Birthers are back

[cherrypoptart]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/12/investigators-find-source-for-obamas-online-birth-certification-image/

Looking at the birth certificate video analysis they put up there at about 1:30 where they take five points on Johanna Ah’nee's birth certificate and copy them together and then move them over and they line up precisely with the identical marks on Obama's birth certificate... I mean I thought I had let this go but that's just spooky.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/court-obama-must-be-constitutionally-eligible/barack-obama-birth-certificate/

Someone else's comments from there that seem to match up with the gist of what I remember some of our own tech savvy contributors posting about this:

"my favorite thing about this doc is how illustrator and photoshop users can tear apart all the things they did to fabricate it. Look how the lines of the form bend with the binding, yet the background doesn't. What hospital or state records office has the budget to hire a designer to scan, very poorly delete the white background, (as evidenced by the white artifacts around the type) and put it on that hideous green background? what office on earth would do that in lieu of just scanning it in or putting it on an HP scan to email? Those machines you buy at office depot don't do what you see here. BTW, who ever did this lousy job, if you use multiply in the layer effects pallete, you won't have to delete the white, and you won't get the artifacts around the black pixels. Also when you are bringing in vector objects: add noise so it blends with the original raster image. Sloppy sloppy work. The PDF you can download opened in Illustrator reveals all. links, placed objects, multiple layers. A definite work of fabrication.

... there are so many reasons this thing is fake. Download the PDF from the whitehouse website, find someone who knows illustrator, (someone who knows pre-press) and ask them to explain the structure of the document and how it was built. ask them which elements are raster and vector, and if something like that is possible just by scanning something."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those were the comments years ago by someone apparently knowledgeable on this stuff and that was even before Ah'nee's birth certificate was available for comparison. One might question if Ah'nee's birth certificate is legit. Maybe that is a forgery based off of Obama's birth certificate to perpetrate this birther hoax against a real Obama birth certificate. I don't know but I have to admit this is all still very curious.

I remember Daruma pointing out that before Obama anyone could get their birth certificate or a close family member's just by paying ten bucks and then suddenly after Obama all you could get, supposedly, was the short form according to Hawaiian government officials who said that even if Obama wanted to and came down there in person he couldn't get his long form. Maybe if there was a fraud it was imperative not to let the template for it get out. I wonder how Joe got access to it after all. And I also wonder if now that Obama is almost out of office the state of Hawaii might consider letting people get access to their own birth information on the long forms which are invaluable genealogical resources.

[TheDrake]

tl;dr  wnd has been doing this crap for years.

I think you mean marginally valuable rather than invaluable. Long forms don't have much more information, just parents addresses I think.

[TheDrake]

FYI, from reddit:

I will describe the insane coincidence implicit in his narrative. Arpaio's guy admits that he got the Ah'Nee certificate from Corsi in 2011. Johanna Ah'Nee voluntarily gave the certificate to Corsi in 2011 (presumably he put a plea out for anyone to volunteer a contemporaneous birth certificate sample to compare BHO's to). This is important. The original context of the Ah'Nee birth certificate is that it was the first contemporaneous Kapiolani longform that became available for forensic comparison to BHO's longform. Some of the first claims about BHO's document being a forgery based on comparison to the Ah'Nee form have since been debunked. They were based on weird repeated characters that looked to have been copy-pasted and/or layers in the document (both oddities turned out to be an artefact of the Xerox scanner used, see here and here). In summary, the forgery theories based on the differences between the BHO form and the Ah'Nee form were discredited. But, apparently undiscouraged, now Corsi and the other birthers are saying that BHO's doc is forged, based not on differences to the Ah'Nee doc, but instead based on similarities. Now their story has become that the BHO doc was partially lifted from the Ah'Nee doc. But therein lies the insane coincidence. The same birth certificate that Corsi was given in 2011 just so happens to be the exact same birth certificate that the CIA/Illuminati/Anunnaki used to forge BHO's? That to me seems fishy as hell.

[cherrypoptart]

Thanks for the info. I hope I don't get sucked back down into this rabbit hole.

That also struck me as odd that he came across the exact same birth certificate supposedly used to help in the forgery. I wondered how many birth certificates he had to go through to find the one Obama supposedly used as the template. It certainly stretches credulity to think that the only one he came across happened to be the one he needed to prove something, unless there just aren't that many floating around or something so that was the only one Obama's minions could get ahold of as well.

But it seems like someone must be lying here. If Obama's birth certificate is legit then Joe is straight up lying and perpetrating his own massive fraud. There isn't any way this could be any kind of mistake or misunderstanding. Is there?

