would seem they’d get somebody smarter to do a phoney BC.

    Or, some genius might have just transfered the long-form’s data to a photoshoped image en toto, to make it all look better, but why he would do that, instead of just releasing a simple unaltered scan of the original is beyond me. http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2711302/posts

    Like

  15. In short, after creating a forgery, the way to cover tracks such as mawn just posted, is to take a new photograph of the forgery, and scan THAT into the PDF file. NO layers could show up then.

    This so smells of “In Your Face” man, that Russian analogy really does apply.

    Like

  16. “Of this is a phoney, but it would seem they’d get somebody smarter to do a phoney BC.”

    Especially, if this was what they did, all that would have been necessary was to scan the altered document one more time, and it would have been a one layered document.

    Like

  17. Well guys, let me enlighten you, something strange afoot. There is this leftoid website dedicated to BC issues, find it here: http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/whitehouse-releases-long-form-obama-born-in-hawaii/comment-page-1/#comments

    They have a PDF up, which is a scan of the original document without the green hash pattern, and the resolution is much, much higher than the thing produced by the White House.

    Where did they get that, and who is played for a fool by whom?

    Like

  18. Why does the top left corner give me the shits? there’s clearly some form of cut happening and the document appears to extend beyond that and the printed line curves away, yet the pattern is not distorted.

    Like

  19. I don’t have Adobe illustrator, only the the Acrobat Pro, but it looks like this PDF does NOT have the strange artifacts of the WH version. There may be a huge red herring afoot one way or another.

    Like

  20. Ciaron – look at the PDF I linked to. You’ll note that the pattern distortion is irrelevant, while the curvature issue isn’t there either. This HQ PDF looks a lot more genuine than the WH version.

    Like

  21. WH has replaced the image on their website with one that doesn’t layer. Nothing to see here folks, move on!

    Like

  22. Mawm, the one I downloaded there a minute ago still has the same behavior, looks the same to me. But have a look at the PDF I linked to above. That looks much more like the real deal to me. (At least it doesn’t look like a blatant forgery). I am still trying to get my head around what all this means.

    Like

  23. I just downloaded the birth cert from the Whitehouse site as well, and opened it in Illustrator. It’s an obvious fake! It has clipping masks/selections for the various names etc that have been dropped in. Whoever did it, obviously didn’t know enough to turn of ‘editing in Illustrator’ when they PDF’d it.

    If it were real, wouldn’t it be one image that’s been scanned in, not a document made up of many different clipping masks? You can even turn off the entire green background/pattern in a layer and all the text is left on white!

    Like

  24. Re the possible forgery, and its amateurish design- this could have been done a long time ago, and without the expectation of massive and intense scrutiny.

    It might have been used as the basis for the original Certification first passed of as the BC, and given the broad understanding/ propaganda that this was the real BC, it was again never expected that this document (the long form) could be subject to intense scrutiny.

    This could explain why Obama was reluctant to release it. He knew it was a weak forgery that would be easily exposed.

    However Trump caused too much pressure, and Obama knew he had to release it, and then tough out the criticism that is now occurring.

    White House discussion-

    Spokesman 1- The original BC is an easily detected forgery, we cannot release it.

    Spokesman 2- We have to, the pressure is getting too much.

    Spokesman 1- OK well if we must we must but the forgery will be easily detected. Obama’s critics will scream blue murder.

    Spokesman 2- Well, we will just have to tough it out, we have no other option.

    Spokesman 1- Agreed. OK, that will be our strategy.

    Like

  25. Red – I just compared the WH version and the one with much more detail, and they appear identical. That means that your scenario is impossible. What I find strange is that apparently the WH is the one sticking the green hash pattern in and providing a very low quality PDF, while a better one is clearly afoot, and which has found its way to a leftoid site (which by the way is a good source of relevant documents, court cases etc), a must look for those interested. These strange maneuvers must mean something significant, but I haven’t worked it out yet.

    Like

  26. ps, from someone over at Atlas

    I just checked the official web site for Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital and according to the information there, the name of the hospital at the time of his birth should have been Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital. According to the web site the name didn’t change to Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital merged with Kapi‘olani Maternity Home in 1978. So how could his official long form birth certificate that was generated in 1961 have the name of the hospital that wasn’t created until 1978?

    Like

  27. Fletch, sorry to rain on your parade, but google that for yourself. This is not an issue as that maternity clinic started to use the name on the BC around the 50’s. The other BC’s that have been published from other people born around the time have the same wording. I feel we have to be critical of anything that asserted either way at this time. The Obama camp will just love it if people take off on a real conspiracy nutter angle, in fact, that may just be their objective by posting this obviously dubious PDF, while there is a high quality version available. I’d say let’s be aware of the possible strategies and not grasp any aspect as “definite proof” this is a fraud. The actual hoax may be buried under a layer of distractions that can be disproved at convenient times for the Obama camp.

