Immigration Attorney Charles Kuck Says Apuzzo is Wrong on NBC

It was an old fashion “whooping”

This morning our good friend Foggy (Bill Bryan) appeared on the radio program “The Immigration Hour” with Georgia immigration attorney Charles Kuck. The program streams every Tuesday on the America’s Web Radio Network out of Sandy Springs, Georgia. Professor Kuck’s guest last week was DUI attorney Mario Apuzzo who fancies himself a constitutional authority. Last week Kuck sounded as if he not prepared to counter Apuzzo’s nonsense “two citizen parent” theory for natural born citizen. Today’s program was a different story. Foggy had requested a spot on the show and Professor Kuck agreed. Kuck had obviously boned up on the subject and quoted extensively from the key cases such as Lynch v Clarke and Wong Kim Ark. He agreed that Apuzzo was wrong on every point especially his flawed reading of dicta from Minor v Happersett.

Kuck said he would be glad to come on a future Reality Check Radio program to discuss immigration reform. He also said he would like to have Bill back again to discuss the eligibility issue some more. Kuck had briefly become a hero for some of the Birther blogs but we suspect they will ignore this follow up show where he essentially tosses Mario Apuzzo under the bus.

Foggy will call in to RC Radio tonight to review his appearance today. Tune in at 9 PM ET/ 6 PM PT on the link shown to the right.

I will add a link to download the audio from the program today as soon as it is available.

Update 6/19:

The audio is up now.

Listen here:

Download

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Birthers, Mario Apuzzo and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Immigration Attorney Charles Kuck Says Apuzzo is Wrong on NBC

  1. RoadScholar says:

    So what’s it gonna be THIS time? Professor Kuck now says Obama is eligible because he was 1) threatened, 2) bribed, 3) an Obot operative all along, 4) Jewish, 5) a Communist, or what? I mean, they’ve got to say something like that rather than admit that Birthers are just plain wrong!

    • That is why you are a “Road” Scholar and not a Rhode Scholar. It is Kuck that is wrong.
      Congress has tried over eight times in the past 10 years to revise the NBC requirement and each time has failed. In any event, a constitutional provision can ONLY be revised or repealed BY AMENDMENT. Why is congress so concerned about the “Natural-Born Citizen” requirement? It is because of their work towards the “New World Order”. They want global government. BOTH Bushes, Obama, Biden and the Clintons are advocates of the NWO. Obama and both Bushes have advocated for the NWO publicly in speeches that they all made. To prove my point, both parties have been proffering patently disqualified candidates to run for POTUS:

      1. Barack Obama- Father a Brit. DQ’d
      2. John McCain-Born in Colon,Panama-DQ’d
      3. Ted Cruz-Born in Canada-DQ’d
      4. Marco Rubio-Parents were not naturalized at the time of his birth-DQ’d
      5. Bobby Jindahl
      6.Arnold Swartzenegger
      7.Mitt Romney-Father was born in Mexico
      8.Rick Santorum-Parents were not naturalized at the time of his birth-DQ’d

      These eight people all have Citizenship status issues which disqualify them to be POTUS.

  2. I notice that Birther Reports has not a single mention of the show with Bill Bryan. A week earlier they rushed out their chopped up video/audio version of the Apuzzo interview just a few hours after the show. I suspect we will here nothing more about Professor Kuck from Birther Reports.

  3. Pingback: Mario Apuzzo’s “Schlock And Awe” Attack Fizzles!!! | The Birther Think Tank

  4. NBC says:

    I have done an analysis of the JPEG file embedded in the PDF and reached several interesting conclusions:

    1. The compression resulted in a quality drop of 53%, which is extremely high
    2. There is not metadata that suggests creation by Photoshop and I am exploring others
    3. There is one comment in the file “YCbCr” which is the coding scheme for the color space.
    4. Error level analysis shows no evidence of tampering
    5. It’s unfortunate that we have not seen anyone apply these tools to look in more depth at the raw data

    If we can identify the software which generates such a comment, we can reach additional conclusions.

    JPEG – The Gory Details – Part 1 – Introduction

    JPEG – The Gory Details – Part 2 – File Contents

    Enjoy, it is a bit technical but I believe it is still clear enough for one to follow the dissection of the JPEG which was embedded in the long form birth certificate PDF.

    • I am enjoying this series NBC. As you said it is a bit technical. When you are done it would be great if you assembled the work in a white paper and simplified the analysis for those not into the technical side of things.

      Have you done any analysis on the AP JPEG file? Mike Zullo avoids discussion of the AP JPEG like the plague. There is no way that the AP grey scale photo was made from the PDF. If Zullo conceded that obvious fact then he would have to admit that their analysis of only the pdf is futile. I explained this to Karl Denninger and he got mad and blocked my emails.

      • NBC says:

        I believe that the AP JPEG is of higher resolution but it would be fun to explore as well now that I have the tools.

        • NBC says:

          Yes, good idea, it contains a lot of helpful hints, including a faint copy of the COLB shining through. So it is unlikely that it is a printout of the PDF

          No wonder it is being ignored.

  5. Kuck is wrong. To reiterate,the founders required and desired 100% American Citizens to be President. They required that a President and VP be a “Natural-Born Citizen”.
    A “Natural-Born Citizen” is:
    1. A person be born on U.S. Soil (Jus Soli)
    AND
    2. Born of Parents who are both American citizens themselves. (100% Jus Sanquinis)

    The highest level of citizenship attainable, a 100% American, a “Natural-Born” American consists of being born on U.S. Soil AND having a Mother and a Father that were also born on U.S. Soil..

    This level of Citizenship is the level of citizenship that the founders required for one to be President

    .The requirement allows that one’s parents can be naturalized citizens but that they MUST both be American Citizens. Otherwise a person would NOT be 100% American ,would have dual loyalty and would have dual citizenship as Obama did when he was born a British subject under the
    British Nationality Act of 1948. Obama Sr. was a British subject when Obama,Jr. was born..

    The fact that the founders did not want ANY person born of a British subject to be OUR President is simply incontrovertible.

    • …those born of Brits who were citizens of the USA at the time of the ratification of the Constitution were grandfathered in as eligible. Those people are dead now. Obama is not one of those. Obama and any other candidate for President must meet the ‘100% American” standard of meeting Jus Soli and having 100% Jus Sanquinis .

