Tweet
Obama's Other Big Lie
American Thinker
Nick Chase
1/3/2014
Excerpt:
"We will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period." (Barack Obama, June 15, 2009, with variants repeated many times since).
Today, any American who isn't willfully blind knows this "promise" is a very big lie. A lie which was deliberately told by fundamentally-dishonest pushers of Obamacare, because if the truth were widely known at that time the Affordable Care Act would never have become law.
It's a lie that is so egregious, even the dinosaur media can't ignore it or cover it up. In fact, the dinosaurs are increasingly upset that they're being continually abused be "the most transparent administration in history" and they now seem to be more willing to shed light not just on this lie, but also on some of Obama's other lies.
Do you suppose we could get them to take another look at the big lie of April 27, 2011? The lie that is central to Barack Obama's identity? The lie the dinosaurs not only glossed over, but for which they excommunicated from the human race anybody who dared to point out it was a lie?
I refer, of course, to the long-form "birth certificate" forgery for Barack Obama released by the White House to the world as a digital image on April 27, 2011.
Before you say, "Oh no, here we go again -- the guys with the tinfoil hats are on the loose", let's dispense with the easy part. Here is the irrefutable proof that the Obama long-form "birth certificate" is a forgery.
Shown in Figure OFS (...), side by side, are two images, each measuring 8.5 inches wide by 11 inches high (in their life size), against a black background. On the right is the digital scan of Obama's genuine short-form birth certificate, as released by the Obama presidential campaign in 2008. On the left is the long-form "birth certificate" forgery released in April 2011. I call it the "green thing".
Genuine Hawaii birth certificates are printed on borderless green basketweave security paper, as you can see on the genuine short-form certificate image. They do not have the white border that you see in the "green thing" on the left. That white border is like a picture frame for a (borderless) photograph that you hang on the wall. It masks (covers) part of the security-paper pattern at its outer edges.
So it is immediately obvious to the naked eye that the "green thing" is not a simple scan of a genuine, borderless paper birth certificate. It is a computer-generated fake -- a forgery.
The White House released two versions of this fake: The "green thing", and a much clearer (higher-resolution) black-and-white paper copy with no security-paper background, which was passed out to reporters on the morning of April 27, 2011. This paper copy was digitized (photographed) by The Associated Press, and that image is shown in Figure MP1, which follows.
The second irrefutable proof of forgery was developed by Christopher Monckton (Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, an Englishman), who has done a thorough analysis of the forgery's pitch -- that is, the spacing of the supposedly-typed monospace text -- by drawing a uniform grid on the AP-digitized image of the forgery (...).
Enlarged, look at the "typed" line of text on Lord Monckton's grid, as shown in Figure MP2. We see that "August 4" is actually shifted slightly left of true pitch, and ", 1961 7:24 P." is shifted about a third of a character to the right of true pitch.
If you look back at Figure MP1, you will see that the column containing the comma is where the forger "lost" horizontal pitch. While the leftmost two-thirds of the forgery (mostly) has one typewriter pitch, the right one-third (mostly) has a different pitch, with the column containing the comma being (about) an extra third of a character too wide. This pitch-shift is very abrupt and cannot be accounted for by lens distortion in the AP photographer's camera, nor by any conceivable behavior by a real typist at a real typewriter. A true, and obvious, forger's mistake.
In Figure MP1 Lord Monckton also drew baselines for the "typewritten" text. (The baselines are for double-spaced lines on a typewriter, when the typist pulls the carriage-return lever twice after typing a line.) You can see that some lines of "typewritten" text are on the baseline, some are close, and others are off, with no consistency from line to line. While the forger tried to maintain consistent pitch horizontally, vertical pitch was lost.
Courtesy of Lord Monckton, shown in Figure MP3 is a very-beaten-up genuine Hawaiian birth certificate for the summer of Obama's birth, on which Monckton has superimposed a pitch-grid (blue lines) showing that a genuine typewritten Hawaiian birth certificate of that era maintains horizontal and vertical pitch on a form designed to accommodate double-spaced typewritten lines (as one would expect.) (The items "Waihee", "Negro", "Porter Service" and "6-13-61" are later modifications made with a different typewriter.)
To summarize:
If Obama's long-form "birth certificate" were genuine, then the White House would have released a simple, borderless digital image resulting from the scan of a genuine paper document, in a widely-used graphical format. (The 2008 certificate image was released as a JPEG.)
But because the "birth certificate" is a forgery, what we wound up with is a mess. Paper black-and-white copies of the forgery, with the basketweave security pattern digitally "turned off" before printing, were passed out to the White House press corps. Then a much-poorer-quality color image, inexplicably masked with a white border, was deliberately digitally damaged by the forger to confuse Internet sleuths before it was released to the public in PDF format (generally used for documents, not stand-alone pictures) as the "green thing".
