Hmmmm: New twist on Birth Certificate issue

Hmmmm: New twist on Birth Certificate issue
 

Most interesting, and with verification links provided. I’d say it deserves to be put into the light for questioning!
Sent by Korean War Vet, author, Degree in History.  Know him very personally from late ’50s.

New twist on Birth Certificate issue
It was brought to light that back in 1961 people of color were called ‘Negroes.’ So how can this ‘birth certificate’ state he is ‘African-American’ when the term wasn’t even used back then?? This isn’t over! This is interesting!
Here is a comment from a reader to George Ure at Urban Survival.com: “As you all know, Donald Trump made a big deal about Obama’s birth certificate.
I will tell you right now that I had never given this “birther” issue any credit. I watched the hype and the crazies come out. I completely dismissed the entire ordeal altogether.
In fact, it was not until the White House released the birth certificate that it had gained my attention.  I am the studious sort of guy, and I have plenty of time on my hands. So, I took a close look at this document.
While I would have thought that this issue would have been closed for good (and, got the crazies to crawl back into their holes), I found two extremely strange inconsistencies that merit some attention. First of all, the birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama’s birth as August 4, 1961. It also lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father.  No big deal, right?  At the time of Obama’s birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama’s father was born in “Kenya, East Africa”.
This wouldn’t seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama’s birth, and 27 years after his father’s birth.  How could Obama’s father have been born in a country that did not yet exist?
Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the “British East Africa Protectorate”. But, this is not the only thing that I found that just does not jive.
The second item that I looked into was the hospital that Obama was born in. On the birth certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is “Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital”. This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called “Kaui Keolani Children’s Hospital” and “Kapi’olani Maternity Home”, respectively.
The name did not change to Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged.  How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978?
Go ahead, look it up. I am not talking crazy talk, these are the facts. Like I said, I thought that this was a non-issue until the actual certificate was released. Now that it has been released, of course I had to look into it. I have found these issues, now I know that something is up. If you doubt me, just look at the following resources:
Sure as hell, the hospital part is true, as you can read about the 1978 merger here. http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx
Post-colonial history (from Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kenya http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya
The first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council took place in 1957.
Despite British hopes of handing power to “moderate” African rivals, it was the Kenya African National Union (KANU) of Jomo Kenyatta that formed a government shortly before Kenya became independent on 12 December 1963, on the same day forming the first Constitution of Kenya.
“In God We Trust”…….. “Get ready for 2012 –

107 thoughts on “Hmmmm: New twist on Birth Certificate issue

  1. Oh, there’s more to it than just this, but I’ll hold my fire until the contributor whom I know is working on some new revelations gets his ducks lined up.

    Until then, think about this:

    IF we were to push this issue and force the real certificate to be presented; and IF it were found to be fake; then we would not need to repeal ANYTHING Obama has done as he would have never been President and ALL of the stuff he did would need to be vacated.

    but then, they wouldn’t do that any more than they want to pursue this because it is easier to just play within the system than to actually live by principles and ideals that govern our actions.

    Interesting post, Dusty. Thanks for the food for thought.

    • I think that the GOP doesn’t want to force his hand on this because they don’t want to have to be forced to prove something later about something they have skewed. It is easier to ignore the obvious than to stir the pot.

  2. New? This nonsense has been floating around the interweb for at least a year. so…

    It’s true that Kenya did not exist as an independent nation until 2 years later. BUT, it is also true that Kenya under British control was known as the Kenya Colony since the mid twenties. Doing a simple news search on google for the relevant time period (1961) returns over 700 results all referinng to the country simply as Kenya.

    The term african american does not exist on his birth certificate. His father IS listed as African rather then “negro”, but again- this was not only common- but the proper and legal way to list someone born in Africa.

    And as to the hospital- more nonsense. so let’s look at the facts? The Kapi’olani Maternity Home became the Kapi’olani /maternity and Gynecological Hospital (where Obama was born and as listed on BC) in 1931. In 1971 the name was shortened to Kapi’olani Hospital. It was the Kauikeloani Childrens Hospital (which is NOT where Obama was born) that merged with the Kapi’olani hospital in 1978, and became the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children.