    • Robert,

      That is your opinion. But the courts don’t agree. Read the Wong Kim Ark decision and the Ankeny decision in Indiana. Historians don’t agree, Constitutional scholars do not agree. Lastly, the voters didn’t agree. Do you you know what that makes your opinion? Irrelevant.

    • arnash says:

      Apuzzo is wrong, and I’ve shown him why and how a dozen times and ways but he has a built-in bias blindspot when it comes to nbc. The term, I argue, never existed in American political life until it was penned into the Constitution as two adjectives modifying one noun, i.e., -natural citizen and born citizen. Neither of those two terms conveyed what needed to be conveyed and so they had to be combined. That was not true of any other citizen, only the President had to be born of only American parents in order to be constitutionally eligible for his office.
      Apuzzo promotes that truth, but also promotes the falsehood that national man-made artificial legal boundaries have an inescapable connection to natural citizenship. That is totally false in both nature, society, and the government of nations. One is a natural member of their parents’ group by birth, just as with all animals that every lived.

      Where one exits their mother’s womb has no significance in natural law whatsoever, -nor in natural American citizenship, -only if born to an immigrant foreign father.
      Obama Sr. was not an immigrant and for that reason the 14th Amendment did not cover his son and provide him with U.S. citizenship from birth. He was born purely as a British subject. That nationality ended with his provisional Kenyan citizenship. He has been ever since a true citizen of no nation on earth, unless Indonesia continues to recognize him as a citizen via his adoption. learn a lot more @ obama–nation. com

      • You exchanges with Apuzzo are hilarious. They remind me of Dumb and Dumber. If your stupid theory were correct wouldn’t the authors have inserted a comma in there so it would have read natural, born citizen? “Natural Born Citizen” and “Natural Born Subject” were used interchangeably even after the Declaration Independence and after the Constitution was written in state laws and declarations of citizenship.

      • NBC says:

        A Nash: He has been ever since a true citizen of no nation on earth, unless Indonesia continues to recognize him as a citizen via his adoption. learn a lot more @ obama–nation. com

        So many myths and rumors and no facts… Hilarious…

        Some birthers really need no facts… Great example…

  6. Mike Zullo has said multiple times in interviews that he is only after the truth no matter where the evidence leads. The latest findings will put Mr. Zullo’s veracity to the test. If he is indeed a truthful person he should shut down the investigation and issue an apology to President Obama.

    I will offer him an appearance on RC Radio to do just that.

  7. arnash says:

    “They all go back to the certified and verified copy of President Obama’s original birth certificate, which shows him born on US soil.” Only the counterfeit fraudulent images show him being born in Hawaii. There is no Hawaiian Hospital original birth certificate anywhere in Hawaii or anywhere else, and no one in Hawaii will claim that there is. Anything that an obamunist accomplice placed in an archive can be labeled as “original”, just as is done with new BCs issued after the adoption process has sealed the true original into secrecy forever.

    No statement made by any Hawaiian official is actual certification of any thing other than information “matching” what is in their computer files. No one in Hawaii has found any original BC, to Abercrombie’s dismay. All there is is whatever is contained in their digital database and in their microfilm archive. No True Copy of those originals and negatives are issued anymore, -not for about two decades. All that’s produced are “Abstracts”. They can’t be certified as being a True Copy of anything since they are abstracts.
    Anyone who thinks that the image posted on the WH webside is of a real paper document doesn’t know the reality of how States produce what they call birth certificates in this day and age.
    The images in the database of the microfilm records are superimposed on an image of security paper with the image of the original paper eliminated back when States digitized their records.
    Nothing that is wholly in the digital realm is invulnerable to alteration, and a whole lot of alteration was used to produce the PDF, -adding layers of specific components, with other earlier layers unrevealed because they were flattened just as the final version was meant to be before release to the world. Learn more about the fraudulence of the PDF image at obama–nation. com.
    Adrien Nash

  8. arnash says:

    Romney’s colb states: I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct representation of the birth facts on file with the Division for the Vital Records, Michigan Department of Community Health certfied by: ~

    It may be true that the birth record certifications issued by every state in the union have been bastardized by non-authentic methods. Michigan will not issue actual copies of real birth certificates so any intelligent, knowledgeable viewer of one can ascertain with his own eyes whether or not it appears to be genuine or a forgery. That is impossible if what is issued is merely information validated by nothing but the authority of a state worker who may be an amoral political hack who would fall on his/her sword to defend his knight in shining armor who happened to be elected President but fraudulently, -depending on fake State birth record certification. Lying and counterfeiting are easy when no one dare question you and you have at your disposal all of the tools needed to do the job.

    The take away: don’t mistake the Obama pdf nine-layer digital abstract image of a Hawaiian Birth Certificate for being a real photo-copy of a real document. The Hawaiian official who claimed to have witnessed the copying of the birth certificate committed perjury by that statement because birth certificates are not created by photocopying anymore in states that have not switched to third generation actual photographic reproduction, and everyone in the birth certificate business knows that, and knows that perjury was committed for his highness BAIR-ek o-BAM-a (the correct pronunciation of his father’s name) by the Hawaiian officer who made that written statement.

    Loretta Fuddy: “…I am making an exception to current departmental policy which is to issue a *computer-generated* certified copy. [i.e., an abstract, whether short or long form] ~ ~ ~ I have witnessed the copying of the certificate and attest to the authenticity of these copies.”

    Does the WH pdf represent an abstract or an original true copy? The answer is found in the background. If it is security paper, then it is an abstract. If it is original plain paper, it is a reproduction of the original. Since the pdf has a security paper background, Fuddy lied by claiming she witnessed “the copying of the certificate…” There was no copying because there was no certificate to copy. There was only complicit conniving concocting of a counterfeit. That is demonstrated by the fact that no hospital in Hawaii, of seventeen or so, will claim bragging rights to his birth having occurred there, -and they all were asked but confirmed that Ann Dunham was never their patient, with the exception of the cancer hospital which declined to answer for reasons of privacy. learn more if you seek the truth, @ obama–nation. com

    PS A natural born citizen = a born natural citizen. Same thing. A natural citizen by birth, -not by borders.

    • When I read unadulterated tripe like you just wrote I think the only valid reply is “Moron”. It is so completely gibberish it doesn’t even warrant a reply one word longer than that.

      • arnash says:

        Thank you! That was just the kind of reaction I hoped and expected to get from the brain-dead likes of you. I apologize if I offended you with facts and truth, none of which you possess and none of which you offered, thereby proving my assertion.

