Not that will matter but I sent the following email to Mike Zullo today. I called him Friday to ask a simple question: Did Carl Gallups speak for him when Gallups said on Mike Volin’s Blog Talk Radio program that blogger NBC and I were “persons of interest” in a criminal investigation?
Rather than answer that simple question Mr. Zullo behaved in a completely unprofessional manner, tried unsuccessfully to intimidate me into revealing my identity, and apparently let Carl Gallups surreptitiously listen to our conversation. He certainly did not behave as someone would expect a law enforcement professional to behave. That was no surprise because he isn’t.
I thought it was good to get on the record that NBC and I are more than willing to share research that meets his challenge. As I told Mr. Zullo in my email I will publish any response he might have.
Update: I had previously published them but for reference here are the files that were attached to my email to Mr. Zullo:
I will put aside your completely unprofessional behavior when I called the other day. Since you are not a professional law enforcement officer I probably should not have had any expectation that you should have acted as one.
From our conversation I gather that you are aware of the work with the Xerox WorkCentres that blogger NBC and I have done that has demonstrated that many of the so-called anomalies in the White House posted PDF are the result of a very simple scanning process. First let me remind you what you said in an interview with the Post & Email on this past May 17:
THE POST & EMAIL: I imagine you know who the major Obot players have been and the kind of trouble they have caused.
DET. ZULLO: I am. I really don’t pay attention to them; it’s just recently that it’s being brought to my attention more than ever. To me, the Obots are completely irrelevant to everything we are doing. Not one of them has the credentials; not one of them has any verifiable evidence. I have put it out there numerous times: if you can show me how a one-button scan push can do this to a document, please come in; I’d love to sit here and have you show me. Nobody ever steps up to that plate.
I assume that your “one button challenge” is a metaphor for a simple mechanical process that would require using only typical office equipment and software that demonstrates that the features of the PDF that you have attributed to a human forger can be reproduced using a simple and common office process.
I hereby accept your challenge.
Both NBC and I have performed experiments using two different models of the Xerox WorkCentre that have replicated the key features in the White House LFBC PDF through a very simple process. It is so simple that it should be easy for your or someone working for you to repeat the process and replicate the results to a reasonable extent.
These are the steps that we followed:
- Printed a color copy of the White House LFBC on a good quality color laser printer found in most modern offices.
- Scanned to a PDF email attachment on a Xerox WorkCentre using default settings. The two models we have tested are the Xerox WorkCentres 7535 and 7655. I believe other WorkCenter models use a similar MRC compression algorithm and would provide similar results. Note: Some lower end models do not use MRC compression and will produce much larger files that only contain a single image layer.
- Opened the resulting PDF on a Mac running OSX in Preview.
- Printed the file to PDF in Preview.
- Opened and examined the file in Adobe Illustrator and compared the results with the White House LFBC PDF.
Note that in none of the reports that the MSCO Cold Case Posse has produced nor in any of the video materials presented at the two press conferences have you provided such detail about any research that has been done by the Cold Case Posse.
I attached my resulting PDF files to this email. I included both the PDF produced by the Xerox WorkCentre 7535 scan to email and the Preview saved version. The objects or “layers” as you and most of us have incorrectly called them are remarkably similar and exhibit several features that your researchers claimed could not be created by any scanning process such as we performed. See Media Supplemental Report
The four main objects are almost identical. In both the WH LFBC and the Xerox 7535 PDF you will find:
- The green background, the birth certificate form and some of the text are separated in a JPEG object at 150 DPI resolution.
- There are while “holes” in the green background object where text was removed
- There are multiple one bit monochrome bit masks that are 300 DPI resolution
- One object contains most of the text from the form
- Another object contains most of the signature stamp
- The date stamp is separated in another object
- The objects like the date stamp and signature can be moved around in Illustrator
I showed a side by side comparison of the four main objects in an article I wrote comparing the Xerox findings with Ivan Zatkovich’s report solicited by WND after the publication of the LFBC in April 2011. Xerox Theory Consistent with Ivan Zatkovich Report
The similarities do not end there. (Follow the links for more detail).
- The PDF contains an embedded JPEG which contains identical quantization matrices. JEPG Quantization Matrices
- The alignment of two sides of the foreground images with 8 bit boundaries in a 300 ppi layer. 8 bit alignments, Layer Alignments
- Preview adds a top level clipping mask set at the printing borders of the default printer on the Mac. In the WH LFBC this clipping path covers some of the green background. In the 7535 Preview file the white border already existed when printed so the clipping path only hides white. It is clearly seen when viewed in Illustrator however.
- The creation of pixel for pixel identical letters and shapes via JBIG2.