  3. Note, wikipedia, modified their “history” of Kenya shortly after this birth certificate was “made public” to not show that Kenya wasn’t created until 1963.

    • More likely he’d try to jail those looking into the matter, but who knows. The simplest and most legal recourse is to impeach him: he’s provided us with several solid cases already, and by not pursuing them, we provide precedents for future presidents to get away with even more.

      • True on your claim of precedent.
        Chester Arthur’s Presidency set a bad precedent. And no one knows about it…. : )

        • “no one knows about it”

          Actually, you can find out about the supposed shady details on pretty much any birther site. Like I said, you guys have some catching up to do.

      • “The simplest and most legal recourse is to impeach him”

        If that’s the simplest route, then I’d say you’re out of luck. You might get the House majority needed to impeach (as happened with Clinton), but what do you think the chances are of getting the two-thirds Senate majority needed for removal of the president from office?

        • Yeah, I do not know what the status of his birth certificate is, but I would offer to suggest that if this thing were proven fraudulent, you would not have to impeach Obama. He’d be jailed.

          Do we have a history of a POTUS performing his duties from a jail cell?

          • “Do we have a history of a POTUS performing his duties from a jail cell?”

            Exactly the same history we have of a sitting president being arrested. Who do you suppose is going to do the jailing? And birthers have been going full-bore on this nonsense since before Obama was elected. Don’t you suppose any “proof” would have turned up by now? Say, by Donald Trump’s supposed “investigators.”

            I now suspect that flasawdust is an Obama operative, since Obama is the one who benefits most from this silliness. 🙂

            • So I guess Michelle better not piss off ole boi then. By your logic, he can whack her with impunity.

              Bet that makes you happy. 🙂

            • Sorry to disappoint me? What in God’s green earth made you think I could possibly give a rat’s (censored) either way? What specifically in my post lead your mind to that conclusion?

              So I guess Michelle better not piss off “ole boi” then. By your logic, he can whack her with impunity.

              Bet that makes you happy. 🙂

              • “What in God’s green earth made you think I could possibly give a rat’s (censored) either way?”

                Perhaps all the good things (“ole boi”?) you have to say about Obama, along with the fact that you brought up the issue of jail. If I misunderstood your desires, I apologize.

                “By your logic, he can whack her with impunity.”

                Wrong again–it’s not my logic. I provided you with a link describing the modern interpretation of the law.

                “Bet that makes you happy.”

                What in God’s green earth made you think that? What specifically in my post led your mind to that conclusion?

                • Perhaps it has something to do with your rapid, and vehement defense of Obama at every single turn. 🙂

                • “Perhaps it has something to do with your rapid, and vehement defense of Obama at every single turn.”

                  Apparently your literacy skills need a bit of work. You don’t even have to go to my blog to see that you’re wrong about that. You merely need to see my comment–which you answered, in case you’ve forgotten–on Joe’s post of last night. Any thinking person can see that I’ve regularly criticized Obama, so here’s a test–have you ever acknowledged that he’d done something right?

            • Yes, you two are quite the clever children. Joe could even tell you the kind of fallacy he committed with the comment. But wait, he’s the one who did it; fallacious reasoning only applies to liberals (as in the 98 percent of people to the left of Joe). So never mind. 😉

              • Oh, I see James. So it’s ok for Obama and his sycophants to run the tremendous amount of negative campaign ads, and sound bytes calling Romney an “Outsourcer”, a “felon”, “bully”, “animal abuser” (just to name 1% of it all), but black, and myself make one “clever” post (btw … it’s too easy to be clever) … and suddenly we are demonized by yourself Mr. Exhaulted One for for “fallacy”.

                Get over yourself. Your making the place smell bad. 🙂

                • “it’s ok for Obama and his sycophants to run the tremendous amount of negative campaign ads”

                  Another fallacious comparison, Augger. I never said anything of the sort–and in fact have frequently criticized negative campaigning by most sides. In other words, you’re misrepresenting my position and making an irrelevant comparison. Other than that, though, good comment. 😉

                  “Your making the place smell bad.”