        • I will reply as soon as you offer either some facts or the truth. You offered neither. Your ravings about birth certificates are nonsense. Hawaii printed President Obama’s long form on green security paper because it was to be a certified copy. Informational only copies are printed on plain paper. No one committed perjury. It is a copy of the original. There are at least three images of a copy on the available on the internet. The PDF is only one. Reporters saw the one of the two actual certified copies.

          • arnash says:

            Human beings who have a built-in bias will shade or filter all input to their mind to protect their revered or treasure idea of reality. It is an amazing ability and it seems that reality check is the poster child of that ability to the ‘nth degree. No facts can get through to him without being transmuted into falsehoods in his mind, so his reaction is to genuinely believe that what he believes is true.
            But reality is not determined by what anyone believes or feels or wants to be true. It is what it is, and anyone who isn’t open to it being whatever-it-might-be will distort their perception of any information received while having a subconscious motive of twisting it to their preference.

            RC’s inability to grasp truth is seen in his reaction to the very simply fact that the only thing that can be printed on a background of any selected type is digital text which exists solely in cyberspace without any background as part of it. In other words, it is essentially on a blank, invisible, non-existent background. Do you see a background to my text here? No. Do you see a background to Obama’s “birth certificate”? Yes. Where the heck did it come from? Was it the original background of an original birth certificate? No. No original birth certificate was ever filled -out on security paper. The security paper appearance was a digital background or actual paper onto which purely digital text was over-laid, otherwise, like the Nordyke twins birth certificates and a million others prior to the digitized era, the original background (paper form) is reproduced just as it originally appeared when created.
            After digitization, only the text was saved to hard-drive and the paper imagery was deleted since computer memory was ridiculously expensive and limited, and hard-drive capacity was tiny by comparison to memory today.

            All birth certificates that result from printing that extracted digital text on a new background are known as “abstracts” since they do not reproduce an image of the actual original.
            No abstract can be certified truthfully as being a true reproduction of anything other than the text itself, but that certification becomes worthless in any controversial case because all digital text can be altered, deleted, and replaced easily by anyone with any photo-editing, digital publishing skills.

            That was what was done in order to concoct Obama’s counterfeit birth certificate, and they would have gotten away with it if only the tired forger hadn’t forgotten to first flatten all of the 9 layers into one before saving it as a pdf that was meant to masquerade as an actual scan of a BC, albeit one just like its predecessor which also lacked the required embossed seal of the Hawaiian Dept. of Health. They blew it because they were in too big of a rush to get it exactly right. As a result, along with millions of Americans, every major foreign intelligence service in the world also knows that Obama’s birth certificates, like him, are deliberate fakes.

            Any appeal to anything other than facts (emotions, frustration, opinions, longevity of conviction and position, disparagement and denigration of all alternative views) must be rejected as ant-truth, anti-logic, and anti-investigation. “Let justice be done though the sky fall”. Adrien Nash obama–nation.com

            • What counts is what the law recognizes. The Hawaiian COLB that Obama’s campaign published in 2008 was more than sufficient to establish that he was born in Hawaii and was therefore a natural born citizen. Your delusions about birth certificates and the law are actually quite funny. It is obvious that you do not even have a clue how modern copiers work.

              As we found after a series of desperate Birther ballot challenges in 2012 none of the state laws require a candidate of a major party to show anything to be on the ballot. The party only needs to certify that their nominee is indeed eligible. The burden of proof then falls upon a challenger with standing to provide solid evidence that the opposing candidate is not eligible. No challenge came even close to succeeding for a variety of reasons. President Obama is the president under the laws and the Constitution.

  9. In case some folks just reading this blog for the first time think I am being harsh with this arnash fellow please understand that we have seen his nonsense of his kind for five years now. Statements like “a copy isn’t a copy because it is on green paper” and accusations that the people in Hawaii are complicit in some big conspiracy because they said things he doesn’t like. All of these plus the nonsense two citizen parent theories have been debunked over and over and over. Anyone really seeking the truth could listen to my show, read my blog, or check any one of a number of fine Birther debunker forums and blogs that are linked here.

    Nope, folks like arnash or H2O for Life or whatever he calls himself aren’t worth the time it takes when the truth is in front of their noses and they close their eyes.

  10. arnash says:

    “What counts is what the law recognizes.”
    That is the equivalent of saying that what counts is what science can prove. That attitude says that unless you can present proof that hummingbirds have sex, it must be concluded that they don’t because only proof matters, -not reality.

    ” The Hawaiian COLB that Obama’s campaign published in 2008 was more than sufficient to establish that he was born in Hawaii and was therefore a natural born citizen.”

    WOW! That answers absolutely no questions whatsoever. “is sufficient”? In what court of Reason is a fraudulent image representing something supposedly real sufficient evidence of anything but the willingness to create a counterfeit? Counterfeiting, of money and birth certificates, is one of the prime reasons that the FBI exists!

    No reasonable person believes that a chump created by the most corrupt political machine in the nation is as pure as the angels.
    “sufficient to establish that he was born in Hawaii”. Please explain exactly what the heck your self-serving definition of “establish” is. You are correct that any state can legally perpetrate a fraud on all the other states by establishing “facts” that are in fact lies, and doing so by the authority of the Constitution which requires all the others to accept on face value whatever one certifies.
    But what does such totally dubious and dishonest certification actually establish? Nothing! Hawaii, and most states cannot legitimately certify anything that is an abstract, as are all of their issued birth certificates and certifications for about two decades. Abstracts are imitation substitutes for something real, just like counterfeit money is an abstract of something real. If Hawaii certified that all of the Presidents of the United States were born in Hawaii, what’s to stop them, legally? Nothing.

    “and was therefore a natural born citizen”. What you really mean is “was therefore a born citizen”. But guess what? Last time anyone looked, the word natural refers to nature, not invisible man-made artificial legal boundaries. You are your parents’ child naturally regardless of where born. Obama was his mother’s son regardless of where born. But he was not a natural son of America because he was not born of an American father.

    A natural American is one born of Americans. A legal American is one made an American by legal means. Obama is neither. His citizenship is solely the result of a federal policy that is NOT the expression of actual United States law nor Supreme Court opinion. As such he, like all legal citizens, is ineligible to serve as President.

