From The Western Center for Journalism APRIL 22, 2013 BY GEORGE SPELVIN
Excerpts
“According to lead Obama investigator Mike Zullo . . .
“Disinformation and the intentional dissemination of false information to protect Obama, will not survive in the face of what Zullo is calling a 100% fabricated document. He listed the following tactics used to discredit the research of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse: media black outs; ridicule of opponents; infiltration and domination of message boards; setting up straw men to create an argument to chip away at the truth and simply ignoring the facts. “All we ask [is that Obama] bring forward the real original document,” said Zullo.” . . . . Read Complete Report
According to expert examination this “birth certificate” was generated on a computer. There were no computer in general use when Obama was born. As we all know the original of Obama’s birth certificate would have been typed on a typewriter. There are other problems with this document besides that. Obama we want some answers. . . EDITOR
Sheriff Joe—-and Mike Zullo–are laughed at by the National Review and not believed even by the Conservative secretary of state of Arizona, Sheriff Joe’s own state, who asked Hawaii to confirm Obama’s birth certificate and who accepted Hawaii’s confirmation when it was sent.
Obama’s birth certificate is not forged. Only birther “experts” have called it forged, and they have not shown that they are even experts, much less fair and impartial. Those are two reasons why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review (or by Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Gingrich or Santorum or Huckabee).
One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.
Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.
And birther sites have not shown you these real experts.
Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”
Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”
John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.
Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.
Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.
Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.
And it is irrational (to say the least) to think that Obama’s relatives had enough money (Obama’s grandfather was just a furniture salesman and his grandmother a low-level employee in a bank at the time; and his father came to Hawaii on a free flight) or crazy enough to spend LOTS of money on a long and expensive and risky (incidents of stillbirths were high at the time) overseas trip for their pregnant daughter—–when there were perfectly good hospitals in Honolulu, Hawaii.
Hi ehancock;
Thank you for a very precise and articulate presentation of the facts as you see them. The only way we learn the truth is through sharing information. I’m sure your comments here will help our readers as they follow this controversial subject. The REAL subject of Obama ignoring court orders back when I started following the subject.
I could care less were he was born. I want him to answer as to why he does not have to obey a lawful court order. ON-SITE SEARCH”Judge Refuse to squelch subpoena for Obama to appear at a hearing to determine Eligibility to Run in 2012″)
What puts him above every other citizen?
Thanks!
Dennis
First, virtually all the “court orders” you refer to do not exist. They are the claims of birther lawyers that courts issued the orders—but they didn’t. Also, state court orders do not apply, and never have, to federal officials (separation of powers).
However, the basic discussion was over whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii. He was, as his birth certificate and the confirmation of the facts on it by the officials of both parties in Hawaii show, and as confirmed further by the public Index Data and as still further confirmed by the birth notices sent to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii. And, as still further confirmed by the Hawaii teacher who wrote home to her father, named Stanley, about the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley.
I can show citations for all of those FACTS. Would you like to show citations for your claims that Obama ignored court orders (and show that they are federal court orders)?
Mr Hancock,
Let’s start with this: You don’t read very well, apparently. The stories about the birth certificate are not our original work, we are reporting what others have published. If you don’t agree with the “facts’, take it up with the original publisher of the story.
That said, let’s move on to the next issue you raised, “State court orders do not apply, and never have, to federal officials”. Your knowledge of Constitutional law appears to be somewhat lacking. The law in these cases applies to eligibility of a candidate to run for office in the individual States and is completely isolated from federal law. The cases heard to date are in regard/relate to State law in the individual State where the case is filed. The individual candidate or the party nominating that candidate is responsible for certifying that candidate’s eligibility in each of the several States.
The story you are commenting on has zero references to “court orders” of any kind. It does, however, allege that the Obama camp is using “infiltration and domination of message boards; setting up straw men to create an argument to chip away at the truth and simply ignoring the facts.” It may appear to some readers that you are using a script rather than commenting. You may want to get a better coach.
Re: “The story you are commenting on has zero references to “court orders” of any kind.”
I was responding to a comment by dgcrenshaw who said that he was concerned about Obama ignoring a court order. Well, that happened in only one case (birther lawyers have claimed that others happened, but they never showed a court order signed by a judge) and that was in an Administrative law court in a state court. Federal officials do not have to respond to state court orders, especially not in administrative law courts.
Re: ” does, however, allege that the Obama camp is using “infiltration and domination of message boards; setting up straw men to create an argument to chip away at the truth and simply ignoring the facts.”
Answer: I am not on anyone’s team, and I always cite the facts. It is you who are ignoring the facts. And i can show it. IF you had the facts, then you could respond to this question:
For Obama to have been born in a foreign country:
(1) Obama’s relatives would have had to have been rich enough (and they weren’t. In 1961 Obama’s grandfather was a furniture salesman and his grandmother was a low-level employee in a bank) and dumb enough to send their daughter at high risk of stillbirth to a foreign country to give birth—-—despite there being fine hospitals in Hawaii;
(2) Obama’s mother would have had to have traveled overseas ALONE and somehow got Obama back to the USA without getting him entered on her US passport or getting a visa for him (which would have had to have been applied for in a US consulate in that country and the records would still exist);
(3) got the officials in Hawaii to record his birth in Hawaii despite (as birthers claim) his being born in another country and somehow got the teacher who wrote home to her father, named Stanley, about the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley to lie (and since the woman’s father’s name really was Stanley, she would have had to have found one of the very few women with fathers of that name to do it).