- Scaling of the layers (48% and 24%). Scaling and Rotation on the Xerox 7655, Scaling and Rotation on the WH LFBC
- Existence of an embedded JPEG comment tag “YCrCb”. This has been found in all color documents scanned on a Xerox WorkCentre and can be found in the White House LFBC PDF. It refers to the color space used to encode the JPEG document. It is a comment only and not the command that is used to decode the JPEG. NBC and others have looked at hundreds of JPEG’s using YCrCb color space encoding and have never found the comment. It appears to be a leftover programmers comment. I emailed Professor Ricardo de Queiroz who holds many of the early Xerox patents on MRC compression and he agrees that the comment is most likely something a programmer left during cleaning up the software. In essence the color space comment is almost like a fingerprint that a file originated on a Xerox WorkCentre. Note: Since the JPEG object in the Preview file is double compressed the correct low level extraction software tools must be used to decode this layer to preserve the binary code integrity. The researchers used by the Cold Case Posse have not demonstrated the necessary level of expertise to perform this task. I am sure NBC would be more than willing to help them do this correctly. Any forensic examiner would recognize the significance of this finding and how it directly points to a Xerox WorkCentre as the source of the initial scan of the LFBC PDF.
- The remaining objects are random letters and mostly dots and speckles in both documents.
- Preview replaces the metadata in both files with its own version and removes the Xerox producer and creator metadata.
Both NBC and I have stated that the experiments with the printed copy of the LFBC cannot be relied upon to analyze the white halos around some letters since the halos are already there in the base document. However, other Xerox WorkCentre generated PDF’s have been found on line that clearly demonstrate the same halo effect around letters. The halo effect is most visible in documents with black text on a light non-white background. Here are two examples:
Notice in the second image the halos are quite apparent even on a mottled gray background. We are conducting further research that will I believe be definitive on the halos. I will forward those results if you are interested.
I believe the results presented above refute the vast majority of the the claims that the so-called anomalies in the LFBC PDF are proof that a human constructed the document. I have shown that a trivially simple workflow process can account for these. They are not anomalies at all. They are just artifacts from the Xerox MRC compression process. That leaves only a few other claims that are not PDF related such as the typography claims that you have hardly mentioned, the certificate number sequence, and the “African” race. Your claims in all of those areas have been debunked. The “African” race claim was debunked within minutes by “Doctor Conspiracy”, Kevin Davidson when he noticed that you had used mislabeled race code tables in the July 17, 2012 press conference. By the way you have never owned up to that mistake but left poor Mark Gillar hanging out there to try to excuse it.
When we spoke the other day I said that you needed to “man up”. What I meant was that you need to back up the challenge you made. We have accepted your challenge. Now see if you can replicate those results and publish them. I have given you every step necessary to do that. A real investigator would begin there and not try to find other documents that give different results. Both you and Sheriff Arpaio have stated that this investigation was only being done to find the truth and that you are not out to get the President. It is time to quit hiding behind the “criminal investigation” meme. Your own Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said no crime had been committed as of last September in a response to a request from your former CCP member Brian Reilly to take the “evidence” to a grand jury.
It is time to quit hiding behind unofficial spokespersons like Mark Gillar and Carl Gallups who purport to speak for you and the CCP but whom you have never acknowledged as such. It is time to quit portraying those who disagree with you as “Obots” and insinuating they are paid operatives and criminals. This childish behavior is beneath the dignity of someone who purports to represent a major metropolitan law enforcement organization. Neither my name nor NBC’s name would mean anything to you. I do not purport to be an expert in computer and document forensics but like your self-proclaimed experts I have worked in a technical field for over 30 years and have worked with computers in my job since I ran Fortran language programs on a mainframe using Hollerith punched cards in the late 1960′s. Reed Hayes has no expertise listed in his background that would suggest he is qualified to be an expert in this area either. You and your minions have tried to portray him as if he was hired by attorneys working for President Obama. That is just a blatant lie.
What counts in any research is the facts. I believe they are overwhelmingly in favor of the premise that the White House published a PDF scan of a certified copy of President Obama’s long from birth certificate obtained by special request and provided by the Hawaii Department of Health in April 2011. One copy was scanned on a XeroxWorkcentre 7655, which we know from GSA records and metadata from other documents published at the White House web site, was in use at the Executive Office of the President only days before the publication of the LFBC. At least two other independent images were also published. One was a photo of the press conference handout by AP photographer Scott Applewhite and another was a cell phone photo of one of the two certified copies taken by NBC reporter Savannah Guthrie.
We have accepted you challenge. It is time to show whether you are running a real investigation rather than a PR operation against Barack Obama.
I await your answer. I am publishing a copy of this letter on my blog. I do not consider this email nor any reply you might make as private communicatio. I offer to publish any response you might have.