    “In case some folks just reading this blog for the first time…blah, blah, blah. Please, spare us the whistling past the graveyard self-reassurance. It’s below the requisite level of intelligence required to judge these matters. Adrien Nash “Let justice be done though the sky fall.” obama–nation.com

    • I am sure all the states will be surprised to learn that every single of one of their birth certificates issued for the last two decades are invalid. Have you told them? What a moronic statement. Adrien, you are living proof that someone blinded by hatred can say really, really stupid things. By the way, the US Secret Service investigates the counterfeiting of currency, not the FBI.

      • arnash says:

        “Invalid”? That is your distorted, twisted, dishonest bastardization of “Hawaii, and most states, cannot *legitimately* certify anything that is an ABSTRACT,” Is your pea brain to small to understand what the word “legitimately” means? Clearly you have no idea of what “certify” means. No entity in any country on earth can certify anything without a real signature and an official seal except the corrupted authority of states that can legally require all other states to accept whatever they spew out.
        All birth certificates were once actually signed, back before the invention of rubber and rubber-stamp facsimiles of signatures. Would you want to carry out an execution order that wasn’t signed by the governor but was merely rubber-stamped? How would you feel, in a hypothetical world, if you were a bomber pilot and received orders to drop an atomic bomb on a city and it only showed a rubber-stamp facsimile of the President’s signature? Anyone can use such a thing. Only actual signatures and state embossed seals are the unique elements that makes a certification “valid”. Even worse, I suspect that state seals are programmable devices and not drop-forged sculpted and die-cast from a unique mold.
        If their pattern of dots or dots &d dashes is programmable, then no such seal can be certified as unique.
        Have you ever bought something that came with a printed “certificate of authenticity”? Was it worth a damn thing? No, because it, like state birth certificates, was NOT a real certificate since it authenticates nothing since it was not signed by the creator or certifier of the thing.
        So you tell me, how many state officers actually sign state-issued birth certificates? Maybe North Dakota and Indian tribes if any at all.
        I looked at my grandmother’s high school diploma yesterday, from 1920, and it was hand-signed by four highest-level officers connected to the school and school district. Certification used to mean something, now it doesn’t mean crap when perversely employed by government.

        “you are living proof that someone blinded by hatred can say really, really stupid things.”

        What the truth actually is is that someone who makes presumptuous and slanderous accusations should actually know what the hell he’s talking about. Along with the fact that someone blinded by sycophantic and romantic devotion and idealization can say really, really stupid things. Have a nice day!

        • It would be nice if you could actually cite a state statute or two to support your lunacy concerning birth certificates. After all, we are a nation of laws and not Birther fantasy. I have the impression that all of this nonsense exists in Adrien’s mind and not in statute.

  11. arnash says:

    All states retain for their vital records department the authority to issue records in any form they deem most appropriate, and in the digital age, that is universally a computer-printed digital record-file created back when all microfilm backup records were digitized.

    Since digital memory and processing power are infinitely greater and cheaper than twenty years ago, any state could switch back to creating birth certificates that are exact photographic replications of the original, but to do that they would have to once again digitize all of those millions of frames of microfilm and retain the complete image instead of separating and deleting the imagery of the paper they were typed on. That would cost money and lots of time and effort so there’s not much incentive to do that. But for new births going forward, they wouldn’t involve microfilm, just scanning the original into digital form.

    With all records having been digitized around two decades ago, no state is any longer involved in “copying” paper original birth certificates. Everything is on the hard-drives and available at office work stations. Those digital files can be altered if there is enough incentive to do so, such as was offered to the clerks in the Coast Provincial Hospital by Lucas Smith ($5,000 if they could produce a certified Obama birth certificate in 20 minutes, thinking that a counterfeit couldn’t be produced in such a short period of time, but with all things being digital, it would have been possible with digital erasing of original info, or whiteout/ erasure tape and replacement with Obama’s info.).

    PS, I’ve read the regs for Hawaii and they say that the decision of what form to use for producing state vital records is ultimately his/her decision. It is that authority, and nothing in actual law, that allows states to produce abstracts instead of actual photographic copies. In an abstract, only the text itself is original imagery, -not being digital in nature like digital fonts are. That text appears just as it appeared on the original hospital birth certificate, since it’s a capture of it, -not a retype on paper nor on computer. That is why states have some legitimacy in certifying them. The only thing missing is the original paper they were typed on.

    • Northland10 says:

      Lucas Smith? You hint that somebody is changing a certificate in Hawaii, with no proof, but you take the word of an actual convicted forger who has never shown any proof he was actually in Africa.

      • Haha. Yeah. I noticed that about Lucas. Adrien just doesn’t like any system that could have allowed Obama to become President. He also keeps referring to “original hospital birth certificates”. Birth certificates never belong to the hospitals and in case of home births wouldn’t even have the name of a hospital on them.

      • arnash says:

        I didn’t weigh in as to the veracity of Lucas Smith’s account. While it seems to have no notable illogical holes, it does have at least one minor one, and that would be the amount of money he says he offered for an Obama BC, $5,000, which seems like about $4,000 more that would have been needed, and who carries that kind of money anyway, especially in a crime-plagued nation.
        On the other hand, what sane person would submit his notarized account to a court of law, under penalty of perjury, unless he possessed the very thing that he claimed to possess?
        So what does reason tell you? It says he probably has something that he believes is real, even if it was a counterfeit officially produced by the Kenya vital records dept. Bear in mind that when money and power are involved, not much can be ruled out.

        Reality Check says: “He [myself] also keeps referring to “original hospital birth certificates”. Birth certificates never belong to the hospitals and in case of home births wouldn’t even have the name of a hospital on them.”

        Original birth certificates are not created by the government but by the hospital where a birth takes place. It is signed by the mother and attending Dr. in the hospital before being sent to the regional Health Dept registrar. There it is “accepted” by the Registrar as legitimate, then sent on to the State office where it must be accepted a second time since the state office is also one of the regional offices and therefore a primary and only recipient of *local* birth certificates.
        [NOTE: Obama’s short form fake only shows the date on which it was “filed”, failing to contain any “accepted” date, meaning it was never accepted by the Hawaiian government nor issued by them or else it would not say simply “filed”, but would only say “accepted”.]
        The State office is the one that accepts them, orders them, and then numbers them, and then files them until they’re bound into volumes.
        They possess the original hospital birth certificates which they did not create. But they do create ABSTRACTS from digitized microfilm records (as well as newer non-microfilmed birth certificates that have been digitized by scanning) which represent the original text and signatures minus the paper they were created on.