[NobleHunter]

Fraud is always a safe bet when dealing with purveyors of conspiracies theories. Especially people who are using it to make money. When exploiting the credulous, the temptation must be overwhelming just to start making **** up.

[TheDeamon]

Without looking at any of the "evidence" in either case, watermarking, in particular back in the the 1940's, 50's, and even later(and earlier) was a mechanical process. In many cases it probably involved the paper passing across a drum with the specific "watermark" present, the size of the drum would determine the frequency of such a watermark. It also is possible the mill would have set the drum size to correspond to the size/length that the paper was going to be cut to. As such each successive page would be "very comparable" to the one before it. There would some slight drift over time, as exact matches aren't going to happen.

But you also have not wholly improbably odds of ending up with multiple pages ending up with virtually identical watermarks/other printing artifacts. Those odds can be widely variable depending upon a large number of factors. So the thing they're fixating on now as "proof" may not be anything particularly unusual after all other things get considered. Improbable? Maybe. Impossible? No.

[cherrypoptart]

Well I think you have to see the video. I'm old enough that I used to work on a typewriter filling out forms and it looks like these birth certificates were originally done the same way. The places where the "x" marks are put into a box and where the names Oahu and Honolulu are typed would never match up so precisely on two separate forms. That's why on forms like a military DD-214 that was typed out you see the "X" marks all over the box and the information typed in slightly different places each time. The paper feeds into the typewriter just a little bit differently every time and it throws the spacing off just slightly. If the video is accurate then I'm confident in saying that something there is very hinky, either with Obama's form or with the other lady's. A hand typed paper will never match like that, down to the exact ink blotch patterns from where the letters (hammers I think they're called) hit the paper.

[TheDrake]

I saw some of the stills. Video is always overdramatized and more easily manipulated. The reddit thread says it isn't quite as cut and dried as far as matching up. Plus the whole notion that people who hated Obama had this document in 2011 and only just suddenly noticed five years later that things matched up, not to mention the possibility that they just altered the document they are supposedly matching up to Obama's.

[Kasandra]

The same birth certificate that Corsi was given in 2011 just so happens to be the exact same birth certificate that the CIA/Illuminati/Anunnaki used to forge BHO's? That to me seems fishy as hell.

Not if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama's BC was forged.  It's just a matter of connecting the dots, no matter how many dots or how many tries it takes.  It would probably take fewer dots to prove that Obama is Queen Elizabeth's illegitimate love child.

[NobleHunter]

Please, Queen Elizabeth II is obviously a lizard. You aren't suggesting Obama is secretly a lizard, are you?

[Kasandra]

I can't rule it out, like so many other things we are hearing about.  For instance, the reports of dead people voting in Chicago gains credibility if you are a fan of Juan, Shaun or Dawn of the Dead, which are very realistic.

[D.W.]

I can't rule it out, like so many other things we are hearing about.  For instance, the reports of dead people voting in Chicago gains credibility if you are a fan of Juan, Shaun or Dawn of the Dead, which are very realistic.

Oh man!  I totally missed Juan of the Dead.  Just watched the trailer and it looks fantastic. 
Thanks for the heads up.

[Kasandra]

OK then, you owe me juan.

[D.W.]

Hmm if I owe you an obscure zombie flick, Fido (2006) is worth checking out if you didn't see it.  At least I don't recall it getting any advertising.

[Wayward Son]

All I can say is, if someone starts questioning Trump's legitimacy as President, I trust Trump supporters will keep quiet.  Because if people are still talking about this BS, anything anyone says about one of the most prominent purveyors of it is simply fair-play turn-about. :p

I would say that I trust Trump, of all people, to keep quiet, but we all know he is constitutionally incapable of doing so.

[Kasandra]

I would say that I trust Trump, of all people, to keep quiet, but we all know he is constitutionally incapable of doing so.

Yet another reason to impeach him...

[TheDeamon]

I would say that I trust Trump, of all people, to keep quiet, but we all know he is constitutionally incapable of doing so.

Yet another reason to impeach him...

First he has to do something to warrant it. Simply being capable of doing something doesn't mean he will.

[Wayward Son]

We might as well give him a chance.  Who knows, he might turn out to be a good President.  Sure, the odds are horribly against it, but he's beaten the odds before.  Maybe he'll surprise us again.

But if not, as the Boy Scouts say, be prepared.

[Kasandra]

First he has to do something to warrant it. Simply being capable of doing something doesn't mean he will.

I was punning on him not being constitutionally able...