    Like

  28. Whether the Birth Certificate is genuine or not, Obama still doesn’t act or think like an AMERICAN.

    Like

  29. Two more videos. I hope they imbed like they do at Wabbit’s Place.

    Turning on and off the layers in the scanned doc:

    And comparing a truly scanned document with one that has been constructed:

    It simply looks like this is “There. I outright Lied. Waddaya think you’re gonna do about it chump? Bwahahahaha!”

    Like

  30. What could happen to these people who’ve put these videos together?

    They could be charged with fraud and put away for a very long time. We have Precedent.

    The forensics investigation by private parties into the TWA flight 800 off Long Island. They managed to recover some parts of the plane. They claimed they found explosive residue. They were charged with unlawful possession of contraband. I think they may still be in prison. I’m getting too old to do anything but rely on my memory, but I think my recall is good enough for this comparison.

    If those independents could be put away for contradicting the story put out by the Clinton WH, these people could be too for proving the Obama WH is full of thugs who dare members of the public to “claim we’re lying, even prove it, and see what good it will do.”

    Like

  31. Those vids turning on and off the layers have been removed….
    I know it’s true though, because I tried in Illustrator myself.

    Like

  32. The only people who qualify as natural born citizens are those with both parents BORN IN THE US.

    Red, I don’t think there’s any court decision that supports this interpretation (“natural-born” citizens are not defined in the Constitution or in ordinary law). Through the entire 20th century, it’s generally been interpreted to mean someone who is a citizen from the moment they are born, i.e. a citizen other than a naturalised citizen.

    Here, Obama claimed this is a scan of his long form. Yet when you open it in Illustrator or Photoshop, or Preflight it on Acrobat Pro, you see this is a layered image.

    I just opened the WH PDF in Adobe Illustrator, and I only see a single layer.

    I suspect the non-green version is simply another copy of the same record, printed on different paper.

    Like

  33. derp, I suspect the WH has now corrected their blunder and fixed the link. I’ll uipload the original from work tomorrow for you so that you can experience it for yourself.

    Like

  34. “I suspect the non-green version is simply another copy of the same record, printed on different paper.”

    Watch the video in Pascal’s 15:58 post.

    Like

  35. d de d – see my 12:43 post, The WH have taken the doco down and replaced with one that is not layered.

    Like

  36. Pascal’s 15:58 post basically points out that the high res document appears to be a scan of a single document as opposed to the WH counterfeit file, which purports to be some scanned or photocopied version, but which is in fact a construct. My guess is that the WH thing is constructed by overlying a low resolution version of the high res scan onto this green hash-pattern document. In order to do that, they had to “lift” the black pixels off that slightly blue-ish document, for which they used some mask, which then created the low res layer with its weird artefacts. They may have been adjusting things a bit where the masking hadn’t worked, hence the problems with signatures and such, and they “touched up” some numbers at pixel levels, hence the strangely dark and sharp characters between otherwise vague counterparts. All in all a very amateurish job.
    The huge question I remain with is why the heck they went through this hassle if they had a high res scanned document available. Why pissing around with it to get it onto this official looking green stuff, which they had also used for the COLB. There must be something fishy going on, I don’t know what.

    What I also find hugely strange is the fact that the WH is disclosing this strange correspondence with the State of Hawaii. Here we have a president who tramples the state’s authority and the constitution on a daily basis, but who suddenly turns all timid asking for a copy of his OWN birth certificate, which the state clearly can’t disallow anyway, regardless of their rules. What I also don’t get is that it is left to some 6th layer bureaucrat to certify it is a true copy. Why wasn’t there at least an independent attorney involved, why aren’t there photographs of the folio of which this page is part, why haven’t we seen copies of preceding and subsequent documents, why is their no report of the authenticating person as to the actual handwriting on the document?
    Why believes that the state of Hawaii hasn’t at some point micro-filmed or scanned all these things in the past, so that there would be additional verification.
    For now we may well have a very good forgery which is kept largely behind the scenes (the high res), and a crappy patchwork brought out “officially” by the WH. If the heat about the WH obvious forgery gets too intense, they revert to the high-res scan, which has so far only (as far as I know) appeared on a friendly web site (the AP version is also of lower res). This then “solves all problems”, but the reality is that we are still looking at something that MAY well have been doctored, as we only have obedient flunkies’ word for it that it resembles the paper original.
    I may sound like a conspiracy nutter, but it boggles me why there is so much obfuscation for something that is so simple.