If you would like more detailed evidence of forgery than is contained in this brief summary, I urge you to download and read my complete research report, Barry Soetoro's Birth Secret, available at:
http://contrariansview.org/Site/Abou.../BSBS/BSBS.pdf
This is a "public domain" document (uncopyrighted, except for "fair use" of certain graphics), so feel free to pass it around among your friends.
For the two years that I have been analyzing and writing about Obama's long-form "birth certificate", I have not done any of this research to score political points. (I think Obama is a terrible president, but that is irrelevant to my research efforts.) I have only been trying for my own satisfaction to solve the maddening, real-life mystery of Obama's origins and of what's being hidden that's on his real birth certificate.
In "Secrets Revealed" (American Thinker, June 15, 2012) I compared the short-form birth certificate, the forgery, and the "Verification of Birth" sent by the Hawaii Department of Health to Arizona secretary of state Ken Bennett -- line by line -- and concluded that all of the information on the short-form birth certificate and on the long-form forgery that was released to the public is true, but the genuine long-form image cannot be shown because the certificate in Hawaii's possession "looks different" or contains more information than what was released to the public.
At this point we progress from known fact -- the "birth certificate" is fake -- to theory: If all the information shown is true, why was the fake, instead of the genuine birth certificate, released?
For me, there is only one likely possibility: Adoption. Specifically, Barry was legally adopted by Obama's mother's second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in a way that caused the Hawaii birth record to be visually altered.
Is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro legally adopted Obama after he and Ann Dunham (Obama) were married in Hawaii on March 24, 1965?
Yes, there is, though it is sketchy. (Adopted children don't usually go around telling people they were adopted, nor do parents typically advertise that their children are adopted, though it may be obvious where the child's race differs from the parents'.)
There is a Facebook posting made in 2011 by Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, in response to a critic where she wrote in part, "You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother's legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law and what you were saying didn't make any sense to me but that the law that mattered was the law of this country [that is, U.S. law] and the fact that he was born in the United States." (Italics are mine.) It would seem that Maya thinks that Barry was adopted, believing it to be an Indonesian adoption.
............................................
View the complete article at:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/...r_big_lie.html
American Thinker
Nick Chase
1/3/2014
Excerpt:
"We will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period." (Barack Obama, June 15, 2009, with variants repeated many times since).
Today, any American who isn't willfully blind knows this "promise" is a very big lie. A lie which was deliberately told by fundamentally-dishonest pushers of Obamacare, because if the truth were widely known at that time the Affordable Care Act would never have become law.
It's a lie that is so egregious, even the dinosaur media can't ignore it or cover it up. In fact, the dinosaurs are increasingly upset that they're being continually abused be "the most transparent administration in history" and they now seem to be more willing to shed light not just on this lie, but also on some of Obama's other lies.
Do you suppose we could get them to take another look at the big lie of April 27, 2011? The lie that is central to Barack Obama's identity? The lie the dinosaurs not only glossed over, but for which they excommunicated from the human race anybody who dared to point out it was a lie?
I refer, of course, to the long-form "birth certificate" forgery for Barack Obama released by the White House to the world as a digital image on April 27, 2011.
Before you say, "Oh no, here we go again -- the guys with the tinfoil hats are on the loose", let's dispense with the easy part. Here is the irrefutable proof that the Obama long-form "birth certificate" is a forgery.
Shown in Figure OFS (...), side by side, are two images, each measuring 8.5 inches wide by 11 inches high (in their life size), against a black background. On the right is the digital scan of Obama's genuine short-form birth certificate, as released by the Obama presidential campaign in 2008. On the left is the long-form "birth certificate" forgery released in April 2011. I call it the "green thing".
Genuine Hawaii birth certificates are printed on borderless green basketweave security paper, as you can see on the genuine short-form certificate image. They do not have the white border that you see in the "green thing" on the left. That white border is like a picture frame for a (borderless) photograph that you hang on the wall. It masks (covers) part of the security-paper pattern at its outer edges.
So it is immediately obvious to the naked eye that the "green thing" is not a simple scan of a genuine, borderless paper birth certificate. It is a computer-generated fake -- a forgery.
The White House released two versions of this fake: The "green thing", and a much clearer (higher-resolution) black-and-white paper copy with no security-paper background, which was passed out to reporters on the morning of April 27, 2011. This paper copy was digitized (photographed) by The Associated Press, and that image is shown in Figure MP1, which follows.