If you sincerely believe that Obama could have been born in a foreign country, then you could answer all three points. For Obama to have been born in a foreign country, all three would have had to have happened—-so, here’s the question, what are the odds that all three happened???
Funny you are worried about a presidents birth certificate on his last
Term off being president and what makes you really skeptical the fact
That its not printed with a Type writer. When the previous president
Lied about a country saying they had chemical weapons and invades it
And another country after a bunch of conspiracys of taking down a building
To invade another country and you are worried about a birth certificate
Sounds like you got some personal issues with current president and I really
Don’t think it has anything to do with his Birth Certificate ! ……… Nigger.
Apocalypse9;
If you would check my writings back over the years you will find that I have been just as hard trying to expose the Controllers domination during the the last 5 presidents administrations and have pulled no punches with any of them. Obama is on the same team as Bush and the rest of the puppets of the globalist elite.
like all liberals (you are a liberal I presume) you want to break everything down to the “race card.” Need I remind you that Obama is not a “black man” he is a ‘white and black man.” But that has nothing to do with this issue. For some reason anytime someone criticizes THIS president there is always someone waiting in the wings to claim it’s “because he’s black.” Just because a person is black doesn’t mean he isn’t human with human traits. We should be able to criticize those traits we do not like. In this case arrogance and putting himself above the laws of our land. I see nothing racist in that. So go ahead and try and shock us with your “nigger” word, its you that thinks that way. Too bad.
The truth of the matter is that Barrack “Berry” Obama, Baby Bush, Daddy Bush, “Slick Willie’ Clinton, “Tricky Dick” Nixon and all the rest of the modern Presidents have been controlled by the Rockefeller crowd and are not in step with where our country needs to go and in fact are leading every man, woman, and child into slavery. And that’s the only black & white issue here.
The reason for my following of the ‘birthers’ reports is because of Obama’s ignoring a court order, way back at the start of this story, to produce proof of his eligibility to run for president in the state of Georgia. He ignored that legal State Courts order.
[“Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia. Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia.] I only want an answer to one question: “What gives him the right to ignore a lawful judges order?
Until that question is answered to my satisfaction I will continue to run this series. And you can dream up all of the ‘race” reasons you want. My published history stands as my answer to that charge. . . . EDITOR
Re: “The reason for my following of the ‘birthers’ reports is because of Obama’s ignoring a court order…’
As discussed above, federal officials do not have to respond to state court orders, especially in an Administrative law court.
ehancock;
I see Rick is right, you obviously can’t read.
In Rick’s post in this string he explained the reason we are running this series: “The President of the United States refusing to answering a lawful subpoena to appear in court.”(Source) That has nothing to do with the Feds. It actually has to do with character and arrogance. Any other citizen who is issued a subpoena has to appear or send legal Representative. Obama chose to ignore. I ask what gives him that right?
And why so much concern from you over this series of reports? Like another reader said, in three and a half years we’ll be rid of the puppet and the Controllers will just put another cookie cutter yes man in his place. Only thing that comes to my mind for your continued concern for this particular series is, ah ha “a troll” posting comments for his master. I repeat: I don’t care where Obama is from, I just want to know what gives him the right to thumb his nose at a lawfully issues subpoena?
I will continue to post your liberal talking points, but
I will not respond to any more of your nonsense. . . . EDITOR
Re: “Any other citizen who is issued a subpoena has to appear or send legal Representative. Obama chose to ignore. I ask what gives him that right?”
Answer: It is very simple, federal officials do not have to answer state court orders—separation of powers, you know (or you should know).
Re: “And why so much concern from you over this series of reports?”
Answer: I seem to have about as much concern about the subject as you do. We are posting about the same amount.
I have read a lot of negative comments on presidents and I can recall
Almost every president has been called an antichrist or some sort of illuminate
Spy or some corporate puppet and they all probably were or are but the
One thing that is new is the level of hatred for the current president on almost
All levels of establishments mostly from white older men. I usually have list of Mis conduct
And questionable judgment by a president but this current president has not done
As questionable ethics as previous presidents but he is more subjected to media and mainstream
Media scrutiny than any previous presidents I find the ones that try to make the most change weather it is good or not faces the most scrutiny. I am the one of the last ones to stand by a president when
They make some questionable judgment calls but I will atleast hear him/her out
And if its not so conflicting of intrest I can easily let that go as long as my rights are intact and America
Is still a compassionate, strong, leader, neighborly, fair, honest, free, supportive,and many other wonderful things that make America what is ….. Stop supporting anti American crap think of ways to bring us together not apart America is stronger together people like you add to the problem