        Birth certificates with original images, like the Nordyke twins’ bc’s, are photographic reproductions because they were produced before the era of digitization. THEY can be authentically certified to be a TRUE COPY and that is what is stated, but the Abstracts cannot certify anything other than that they are a True Copy OR an Abstract. That’s like you certifying that you are a Caucasian OR a Negro, leaving open the question of “which is it?”
        The certification states only that it is one or the other, but true, actual certification does not allow any uncertainty, it does not allow the use of the word “or”. It identifies explicitly what exactly the certificate is, -not what it might possibly be.
        Hawaii can legitimately certify one or the other since they possess the original from which either is created, but it can’t do what has always been done for a hundred years, and that is to certify that the certificates that they issue are “a TRUE Copy”; -nor a True Abstract since such a thing is an oxymoron.
        They ONLY issue Abstracts, and they can be easily faked because they only exist in digital form on a computer hard-drive. It’s unlikely that anyone in the HDOH did that, but undoubtedly, they supplied the source materials for it being done by another.

        “Birth certificates…in case of home births, wouldn’t even have the name of a hospital on them”

        That much is certain, but what is also certain is such births require nothing more than a hand-written statement offered by just about anyone with supposed knowledge of a birth, including an out-of-state, or out-of-country birth, to be the basis of producing a Hawaiian Birth Certificate for the child of anyone who has been a “resident” (not citizen) of Hawaii for a year.

        Anyone who claims that anyone else who has lived in Hawaii for a year (some proof probably required) and had a baby, can obtain a birth certificate for a child of any such “resident” alien, -possibly even if such a child doesn’t exist (I don’t what if any proof is required, after all it may be completely based on the honor system of signing a document under penalty of perjury. What is that penalty compared to the prize of obtaining U.S. citizenship?)

        If Obama had been born at home, then his long form birth certificate image is a pure fabrication, (which it is anyway since he wasn’t born in Hawaii at all) or else that could have been stated in the affidavit filled out by his mother or grandparents, -and it wasn’t. [half written, half typed]
        Actually, maybe it was, but being unprovable, the counterfeiting conspirators choose to remove all doubt and simply make him appear to have been born in a hospital, which no hospital anywhere in Hawaii has ever trumpeted as they would were it actually true.
        And don’t forget, when Zullo went to the supposed hospital of Obama’s birth, and asked for directions to their *public record* of hospital admissions (seeking those during the first week of August 1961), they called the cops on him and his law enforcement companion and forced them to leave the premises. To cover for a big fat lie you have to protect the lying cover story by not allowing access to the recorded facts, -or I should say, the facts that were never recorded because they never happened. It’s the dog that didn’t bark that exposes the crime, i.e., the record that doesn’t exist.

        • arnash

          Sure. You believe Lucas Smith even though his forgery had the wrong hospital administrator’s name and it was misspelled to boot but everyone in Hawaii is a liar. Unfrickingbelievable.

          PS: Kapi’olani did exactly the right thing kicking Zullo’s ass out. He is a meddling private citizen from Arizona who had no right to see anything.

          PPS: I had not heard the “Date filed” vs. “Date accepted” BS in a while. You buy into all the nonsense don’t you? What is your evidence Obama was not born in Hawaii?

  12. arnash says:

    CORRECTION to “Anyone who claims that anyone else who has lived in Hawaii for a year…and had a baby, can obtain a birth certificate …”
    What was meant was not that one can “obtain” a birth certificate, but that one can *register* a birth with the State.

  13. Birth certificates are not hospital documents. The are state forms from the beginning. Since the great majority of births take place at hospitals the form is general begun there and completed when the registrar signs for the state. For a home birth the midwife of attending physician would sign. If indeed no one attended then I am sure the state would have procedures to handle that. You can bet that those births get more scrutiny than the run of the mill hospital births.

    In Hawaii births not registered within at the time can be recorded up to one year after the birth but they are marked “delayed”. Obama’s birth certificate was not delayed or altered as the silly Butterdizillion has claimed.

    You silly claim that only photostat copies of original birth documents are valid are completely wrong. Any person in the vital statistics business would laugh at the what you have claimed here.

    Finally Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. Deal with it.

    • Adrien Nash says:

      “Your silly claim that only photostat copies of original birth documents are valid are completely wrong”
      Clearly, you’ve been reading with a closed, biased, and blinded mind because I never claimed any such thing since I’ve never defined what “valid” means. Have you? Is it that which is actually true and sworn to be so, or is it merely that which is claimed to be authentic by an authority, regardless of whether or not actually true?
      RC: That sentence is first class gibberish. Can you cite a single case of a state forging then verifying a birth certificate as authentic? You have claimed the Nordyke twins birth certificates are examples of proper copies. Yet you have never seen them have you? All you have seen is digital images of them.

      Legal validity is something assumed whenever anyone in any government or legal position accepts as valid any counterfeit document. If an officer of government or a legal department deems something to be valid, then it is so deemed to be authentic, even if it isn’t authentic. Just because all states must honor the validity of anything that other states certify does not rule out the possibility of fraud, which people in government are very capable of committing, -though not likely to commit and put their retirement at risk along with conviction of a felony. RC: Right. People don’t commit fraud just for the hell of it do they? It is how our system works. Hawaii’s registrar, Alvin Onaka, is one of the most respected of all among his peers. Hawaii runs an accurate and efficient vital statistics system despite the attempt to slime them done by that lying piece of crap Mike Zullo.

      But….you error in thinking that that is the case with Obama’s bc because Hawaii never produced one, RC: OK now you are back to your moron mode again. Hawaii has produced two birth certificates and verified them both multiple times. Obama never showed one, and in fact was not even allowed to be in the room when the printed-out version of the pdf counterfeit was held up in front of an unquestioning, compliant press. RC: More nonsense. No one told Obama to leave. He came into the press room, made a short statement, and left to let his press secretary provide the details. There was nothing unusual about that. Why are you pulling this crap out of your ass? No Hawaii issued Obama birth certificate will ever be seen by anyone, -not by authorities of any State, including Hawaii, nor any court, nor any congressional committee because only the pdf exists, (along with any copies made from it) and one will never be produced unless someone in the DoH is willing to stick their neck out and create a real but fraudulent paper certificate. RC: Wait a few years and you can see one at the Obama Presidential Library.

      Since that hasn’t happened by now, it seems it never will. All anyone will find available is the pdf, not the real deal.
      You need to re-read what I wrote because you missed all of the points that I made with irrefutable logic and fact. It seems it was all over your head or outside of your kool-aid drinking zeitgeist. RC: I don’t need to reread gibberish.