The second irrefutable proof of forgery was developed by Christopher Monckton (Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, an Englishman), who has done a thorough analysis of the forgery's pitch -- that is, the spacing of the supposedly-typed monospace text -- by drawing a uniform grid on the AP-digitized image of the forgery (...).
Enlarged, look at the "typed" line of text on Lord Monckton's grid, as shown in Figure MP2. We see that "August 4" is actually shifted slightly left of true pitch, and ", 1961 7:24 P." is shifted about a third of a character to the right of true pitch.
If you look back at Figure MP1, you will see that the column containing the comma is where the forger "lost" horizontal pitch. While the leftmost two-thirds of the forgery (mostly) has one typewriter pitch, the right one-third (mostly) has a different pitch, with the column containing the comma being (about) an extra third of a character too wide. This pitch-shift is very abrupt and cannot be accounted for by lens distortion in the AP photographer's camera, nor by any conceivable behavior by a real typist at a real typewriter. A true, and obvious, forger's mistake.
In Figure MP1 Lord Monckton also drew baselines for the "typewritten" text. (The baselines are for double-spaced lines on a typewriter, when the typist pulls the carriage-return lever twice after typing a line.) You can see that some lines of "typewritten" text are on the baseline, some are close, and others are off, with no consistency from line to line. While the forger tried to maintain consistent pitch horizontally, vertical pitch was lost.
Courtesy of Lord Monckton, shown in Figure MP3 is a very-beaten-up genuine Hawaiian birth certificate for the summer of Obama's birth, on which Monckton has superimposed a pitch-grid (blue lines) showing that a genuine typewritten Hawaiian birth certificate of that era maintains horizontal and vertical pitch on a form designed to accommodate double-spaced typewritten lines (as one would expect.) (The items "Waihee", "Negro", "Porter Service" and "6-13-61" are later modifications made with a different typewriter.)
To summarize:
If Obama's long-form "birth certificate" were genuine, then the White House would have released a simple, borderless digital image resulting from the scan of a genuine paper document, in a widely-used graphical format. (The 2008 certificate image was released as a JPEG.)
But because the "birth certificate" is a forgery, what we wound up with is a mess. Paper black-and-white copies of the forgery, with the basketweave security pattern digitally "turned off" before printing, were passed out to the White House press corps. Then a much-poorer-quality color image, inexplicably masked with a white border, was deliberately digitally damaged by the forger to confuse Internet sleuths before it was released to the public in PDF format (generally used for documents, not stand-alone pictures) as the "green thing".
If you would like more detailed evidence of forgery than is contained in this brief summary, I urge you to download and read my complete research report, Barry Soetoro's Birth Secret, available at:
http://contrariansview.org/Site/Abou.../BSBS/BSBS.pdf
This is a "public domain" document (uncopyrighted, except for "fair use" of certain graphics), so feel free to pass it around among your friends.
For the two years that I have been analyzing and writing about Obama's long-form "birth certificate", I have not done any of this research to score political points. (I think Obama is a terrible president, but that is irrelevant to my research efforts.) I have only been trying for my own satisfaction to solve the maddening, real-life mystery of Obama's origins and of what's being hidden that's on his real birth certificate.
In "Secrets Revealed" (American Thinker, June 15, 2012) I compared the short-form birth certificate, the forgery, and the "Verification of Birth" sent by the Hawaii Department of Health to Arizona secretary of state Ken Bennett -- line by line -- and concluded that all of the information on the short-form birth certificate and on the long-form forgery that was released to the public is true, but the genuine long-form image cannot be shown because the certificate in Hawaii's possession "looks different" or contains more information than what was released to the public.
At this point we progress from known fact -- the "birth certificate" is fake -- to theory: If all the information shown is true, why was the fake, instead of the genuine birth certificate, released?
For me, there is only one likely possibility: Adoption. Specifically, Barry was legally adopted by Obama's mother's second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in a way that caused the Hawaii birth record to be visually altered.
Is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro legally adopted Obama after he and Ann Dunham (Obama) were married in Hawaii on March 24, 1965?
Yes, there is, though it is sketchy. (Adopted children don't usually go around telling people they were adopted, nor do parents typically advertise that their children are adopted, though it may be obvious where the child's race differs from the parents'.)
There is a Facebook posting made in 2011 by Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, in response to a critic where she wrote in part, "You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother's legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law and what you were saying didn't make any sense to me but that the law that mattered was the law of this country [that is, U.S. law] and the fact that he was born in the United States." (Italics are mine.) It would seem that Maya thinks that Barry was adopted, believing it to be an Indonesian adoption.
............................................
View the complete article at:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/...r_big_lie.html
Comment