                  OK, since the repeated use indicates it’s not a typo and your friends obviously won’t tell you, I will help you out: there’s a difference between “your” and “you’re.” By the way, if the smell bothers you you’re free to go elsewhere, or to simply skip over any comment with my name. But you can’t keep yourself from jumping in, can you? 😉

                  • When it comes to you, and your pack of lies … no. You say one thing, and then do another James. Typical, and your all butt-hurt that I can see through it. You would do anything at this point to besmirch me to save your face.

                    My medical advise still stands. Maybe you can get Obama to pay the treatment too. 😀

                • “your pack of lies”

                  I challenge you to identify even ONE lie I’ve told here. If I’ve told a pack, it should be easy. And if not, you’re just another whiny liar.

                  “You would do anything at this point to besmirch me to save your face.”

                  You give yourself far too much credit. I care little what you think, and definitely see no need to “save face” with birthers and Beck supporters. Sounds like you’re the one who should “get over yourself.” 😉

                  • “birthers”, did you write “birthers”? Oh yeah, now your going to tell me there is nothing negative about coining the term “birthers” in the context that you use it?

                    Too easy. Go eat a sandwich now. 🙂

                • I see the apparent problem, Augger–English apparently isn’t your first language. Perhaps Farsi or Arabic? 🙂

                  I challenge you to come up with just ONE lie–come on, I’ve written a lot here, and you’ve accused me of being a liar–and instead you act as if “something negative” is a lie. That’s the best you can do? I’d hestitate to keep this thread going if you can’t do better. Your decision, of course.

  4. You can look at a copy of the birth certificate online; Obama’s Father’s race is listed as “African’, not African-American.

    The country was known as “Kenya Colony” from the 1920’s on, and and even more simply as “Kenya”. Contemporary newspapers referred to the country as ‘Kenya”

    The former Kapi’olani Maternity Home became the “Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital” in 1931.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/birthcertificate.asp

    3 strikes, you’re out.

    • Don’t you know that Snopes is in on the plot, and can only be trusted when it confirms nutty theories? 🙂

    • I am just now reading your comment (2018) and feel I must respond.
      About Snopes- thinking that Snopes is credible I wrote to them after finding an error in the report they supposedly “debunked” concerning Obama Birth Certificate.
      Snopes claimed that an Adobe expert Jean Claude Tremblay told a FOX news reporter the certificate is legit.
      “I never said that” Tremblay insists. “Winter called me and talked to me for about five minutes on the telephone, and she never said she was going to quote me. Then she misrepresented what I said.
      Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/314041/#94JSGga1TJjffXFC.99

      So using Snopes as a source is foolish,

      • Very good info. Thanks for commenting.

        The commenter who goes by the endearing handle of ‘melfamy” is both a marxist and a supporter of muslim …. shall we say…. extremist apology”.

        Snopes is s hit. From it’s funding sources to its execution of highly biased reportage of its “investigations”.

  5. “African” IS NOT a race. That term was not used in 1961. “Negro” is a race and that is the term that was commonly used in the US and the US Military. The term “Negro” was still used to identify RACE in our military police as late as 2004.

  6. I hope this isn’t the same Korean War vet who posts regularly at such birther sites as WorldNutsDaily and Floyd Brown’s Western “Journalism” Center–and who kept insisting that the so-called “Kenyan Birth Certificate” with “Obama’s footprint” was real (even after WND showed it wasn’t) and kept linking to a known spoof video in which Obama “admitted” he wasn’t born in the U.S.

    By the way, “African American” wasn’t a normal descriptor in 1961, but “African”–what the birth certificate actually says, and depicting the continent where Kenya is located–was. If you do what Ure says — “go ahead, look it up,” as I did a few years ago when birtherism popped up — you’ll also he’s wrong about the hospital name and the name of Kenya (commonly used since the 1920s, as I recall), despite his claim that Wikipedia is apparently in on the plot.

    If you guys want to turn this into another birther site, you’ve got a lot of catching up to do. You’re so far behin that I fear you’ll never draw as many suckers as Brown, Joseph Farah and Jerome Corsi. Good luck with the campaign, though; I can’t wait to see Joe’s ducky new “revelations.” I also can’t see how birtherism is going to make the RNL seem more credible with anyone other than a clueless minority. Even Glenn Beck doesn’t buy it. 😉

  7. Tex, ‘African’ was an accepted term, and the point is, Sawdust’s buddy said the term used was AFRICAN-AMERICAN!

    “Negro’ can still be used as a race identifier, so what?