    Like

  37. Just for the record, Red, the “blue scan” you put up here is not as high-res as the one I linked to this morning. You may want to download that and keep it for your records. 🙂

    Like

  38. Red – I’ve been looking at that high-res thing until my eyes bled, I’ve scanned some of my own handwriting with different pens and such and tried to sortt out the scan characteristics of the thing. Now I am no expert in these matters at all, but I can guarantee that this high-res scan is not made of the original document. A scan of an original would show differences in coloring between handwriting, printed, typed and stamped material. We are looking at a scan of a photocopy, which begs the question why it was scanned in color. It does provide support for my original hypothesis though, the WH very likely received something WITHOUT the green hash-pattern, they added that later for some obscure reason.
    It may also be that what was sighted as “original” by Mr Onaka was in fact already a photocopy, but we wouldn’t know that without asking Mr Onaka, who by way of his rubber stamp has absolved himself for that risk (copy OR abstract).
    All in all, I am quite convinced this entire operation is set up to deter avid truth seekers, and to tar them with the brush of tinfoil hatters if they become too interested in the other hiatuses of Obama’s past. Everybody seeking further truth ought to be very careful in suggesting there is anything amiss with the thing put out by the WH, it’s an obvious red herring.

    Like

  39. If Obama can’t be President because one of his parents was born outside the US, does this mean that Republican contenders Donald Trump and Mitt Romney are ineligible to run against Obama in ’12? After all both of them have a parent born overseas. I haven’t heard anyone saying Obama is ineligible to be Prez on account of his father’s place of birth also say Trump and Romney shouldn’t be able to run. Bobby Jindal is another leading Republican who’d be ineligible to be President if the place of his parents’ birth were taken into consideration…

    Like

  40. I would hesitate to make any kind of firm judgement on such a circumstance, but off the cuff I would say your question is perfectly correct.

    There’s a diagram here that attempts to set out the different categories of citizenship.

    https://truebluenz.com/2011/04/26/us-citizenship-categories-and-legal-definitions/

    AFAIK Trump and Romney’s parents were naturalized citizens even if foreign born. This separates them from Obama senior who was never an American citizen.

    The real test I think is the intent of the phrase when used in the Constitution, where the context is clearly that The President must not have origins that cast doubt upon his loyalty to the US.

    This intent is clearly challenged by Obama’s un-American political frame.

    Like

  41. Here’s the replacement for the video that was “removed by user” up at 16:10

    This is clearly a different video, but it sounds like it was made by the same guy. If I were he, I’d keep the old one somewhere even if I wanted to improve upon my presentation. Since he’s trying to demonstrate facts about a forgery, removing his old presentation and putting up a new one undermines his stated efforts. Of course, that might be his intention from the start. Cas Sunstein, for instance, has called for his side to infiltrate the opposition (ala Orwell’s Big Brother).

    What good are billions of stimulus funds, with no designated use assigned to them, good for, afterall, unless you use them as teh Won sees fit?

    Like

  42. Here’s an exact copy of the removed video up at 16:10, posted by the same host (“Livefreerevolution”), but with an different address.

    At least the length is the same (2:34) as the original. And I did notice the same quirky chuckles by the voice doing the presentation (and even the momentary screen glare at the beginning) that I saw in the original.

    There can be almost no doubt this is a red herring now. As I wrote at my site yesterday, it’s like we’re defending one small island ( the principle of constitutional eligibility) while the Bummer tsunami wipes out all our other constitutional protections that are substantially more important.

    While Bummer does all this:
    ObamaCare’s on-going implementation
    Friends of Obama openly getting tax and regulation breaks
    Seeming out of control EPA killing industries and raising fuel prices
    Strong-arm breaking of contracts to favor unions (e.g., GM’s take-over)
    Undeclared acts of wars (Libya) without any Congressional review
    Continuing to pay Czars despite law (Bummer signed) declaring it illegal.

    Do I need to name the substantive principles and constitutional trampling in each of the above list?

    And we are defending the principle known as constitutional eligibility? WTF? This has to be among your longest string of comments — YES I’m guilty of contributing to that — all to show what it appears a deliberate attempt to stir the pot because this damn red herring was running out of steam when all the usual suspects were defending the “short form” as being “the birth certificate.”

    Why not start an open blog RB? Invite readers to expanded the list of Bummer’s criminal enterprises. Let’s get back to shining the spotlight, at least a little bit, on the entire Statist takeover.

    Like

  43. I checked and Trump’s mother eventually became a naturalised citizen, but was not a naturalised citizen when she was born. Nor were Jindal’s parents, who only arrived from India a few months before he was born.

    The idea that the President ‘must not have not origins which cast doubt upon his loyalty’ seems quite vague. Who gets to decide what counts as unloyal origins? I mean, Kennedy’s ancestors were arguably dodgy, with their links to Irish Republicanism and also to those who favoured appeasement in the ’30s. And many of Nixon’s ancestors were conscientious objectors, being Quakers. And if course Reagan as a young man flirted with communism, even asking to join the communist party at one stage, before moving in a very different political direction. I think that if the Supreme Court or some body of bureaucrats were put in charge of determining which person had ancestors/an early life which represented disloyalty and which did not then the process would quickly become politicised. Ultimately the voters have to decide if a candidate is suitable for office or not.

    Like

Comments are closed.