      You: “Sure. You believe Lucas Smith…”
      Me: “I didn’t weigh in as to the veracity of Lucas Smith’s account.” RC: Yes, you did. Go read what you wrote.

      You: “Birth certificates are not hospital documents.”
      Me: “Original birth certificates are not created by the government but by the hospital where a birth takes place.” Duh. Note that I did NOT claim that the *Form* is not created by the government. RC: So you agree they are no hospital documents. The forms are begun by the attending physician whether the birth is in a hospital or at home.

      “Finally [Barack Obama] was born in Hawaii.” For which there is not one single shred of evidence, paper or eye-witness. RC: A complete fabrication. There are the newspaper notices, accounts by Barbara Nelson and Gov. Abercrombie. We know the father and mother were in Hawaii that summer so where else would Stanley Ann give have given birth? Even the Obama-loving mother of the Nordyke twins has never stated that she has any recollection whatsoever of the young unmarried white mother of a black baby born within a day of her daughters in the same maternity ward. THAT is impossible if he actually was born there. That is something that no one would ever forget. RC: She was busy having twins at the time. Hawaii was and is a multi-racial society. Your assumption is not valid that the birth of a mixed race child would be that unusual. obama–nation.com

      • To say nothing of:

        H. Res. 593
        In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
        July 27, 2009.

        Whereas August 21, 2009, marks the 50th Anniversary of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s signing of Proclamation 3309, which admitted Hawaii into the Union in compliance with the Hawaii Admission Act, enacted by the United States Congress on March 18, 1959;

        Whereas Hawaii is ‘a place like no other, with a people like no other’ and bridges the mainland United States to the Asia-Pacific region;

        Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961…

        (snip)

        This Resolution passed unanimously. It carries exactly the same weight as H.Res.511, which declares McCain a Natural Born Citizen.

        Suck it, Adrien.

  14. Adrien said

    That is demonstrated by the fact that no hospital in Hawaii, of seventeen or so, will claim bragging rights to his birth having occurred there,

    Oh really? (Thanks to Doc C for rediscovering this.)

    What Thomas said….

    • Adrien Nash says:

      “You have claimed the Nordyke twins birth certificates are examples of proper copies.”
      No I did not claim any such thing nor use the word “proper”. You fail to grasp reality. I said that their’s were True Copies of the originals, -not abstracts.
      RC: I get it. 1950’s technology good, modern technology bad. What an idiot. Is “True Copies” capitalized because it is a religious term?

      “Hawaii runs an accurate and efficient vital statistics system”
      True, except in regard to their complicity in providing source documents for the creation of the pdf counterfeit. Other than that, their record may be 99.999% accurate. RC: It is complete nonsense based on fantasy that Hawaii created the PDF.

      I wrote: “Obama never showed one, and in fact was not even allowed to be in the room when the printed-out version of the pdf counterfeit was held up in front of an unquestioning, compliant press.
      RC: More nonsense. No one told Obama to leave.

      He didn’t have to leave because the print-out was removed before he entered, just as his attorney stated would be the situation.

      RC “He came into the press room, made a short statement, and left”
      What you ignorantly or deliberately fail to state is that he never once mentioned the counterfeit that was being presented that day, you know, the one that was the reason for the conference. Instead he did everything in his feeble power to denigrate and dismiss and divert and deflect any attention from being given to authenticate the travesty that was being presented. His disgusting appeal to patriotism to kill any inclination toward scrutiny was anti-American and anti-intellect.
      RC: As a black person Obama was rightly pissed off at racist assholes like Trump and the Birthers were asking him to “show us your papers, boy”. Personally, I think he should have never showed anything to these wastes of protoplasm but since he did he handled the release well.

      RC “The forms are begun by the attending physician whether the birth is in a hospital or at home.”
      There is no attending physician for a birth at home.

      RC “There are the newspaper notices, accounts by Barbara Nelson and Gov. Abercrombie. We know the father and mother were in Hawaii that summer so where else would Stanley Ann give have given birth?”

      She gave birth in Vancouver, BC. She was living in Seattle at the time of her pregnancy and was unable to find an American family to adopt her yet unborn child via the Salvation Army, so she traveled across the border with a possible offer or inquiry from a Canadian couple who either decided against adopting a mulatto child, or Ann decided she wanted to keep him after all. RC: Are you on LSD, crack cocaine or both?
      No one can prove otherwise. She then flew to Hawaii, registered her child there to obtain U.S. citizenship for him, and then returned to Seattle for college since that was where she felt at home. RC: I suppose both.
      The registration resulting from her affidavit to the DoH produced the vital statistic info sent to the newspapers. Barbara Nelson heard “Stanley had a baby”, which does not indicate where or when. She had dinner with Dr. West the very Friday evening of the birth. What do you think they were talking about? What a moron. Abercrombie never swore in any court of law that he knew for a fact where Obama was born. Short of that, he word is worth spit since he is Obama’s biggest sycophant. As for the video, I can’t play it since my soundcard quit working, RC: Why am I not surprised? but I assume it was a video he wishes would vanish since he can’t stand by his silly claim about the mystery letter written seemingly by Obama celebrating the anniversary of the hospital where he claims to have been born. Funny thing about that letter, it is now kept under lock and key, or destroyed, and no one is allowed to see it or discuss it since it too is a counterfeit. Those who’ve tried hit a dead end immediately. Everyone connected to its reveal won’t talk about it. No, they just won’t talk about it with racist assholes, aka Birthers.

  15. Adrien Nash says:

    THE SIGNIFICANCE OF “NON”
    An impossible element of Barry’s Fraudulent Birth Certificate

    The Word “none”; -composed of 3 Greenish-Gray letters plus the letter “e” in pure black are saved on separate layers.

    The word “none” in the box stating the mother’s occupation outside the home is composed of two sections, with the “e” being part of the main text layer, and, most notably, being monochromatic pure black in appearance, while the letters “n-o-n” are a separate layer altogether and not pure black but greenish-gray.

    That indicates that they were part of the editing process and were added where a word like “housewife” once appeared. Since his mother wasn’t a housewife, it would have to be changed. Some of the text of the original source files were replaced by text taken from one or more birth certificates, including one that stated “none”.
    But instead of replacing the entire word, the counterfeiter choose to only replace the letters “housewif” and not the final letter “e” which matched the final letter of the needed response of “none” (no employment).