    With all the attention focused on the document, do you really think that the Obama team would make the same bonehead mistakes that Orly Taitz made?

    Show me where snopes is wrong, or accept their findings as fact. {Hint: Tex, just Saying that they are wrong isn’t good enough.}

    • The beauty of crazy conspiracy theories — birtherism, trutherism, the illuminati, alien invasion — is that no “evidence” to the contrary matters. It just becomes more “evidence” of the depth of the cover-up. This one has been around long enough, though, that it’s probably too late to make a killing on tinfoil futures. 🙂

    • Find another American birth certificate from 1961 that calls the race of a black person African…………………
      I bet they all say Negro or colored….

      Find another American birth certificate from 1961 that states a birth place of a parent as Kenya, East Africa.
      I bet they will all say British East Africa………

      Find another American birth certificate from 1961 that calls the Hospital what his does…..

      Find any birth certificate with this many problems…………….

      • The main problem with the document is the readers of it.

        Dusty here is a link to a birth certificate dated ONE DAY after Obama’s, from the same hospital. I know this won’t satisfy you, and I don’t care.

      • “Are you telling me that you knew blacks that refered to themselves as “Africans” back in the 60′s?”

        Are you telling me that you knew Africans who refered to themselves as something other than “Africans” back in the 60′s? I don’t think so….

      • from the Oxford dictionary….

        Afro-American was first used as an adjective in 1853 in a publication in Windsor, Ontario, Voice of the Fugitive. The OED2 lists examples of Afro-American and Aframerican from 1890, 1898, 1910, 1934, 1939, and 1944, the last being a use of Aframerican from an article by H.L. Mencken.

        African-American was first used as a noun in 1855 and as an adjective in 1858. The OED2 gives cites for one or the other use from 1858, 1885, 1890, 1925, 1962, 1969, 1973, 1979, and later.

        • The Oxford dictionary? Why, that sounds English, and you know the English are a bunch of socialists who were probably in on the plot to get Obama elected way back in 1855. Sorry, not good enough. 🙂

  8. DUDE !
    Do you really believe Obama’s father’s passport had “Kenya” on his passport when Obama was born, since Kenya was still 2 years away from being created?

  9. Obama’s father was a citizen and subject of the Great Britain when Obama was born. It does not matter where Obama was born. Obama’s mother was a U.S. Citizen, so Obama would be a U.S. Citizen. If the Obama, Sr. that Obama, Jr. claims as his father was in fact his father, then Obama would be a British Subject.

    • No. I have not shifted ANY goalposts.

      It does not matter where Obama was born.
      You can even assume he was born in Hawaii. (although it just doesn’t matter)

      If Obama’s claimed parents were in fact his parents, a mother who was a US citizen and a father who was a citizen and subject of a british colony when Obama was born.

    • James, or whoever you are.

      I am accepting the current whitehouse birth certificate as true and accurate.

    • ‘James, or whoever you are’…

      Yeah! How dare you, you James-claimer! Taking the cachet that the name brings, to those who earned it, as your own..

      Boy, you are so ruined for public office now.

      • Damn–so much for my dream of becoming the 45th white male president. Of course Nixon came back from near-ruin, so maybe I have time to recover in time for a 2028 bid against Bristol Palin.

  10. Even when someone at that time was from Africa, and they were black, they were still termed negro. The mother’s race would have been white, not American. And there is a lot of confusion over the address that Obama Sr. gave the government. My guess, and this is just that, is that this man was NOT Obama’s father but used as such. My guess, and that is all it is…. is she had a relationship or whatever it may have been with Frank Davis. Just sharing thoughts. What do you think? And yes it has been forever since I have been on here. Been busy with arguing with the useless on a Liberal site which I have grown weary of. Can’t argue with stupid.

    • It’s all about who fills out the form. If a bureaucrat did it, it would most likely say ‘ negro’. However, if the form was filled out by the mother or father, they, being progressive sorts, might use the term African. We are talking about Hawaii, which had the most multicultural demographic of any state.

