Jul 14 2008

More On The Obama Birth Certificate Myth

Pam Geller’s forensic expert has come out with an update to address my previous claims. Interestingly enough he has become quite respectful regarding my less than formal analysis of the Obama COLB. More importantly, he once again has confirmed the essence of my original post – that the Opendna image could never be the source for the Kos and Obama Campaign COLB Images AND that there were updates to the HI COLB format between the Decosta 2002 COLB and the Obama 2007 COLB:

AJ is correct on several of his assumptions such as the OpenDNA images came after the KOS image and that there was a change in the COLB certificates between the Decosta and the KOS versions.

I appreciate Techdude coming out and confirming my positions. Folks can reference my posts on this matter here, here, here and here. I have some questions and comments posted at Pam’s site regarding the above update.

66 responses so far

66 Responses to “More On The Obama Birth Certificate Myth”

  1. kathie says:

    Some are saying that this whole birth certificate flap is covering up the fact that Obama’s parents were not married. Obama’s wife has already made that statement, so I don’t know what Obama is thinking the problem is. Don’t progressives think that fact is cool? It just adds to his mystique!

  2. Sue says:

    AJ,

    . However I have been using a half dozen separate Hawaiian COLBs issued over a 6 year period all the way through 2008 – some hi-res digital scans and some sitting on my desk (real ones) as comparison specimens. And once again to summarize – none of them match the security border of the KOS image.

    I am glad he did what I wanted someone to do. Look at the documents between 2002 and 2007 (and 2008, just for laughs).

  3. AJStrata says:

    Sue,

    Agreed. But let’s see what Techdude means by “match”. I am more than willing to go the forgery route if he has the evidence.

  4. bomza says:

    Let’s see… Instead of responding to my questions, all you have to say is “Bomza, Got a link?”

    You ignore my question, “And why is the Obama camp taking out ads on Google lying to the American people telling them they can see the “original” birth certificate when they know this is a scan of a laser printed document?”

    Then, while ignoring my question, you turn right around and respond to someone else only THREE POSTS LATER by saying,”BTW – no one ever claimed what was posted on Kos was his 1961 BC. All we have said is it looks to be a 2007 certificate issued by HI confirming his claim he was born in HI.”

    I don’t care what YOU say or where you get YOUR information or images. I prefer to get my statements and facts from the candidates themselves. And the fact remains…

    The Obama campaign is taking out ads on Google telling people “see the ORIGINAL birth certificate” with a link to their “FightTheSmears” site, and what is shown IS NOT his original birth certificate. You can’t “see the original birth certificate” there and the Obama campaign is lying to the American people. And you are willfully choosing to ignore that fact.

  5. MerlinOS2 says:

    Sorry AJ

    I still lean to ALL the online versions are bogus from a larger format file original and done that way just to create a shiny toy to distract from the empty suit Obama is.

    I could find better templates down loadable at Microsoft for MS Office.

    My guess is Obama has a valid and certified forty ways from Tuesday certificate and it matches the data fields presented here but not the shoddy scans/copies/bogus trash work.

    When the time is right the valid COLB will come out to prove all wrong and from then on Teflon him with the ‘it’s just like the COLB attack’.

  6. AJStrata says:

    I need to see a link to your claim dude. If you cannot show me the other COLBs what do you expect?

  7. AJStrata says:

    Merlin,

    You can believe what you want. But notice Techdude at Atlas Shrugs agrees with my statements to date!

  8. MerlinOS2 says:

    In all likelihood Hawaii runs a mainframe based purchased package that has all the documents they print as templet driven stuff.

    They probably have the base document printed on the high security paper with an offset press printer and laser fill in the rest.

    Otherwise they use blank security paper stock and laser flash print the entire form and data.

    It is probably a full customized suite to maintain and validate the data and produce all the required reports to the Federal Government and other agencies as required by law.