    Proof of this is the fact that the added elements are not pure black, nor variable gray-scale, nor solid gray like some of the other added layers, but are dark green. Increasing the color saturation of the “non” layer by 75% makes it appear noticeably greenish.
    That shows that it was acquired via a process that used color scanning or photography, not a process that only outputs black & white.
    No matter how much one increases the saturation level of something that is pure black, it will not take on a tint of any color but will remain pure black.
    No explanation on earth can connect the “non” layer to any scanning process known to man. It is simply and absolutely a human added layer, and one that came about via a color-enabled process when all of the original text is pure black. see the proof if you can handle the proof.


    The OBAMA BC EXPOSED. images: http://obamabc.wordpress.com

    • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

      Almost all black ink fades to one of three colors: blue, brown, or green. Also, the ‘e’ in None is not actually pure black, but rather a dark green.

      • Adrien Nash says:

        “Almost all black ink fades to one of three colors: blue, brown, or green. Also, the ‘e’ in None is not actually pure black, but rather a dark green.”
        All true, but there is no ink in a purely monochrome (pure black) digital text file. The extracted text from millions of birth certificates is saved as pure black, not color, so a good guess is that something happens when text is overlaid on a color background and saved as a pdf.
        But to see the fully extent of the difference between “non” and the letter “e” I’ve just created a new graphic which shows them under four different conditions from normal appearance to extreme difference.

        “You dim-bulbs claim…” Only a dead bulb is incapable of differentiating between different members of groups, whether human or animal. Apparently you are only able to see the world in terms of either black or white, -no millions of colors, no shades of gray. It’s all either your team or the enemy. What a moron. I don’t care what anyone else thinks or says. The facts are all that matters, but you can’t handle the facts. Grow up you pathetically naive Pollyanna-ish useful idiot. The whole government is corrupt. Only a child in Eden thinks otherwise.

        • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

          The extracted text from millions of birth certificates is saved as pure black, not color, so a good guess is that something happens when text is overlaid on a color background and saved as a pdf.

          Who said anything about extracted text being saved as pure black? This is a photocopy of the bound original birth record, printed onto safety paper, then scanned as a pdf. Now, it’s quite possible that the subsequent scanning process picked up the black ink as dark green, and the partial strikes (sorry, there’s a typewriting term for that, but I grew up with computers) as a grey green.

          No health department sends out birth certificates as PDFs.

          • Adrien Nash says:

            Here’s the link that is supposed to work for everyone, not just those signed-in. It will change your view of what is real. It shows four versions of the word “none” and what happens to its two components when edited.
            https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=610399765657315&l=7c5b68fb9e or, if https doesn’t work;
            http://obamabc.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/bobc/non-composite/

            “Who said anything about extracted text being saved as pure black? This is a photocopy of the bound original birth record, printed onto safety paper, then scanned as a pdf. No health department sends out birth certificates as PDFs.”

            In fact, no health dept. sends out photocopies of birth certificates and that’s been true for about two decades as I’ve already stated. ( They send out abstracts created from their digital files on hard-drive, files made-up of digitally extracted text.) That is not a “new” phenomenon since you can see by looking at my grandmother’s birth certificate issued in 1952 (a half century after her birth) that it is a short-form abstract yet called a certified birth certificate. It was produced before the era of photostatic reproduction and so it was just a typed summary of the vital facts, but certified properly with a hand signature and state seal. http://obamabc.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/bibes-nash-cuendet63.jpg?w=74

            Also, look at Mitt Romney’s from six decades later. After reading it, no one would do what was done on behalf of Obama with the claim that his short-form abstract was actually a real birth certificate. Take note of its certification statement at the bottom. It reveals the truth about such documents. If you don’t understand what it says and means then you are totally in the dark. http://obamabc.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=77

            Now look at my grandfather’s death certificate from 1960. It is a real copy of the actual certificate, -not an abstract. At the top there’s an attachment which has the words: “Witness my hand…and the seal of..” No real signature=No Certification
            http://obamabc.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=74

            To view a real certificate, see my great grandparent’s certificate of endowment that comes with the purchase of a cemetery plot. Notice the genuine embossed seal. It’s not from a lame seal impression machine like governments now employ.

            Finally check-out my grandmother’s High School diploma from 1921. You’ve never seen anything like it before. It’s the height of certification. Four signatures!

            The AP version is not higher resolution than the WH version. It’s just an enlarged version of it after undergoing a big boost in contrast and brightness to bleach out the green security paper imagery. It was then given a blue hue for no good reason whatsoever. Understand that if you claim that those things weren’t done, then you are left without any explanation as to how it could even exist. Proof is seen in the damage done to the solidity of the text. I just did in two minutes just what I’ve described and it is the same except it hasn’t suffered an attempt to eliminate the smile of the smiling “A” in Alvin.
            http://obamabc.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=78

            “all the other so called anomalies have been explained and replicated using Xerox WorkCentres. Read my article and the articles at NBC’s native born citizen blog.” Supply the links and I’ll definitely read and debunk whatever errors they contain. No doubt there are a lot.

        • Your Facebook link is broken. The other Facebook link you posted has a photo faked to change the “Non” to appear much more green than it really is. The reason the “Non” and the “e” were separated is because of the lighter inking of the “Non”. The “e” was placed into a 1 bit black object with the majority of the text. These and all the other so called anomalies have been explained and replicated using Xerox WorkCentres. Read my article and the articles at NBC’s native born citizen blog.

          This is the “None” from the higher resolution AP jpg. You can see that there are no signs of the skullduggery that you are claiming happened.

          The PDF forgery claims have been decimated once and for all. Anyone who still stands behind them at this point is an idiot.

  16. Adrien Nash says:

    H. Res. 593, like McCain’s was never actually voted on. They were passed as “unanimous consent” votes when the chamber may be essentially empty because both parties agree to the resolution. There was no actual vote, hence the 99-0 or 100-0.

    • The point is: if ANYONE in Congress had the slightest objection to the wording, they could have voiced it or called for a full vote and voted against it. They didn’t.

      Moral: Even politicians who want Birfer votes are smarter than Birfers. They don’t want the stink of Birther nonsense on them.

      You dim-bulbs claim that once out of office, Obama’s “thugs” will be unable to “silence” the “truth.” But in fact that fever-fantasy of RWNJs will never happen, as the truth is already here: BHO is absolutely eligible for the office, and a damn fine American as well. And Birthers will go down in history as seditious idiots.