    • Welcome back……….. you have a good point about who might actually be his father.
      Don’t think that there aren’t any useless OWEbozo loving idiots here…………….

  11. If you google Frank Davis there is a side by side of Obama Sr., Obama, and Frank Davis. Being the offspring of an Anthropologist, in the medical field of pathology/forensics, I have good question to wonder.

    • The libs I debate with at another site are very frustrating because thet will not concede when they are wrong. They also like to curse me out; fun. I am off to google Frank Davis. It’s interesting because Obama looks like his grandfather, but nothing like his father……. I have yet to find a Hawaiian birth certificate of a black child from ’61.

      G., for both of my sons’ births, the hospital filled it out. I just find it curious…..

    • I posted a comment with several links that is “awaiting moderation.” If you do the same quick Google search I did, though, you’ll find that in many states (and U.S. Naval hospitals, apparently), the parents either fill out the birth certificate or fill out a form that has all the information except hospital stuff (time of birth, for example) that some official then uses to complete the birth certificate. Either way, the info in question would come from the parents.

      • I’m not satisfied, SBJ. I cannot find a birth certificate of a black child from ’61 in Hawaii, and I have never heard of a a parent filling out the birth certificate. Was this the practice in Hawaii in ’61? Did you fill out your kids’ birth certificate?

        • In Texas, the doctor and hospital staff fill out the birth certificate.

          Of course kells, I already stated (before and after being accused of being a “birther” by your friend James) accept the “whitehouse.gov” birth certificate as grnuine. explained. I take the birth certificate at face value.

          • Here’s one from a Texas hospital: http://www.memorialhermann.org/locations/thewoodlands/content.aspx?id=3734

            As you noted, the doc & staff fill out the certificate–but they do so based on information provided by the parents. That makes sense–just by looking, how is the doctor or staffer supposed to be able to recognize every person’s race? My wife is Polish and Portuguese, but tans darkly and is frequently mistaken to be Latina or Native American. My best friend from college was Japanese-American, but was also wrongly assumed to be Hispanic or Native American at times. I once had two students from Spain, one of whom looked like she could be Mexican and one who looked like she could be German.

          • Well, obviously it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to fill out basic informataion as your link has shown (hell, I do it every time I take them to the doctor;) I’m just saying I never did it for their birth certificates. Also, my boys were issued a SS# (I wasn’t asked whether or not they wanted one.)

            I’m very aware of the dilemma in obtaining the long-form birth certificate. My husband would have to go back to his country to obtain his. But would it not be the same birth certificate? Hmmm…curiouser and curiouser……

            • “I never did it for their birth certificates”

              I believe you. One of the other links I had tried to share says it varies by state. And I suspect some states have even changed since 1961. In short, I don’t have a clue about Hawaii in 1961–nor do I care, at this point, unless someone offers proof of something.

    • Greg>>>”I never had kids, patriot, kells; I yield to your greater experience in these matters”
      Thank you for both of those deeds,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  12. What I get from this entire post is that some people will look at situations with both eyes open and expect to see proof of “facts” and James & Greg will spin, spin, spin until their king is allowed to evade all the rules our govt is supposed to abide by.

    • “until their king is allowed to evade all the rules our govt is supposed to abide by”

      That makes no sense at all–I’ve criticized Obama on several issues (lack of transparency, use of drones, etc.); that’s completely different than saying birthers are loony. (Joe could probably tell you what kind of fallacy you’ve committed with that comment, by the way.)

      The point for me is that birthers have been repeatedly proven wrong. When that happens, they then say, “Well, then, what about this?” And then they offer something else for which they have no proof. So until there is some real evidence, I’m going to assume that birthers are wackadoodle conspiracy theorists who are helping Obama by taking attention away from the economy and other things that should–but now probably won’t–keep Obama from being re-elected.

      If birthers’ claims (which contradict each other, but that’s a whole different issue), had any validity, don’t you think that the Clinton machine (when HIllary was beaten by Obama) or John McCain, or Donald Trump (who supposedly had “investigators” on the case), or billionaire Mitt Romney (who is about to be beaten by Obama) would have come up with something by now?