    It is very doubtful this is an application running on a PC somewhere that the kid of a neighbor down the street programmed up for the State of Hawaii.

    Odds are it is a full commercial suite that never would output this kind of trash.

  9. AJStrata says:

    Merlin,

    You accurately described what the Kos image shows!

    Again, Techdude agrees with many of my assertions (as do many others). BTW, no one uses “mainframes” anymore.

  10. bomza says:

    AJ,

    Time will tell, dude… You won’t need my link.

    And why is it I doubt your sincerity about believing a forgery if presented with the evidence based on your past “myth” and “silliness” articles. But maybe “myth” and “silliness” are synonyms for “objective reporting” to you.

    BTW – Nice non-response to the obvious lying to the American people by the Obama camp though. You don’t need a link to know this is a lie.

  11. AJStrata says:

    No link – no answer. What are you afraid of by showing your link? Is it possible you don’t have one!

    ROTFLMAO!

  12. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ go to the Hawaii.gov site and even look at any of their day to day press releases.

    First off the State Seal is in color but the quality of the graphics are much different that what we see here in these examples.

    Just how could you botch things up to make the State Seal even in a black and white scan look so much like a club foot mess compared to the original?

  13. AJStrata says:

    Merlin,

    Your barking up a dead tree. You don’t need a color seal. Check my last post on the matter.

  14. Sue says:

    But notice Techdude at Atlas Shrugs agrees with my statements to date!

    He sort of agrees with your statements. In fact, he says you were correct but not really because you didn’t have all the information. Well, he says it better…

    But f rom AJ’s point of view his observation would be correct having not seen a 2006, other 2007’s, or 2008 COLBs.

    …so something you said he doesn’t agree with, based on his observance of those documents.

  15. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ

    Hawaii says ALL COLBs are shipped out folded to fit the envelope.

    Just how did the Obama website get rid of the fold evidence?

    The only way possible would be for the half sister to pick up a copy down town and mail it to him in a flat folder or email a scan of it.

    But I would guess Hawaii doesn’t hand them over at the counter but mails all of them out.

  16. Sue says:

    I can walk into my county clerk’s office and walk out with a copy of my birth certificate. I don’t know why Obama’s sister couldn’t do the same.

  17. AJStrata says:

    Sue – read the above posts again, I noted his comments. So far he has been coming my direction the entire time on this. The 2006 COLBs are irrelevant to the 2007, they may have been an older version. the 2008’s may be as well. We don’t know how many revisions HI went through.

    And after his first post noting that the 2002 and 2007 COLBs did not match, therefore claiming the 2007 was a forgery, you have to understand he is walking back from his original claim which I found so laughable.

    Go back to the posts I linked to and READ his initial claims and how, now that I pointed out to him the Real ID Act, he has admitted there were new versions out.

  18. AJStrata says:

    Geez Merlin,

    You can see the fold in the Kos image! LOL!.

  19. bomza says:

    “No link – no answer. What are you afraid of by showing your link? Is it possible you don’t have one!

    ROTFLMAO!”

    Oh my God, you sound 10 years old here. Maybe this is opendna in disguise. Lol.

    No, there are plenty of sites out there. I just think I’ll share it with someone closer to my own age. Lol. Go ahead and believe what you want. And hopefully people won’t believe that Google ad lie that the Obama camp is putting out.

    Thanks for your time. I think.

  20. Sue says:

    I read the posts, AJ. And I posted what he said accurately. He agrees with you to a point. That doesn’t mean you aren’t right. Why not wait and see what the differences are? Who knows? It could be so obvious even you agree it is a forgery. But then, you would have to back up further than anyone else in that regard, so it’s better for you to hope the control numbers are the same. I noticed at Atlas you were concerned about that, instead of dead certain, as in your previous posts.

    I’ve asked someone else and I don’t think they knew or didn’t answer me, but does a scan of a scan, possibly scanned again, change anything in the way you look at the documents?