        • Again, yolu’re making no sense. How is it that I “blindly stand behind” Obama when I’ve criticized him repeatedly and have said publicly I am unlikely to vote for him. (I also won’t vote for Romney, who probably hasn’t yet decided whether to vote for himself–and even if he has decided, will likely change his mind a time or two between now and November.)

          Besides, even if birthers haven’t been proven wrong “as much,” it’s been often enough to demonstrate that they have no clear, coherent case to make. And if they did, Clinton, McCain, Trump or Romney would have been able to make it. But go ahead, keep going–I’m sure the Obama folks appreciate your efforts.

  13. just for you James……………….

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/new_obama_birth_certificate_forgery_proof_in_the_layers.html
    July 18, 2012

    New Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Proof in the LayersBy Mara Zebest

    My newly released report examines the metadata and object code of Obama’s long-form birth certificate PDF file and explains how this information corroborates the claim that Obama’s PDF file never originated as a paper document, but rather was born in cyberspace or was — to put it another way — digitally manufactured. The only time Obama’s long-form birth certificate image exists as a paper document is when a computer user selects Print from the File menu. Obama’s PDF file, like everything else from this administration, is a composite, a lie, an illusion — even down to the deceptive colors presented in the file.
    The focus of this report is centered on Obama’s PDF file released on April 27, 2011; the file can be downloaded at this White House link. From the moment Obama’s PDF file was posted, numerous professionals have been speaking out on the multitude of anomalies. The most notable indicator of malfeasance within Obama’s PDF file is the presence of multiple layers. A document scanned into a computer should only contain one layer — known as a flattened file. However, Obama’s PDF file not only contained more than one layer; it contained nine layers that clearly display recognizable signs of forgery, along with a host of other manipulative indicators. The problems range from Tom Harrison’s observation of undisturbed safety-paper pattern beneath white dots to a clipping mask path that hides data and more.
    Because layers are the most obvious symptom of foul play, it may be helpful to understand what layers are and what advantages layers provide. Layers are analogous to transparencies used on a projector in what will be referred to as the analog world. Content is printed on separate sheets (or layers), which allows the user to move, add, or remove a sheet element independently of the remaining sheets. The total composite dofcument comprises the combined stack of transparency sheets.
    The digital equivalent allows a user to add or move digital image information (or text) onto separate layers. This, of course, would be a manual and manipulative choice. Like their analog parallel, layers can provide a means to maneuver individual elements within the image independently of surrounding image pieces.
    The layers have been the most damning and problematic evidence of file-manipulation, and the defenders of Obama are quick to respond with a plethora of explanations to justify the presence of layers. The excuses range from OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software to the more predominant excuse of optimization — both of which have been debunked in my previous report for the Cold Case Posse press conference.
    Many Obama defenders have conceded that OCR is not a factor and admit that OCR was never applied to the PDF file. However, arguments for optimization still persist. Optimization refers to a file-saving process in which the goal is to reduce the file size while maintaining (or optimizing) the quality of the image (as best as possible depending on the settings applied).
    Those who insist on the optimization argument either do not understand what attributes need to be present for this argument to hold water — or they are hoping the general public does not understand. It’s probably a little of both. The defenders certainly count on the ignorance of the average citizen when it comes to understanding the differences in layers produced from an automated process (such as optimization) compared to a manual choice to manipulate the file. One goal of the report is to offer a deeper understanding for recognizing the two patterns of layering (and to avoid being deceived or bamboozled). The report adds additional proof along the way that the optimization excuse fails miserably and can be completely ruled out as a justification for layers.
    One particular and significant point to understand: not all optimization processes are created equal, and only certain programs will create (automated) layers when optimizing. Adobe Acrobat Pro is the most commonly used program capable of creating layers from an automated process such as optimization, but even Acrobat Pro does not always produce layers when optimizing a file. The method and settings applied during the saving process play a factor in whether layers will be automatically generated or not. To be clearer on this point, programs like Photoshop and Illustrator will not automatically generate layers when optimizing a file (regardless of the circumstances). Any layered files generated from these programs are reflective merely of layers manufactured by the user.
    The problems for the opposition increases when the metadata is considered. So what is metadata? If you’ve ever examined a file and noticed property information such as the creation date, modified date, or the program used to create the file, this is known as metadata. The metadata for Obama’s PDF reveals that a Mac-based program called Preview was used to generate the optimized PDF file.
    Preview is a program that allows a user to open and view a file (as the name suggests). Preview can view a range of file types created from other programs as well as allow a user to re-save the file in any file format available within Preview. Preview is limited in its abilities and certainly not a program used to create a layered file from scratch. The optimization argument becomes increasingly problematic when it is understood that Preview is incapable of producing or generating layers automatically from an optimization process (when saving a file). Preview will only maintain pre-existing layers produced from another program. Thus, Obama’s PDF layers had to be generated from another program prior to being saved from Preview.
    One more important point regarding Preview’s role in creating Obama’s PDF file: if a file is produced in another program, opened, and saved again within Preview, the metadata from any prior programs used is replaced with Preview metadata, thus eliminating any digital tracks for the previous programs utilized in the process (such as Photoshop or Illustrator, which might imply manipulation).
    Along with metadata, object code is also buried within the PDF file — which refers to the code that describes the attributes or properties present for each file object (and can be seen by opening the PDF file in WordPad or Word). Layers within the Obama PDF file would be examples of objects described in the object code. The report examines the layer object code, along with how the code properties can be applied in analyzing automated layers — produced by an Acrobat optimized document — against the manufactured layers — produced in Obama’s PDF file. Visible and consistent patterns in optimized layers do not exist in Obama’s PDF file.
    One of the object code properties examined will be BitsPerComponent (seen in the figure), which is typically followed by a numeric value of 1 or 8. To simplify, this refers to either a 1-bit layer or an 8-bit layer, respectively. In layman’s language, a 1-bit layer that also contains an ImageMask true property (in the object code) equates to a layer that is capable of containing only one single color — black. Conversely, an 8-bit (ColorSpace) layer is capable of containing more than one color — indeed, of containing any color value (not restricted to just black). If this concept is clear, then the rest is easy, and the report will explain these concepts further.
    The bottom line, documented in detail within the report, is that an optimized layer pattern will contain only a single layer of 1-bit quality that displays black only. All remaining layers (in an optimized file) are 8-bit — containing multiple colors. In other words, the optimization process pulls out all the black color onto one (1-bit) layer — not two (1-bit) layers, not three (1-bit) layers…just one layer, with this 1-bit object code attribute.
    Obama’s PDF file (as seen in the figure) contains EIGHT 1-bit layers — all of which fail to reflect a black color. However, the colors presented are a deception. The black is there, but it’s hidden in plain sight (as outlined in the report).
    Taking into account the multiple 1-bit layers embedded in Obama’s file, combined with the associated color-manipulation defined in the report, it is impossible to duplicate these file attributes through scanning or any other argument thrown at the debate, which currently includes:

    Optimization Adaptive compression MRC (Mixed Raster Content) compression JBIG2 Adobe Acrobat Pro, and… OCRHere’s a challenge to anyone who would like to defend the list of excuses or to supplement any additional excuses. It is advised (before doing so) to carefully read the report, examining the provided figure of object code for the nine layers found in Obama’s PDF (with important properties highlighted). Then run tests to see if any of the described suppositions proposed in the above bulleted list (or any new excuses being considered) can produce object code exactly as seen in the capture (without manipulation). The final result must include eight 1-bit Image Mask true layers (with FlateDecode, as seen in the figure), and one 8-bit ColorSpace layer (with DCTDecode, as seen for this last layer). Oh, and as an added bonus, the 1-bit layers (all eight of them) need to have colors displayed that are not within a pure (grayscale color value) range of black.
    When these displayed attributes from Obama’s PDF anomalies are reproduced via scanning and optimization settings, please publish the winning recipe settings for all to verify. And don’t forget to include a refry from Preview as the last step. If you cannot document the winning recipe, then supposition does not count, and therefore you have nothing — which falls into the category of misinformation, misunderstanding, misrepresenting, and misdirecting.
    Obama’s PDF object code properties cannot be reproduced without manufacturing andmanipulating layers. Any layers produced through optimizing will result in a single 1-bit layer. Repeat: just one 1-bit layer — not eight. In the case of adaptive compression, the color on the 1-bit layer will reflect a black color value — not off-white, not greenish-black, not greenish-gray (as displayed in Obama’s PDF file).
    The report will detail these concepts and provide a documented recipe on how the layers in Obama’s PDF file can be replicated down to the metadata, object code, and low file size. Here’s a hint: the only way it was possible was through complete image manipulation and manufacturing of layers. The winning recipe included Photoshop, Illustrator, and Preview (in that order).
    Mara Zebest is a graphic artist and co-author for a number of Adobe product books including the Inside Photoshop series, which typically exceeded 1,000 pages and was published in at least ten different languages around the world. Ms. Zebest is also tech editor for numerous books for both Adobe and Microsoft products and has worked closely with the Cold Case Posse (CCP) for the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) in providing evidence on Obama’s forged birth certificate.

    (I just finished a home remodel for a husband/wife team that are both graphic artists, and they said it was obviously a fake document.)

    • “just for you James……………….”

      Thanks, but no thanks. Sorry you took so much time to write this, but I have no interest in birther fairy tales that have no hope of going anywhere. The “layers” story is an old one and disputed elsewhere, including by other graphic artists and the Conservative National Review, so it hardly qualifies as “proof” of anything. Joe Arpaio might buy it, but apparently no one who matters does. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding

      • C’mon, SBJ, you’re all up in arms about where Romney’s got his money, but you don’t give a fat rat’s tiddley-boomp about a document that should’ve been brought to the forefront forthright? I say what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. (I know which is which but that information is classified.)

        • “you don’t give a fat rat’s tiddley-boomp about a document that should’ve been brought to the forefront forthright?”

          Nope. Everybody who matters has been satisfied by the documentation that has released–NOT ONE member of Congress has disputed it, as far as I know, and definitely not have asked for hearings or anything of the sort. If there were anything there, don’t you think that the Clinton machine, John McCain, multi-millionaire Donald Trump’s supposed “investigators,” or billionaire Mitt Romney (speaking of his money) would have found it?

          The guy’s been in office more than three years–and if you can’t find a guy (or gal) who can beat him based on his record, then that doesn’t say much about the alternatives, does it? In the meantime, the ever-changing birther stories smack of desperation and serve as a distraction that helps Obama more than it hurts him.

          • “Everybody who matters has been satisfied by the documentation that has released”

            No, they haven’t. Maybe to you only members of Congress matter, but to real patriots ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS matter.
            There are rules that we ALL must abide by……………….one of the requirements to be the POTUS is to be able to prove that you are a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. This typical Chicago POS we have in the White House now has NEVER proven that he meets that requirement on actually proven anything in my eyes.

            • Dusty, you would not be satisfied if you saw an 8mm film of Obama’s birth, with Don Ho picking out a tune under the palm trees swaying in the background.

            • “Maybe to you only members of Congress matter,”

              No, in this case the courts also matter. And they join all 535 members of Congress in demonstrating no interest in what birthers have to offer. So if the folks you define as “real patriots” have any meaningful influence, they should use it. Otherwise, their opinions may matter to each other, but not at all to the legal process and probably FOR Obama in the political process.

            • I certainly don’t disagree that the mainstream news media spend way too much time on trivia–I said so in my book. 🙂

              I don’t care about Mitt’s grades, and his degrees say plenty about his education. I don’t care that he’s rich–but I do care about how he got that way, if it has to do with not paying taxes, using Chinese labor, and/or supporting economies ahead of the one he wants to be in charge of.

        • It was glaringly obvious to me when Oblamer’s birth certificate was finally released, that if (and that’s a might big IF) its a fake, it would have been so easy for the Secret Service, CIA, FBI, or any of those other agencies could have created it with no problem, and hey!, why not? – – Oblamer is their boss for crying out loud. Give it up – – let it go. Nothing to see here, people. If it is a fake, it will never be proven while the fool is in office, and none of the legislation/policies the fool has passed will be overturned because of it.

          • “If it is a fake, it will never be proven while the fool is in office, and none of the legislation/policies the fool has passed will be overturned because of it.”

            Exactly right.

          • For one thing, they would have made a fake paper certificate, aged it artificially, then scanned that. No need for layers, photoshop, or ‘disappearing whatever graphic artist did the work for them.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.