  17. Adrien Nash says:

    Check this out, and then try to explain it as the result of a copying machine. Total fail. http://obamabc.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/bobc/the-smiling-fact-exposed/
    And good luck finding a logical explanation for this birth certificate “mystery”: http://obamabc.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/bobc/isolated_layers/

    If I recall correctly, you cannot alter black to appear as any other color. Only imagery that is in the color realm can be changed to different colors. The pdf main text cannot be changed to different colors, so why can the text of the added layers be changed? Because they were never switched to monochrome. Their source was a color-enabled source not a black & white source. How is that for deliberate fraudulent manipulation. Please explain it. I’m listening.

    • The Onaka smiley face “mystery” goes away when you look at the higher resolution AP jpg. Where is your idiotic and imaginary “3”?

      I have no idea how you got those colors but those are not what are seen for the different objects when you open them in Illustrator. The Xerox implementation of MRC uses multiple 1 bit masks but the color for each mask can black or another color. The “Non” was pulled into a separate mask with its own color. You should go read the articles at NBC’s blog that I linked. We have already run a color laser printout of the WH LFBC through a Xeros 7535 and duplicated most of the effects seen in the original PDF including the multiple 1 bit masks and the Edge Erase function which a unique feature of the Xerox WorkCentres.

      This “mystery” is over. By continuing to push this forgery nonsense you are just making yourself a fool.

  18. gorefan says:

    To: arnash – On July 5th, 2013 at 4:55, you wrote “The term, I argue, never existed in American political life until it was penned into the Constitution as two adjectives modifying one noun, i.e., -natural citizen and born citizen. Neither of those two terms conveyed what needed to be conveyed and so they had to be combined.”

    This is factually not true. It was used in Massachusetts’ naturalization acts between 1785 and 1791. In fact, they interchangeably used the term “natural born citizen” and “natural born subject” in those naturalization acts.

    • Like most all Birthers Nash just makes up stuff.

    • Adrien Nash says:

      Thanks for the information. Hopefully I’ll find time to read those uses and get an understanding of the reasonableness or stupidity of using them interchangeably. I strongly suspect the latter. But for clarity it should be acknowledged that the representatives from the other States very likely were unaware of the 1785 Massachusetts naturalization act, though the possibility still exists that other States also employed those words in their citizenship acts. My big question is whether or not any of the States required their governor to be a natural born citizen since he commanded the State militia. It seems that was not a requirement after the Constitution was adopted, but may have been before then.

      I went to see an amazing movie today, “White House Down” and anyone seeing it will understand that what they are seeing is a depiction of all White House security personnel as natural born citizens. No one entrusted with the security of the President from the guards at the front gate, to the Marines, to the Secret Service, can even be imagined as being a child of a foreign father. That would not be and is not ever allowed. Same with the responsibility over nuclear weapons. The first prerequisite for passing the extensive FBI and DOD Yankee White background check is that both parents be American. It’s a matter of national security. No one with half foreign heritage need apply because the U.S. government is under no obligation to trust such people, and doesn’t.

      • Northland10 says:

        Adrien: Hopefully I’ll find time to read those uses and get an understanding of the reasonableness or stupidity of using them interchangeably. I strongly suspect the latter.

        So, somebody shows you proof that the words were used interchangeably at the time, and your assumption is that the people of Massachusetts were wrong. That’s not moving the goalposts. That’s just blowing them up.

        At least you have proven that you do not care one bit for the actual history, legal traditions, liberty or the Constitution of the United States. You just don’t want some dark-skinned guy with a funny name as President. Good to know.

        • Adrien Nash says:

          “And that’s how black text becomes dark green.”
          That makes perfect sense, and contrary to my suspicion that black text cannot be recolored, it in fact can via the color change tool, but not the tint altering tool which only results in a color halo around still black text. So the faintly greenish-black hue of the main text layer is indicative of digital processing, i.e., resizing and compression of a colored document. It would be pure black though in the original pdfs that were the output of the microfilm digitization process. They must have contained two layers; one for pure black monochrome text and the other for gray-scale imagery that could not be accurately rendered in monochrome such as signatures with variable shades of density of inkl.

          I assume that the reason the form lines are not a part of the text layer is because in the interest of minimum memory usage the form layout could be saved not as discreet pixels but as a mathematical arrangement delineating horizontal and vertical lines, in other words, saved as a formula instead of saved as pixel imagery that would be needlessly and redundantly repeated in every single birth certificate digital file, in the millions. Any text elements that made contact with the lines of the form were saved along with that formula, -saved with the information of where the exact location was for each attached (touching) letter or number or whatever.

          What is a mystery is the few elements attached to the background layer that were not gray-scale but appear just as solidly black as the elements of the text layer and yet were not touching the form lines. I see that in the numbers 1,6a, 6e, 7,1~ and 1~ on the left side. What can’t be logically explained is why the digits of two of the teen numbers (10 & 15) were split, -with one being left in the main monochrome-text layer and the other being attached to the background layer (while the 13 was left intact).
          But even with accepting that the copier/scanner produced the ghosting-halo effect in the pdf format, along with the splitting of text elements into two layers; one being black and the other gray-scale, the lines of the form being a separate layer that was merged with the background & the ghost imagery along with the gray-scale layer, that still cannot explain the phenomenon of these elements that were not standing apart and isolated individually like the registrar’s stamped signature and date stamp; the “non” letters, and the DOH-accepted date stamps (missing particular date-digits in their layers), nor the difference in density between the characters in the added layers and their companion character(s) like the letter “e” of the word “none”.
          Black does not suddenly become greenish-gray without some manipulation, -of which there was plenty.
          It’s not the greenish tint itself that is significant. It is the contrast in density between the characters of the text layer and the characters of the added layers. That lighter density was the result of the pdf creator working on a screen whose brightness was dimmed down after long hours of work, thereby resulting in dark-gray things appearing solid black when they in fact were not, -as seen when the screen is normal brightness or brighter. As a result of the wide difference in their density (not the result of a single word typed on a typewriter) no innocent explanation will suffice to explain it.

          Thanks be to Gorefan for the unearthing of the earlier reference to natural born citizen. Even though it did not make it into the final version, its use demonstrates that my suspicion was wrong, and its existence did not first arise with the Constitution, but unlike some with the perspective that an nbc is an exclusive and “higher” form of citizenship, it was in fact the most widespread universal form of citizenship since 97% of persons born in the nation were born to American parents.
          Nevertheless, the authors of the federal Constitution were conscious of the potential dangers posed by the disloyalty of those with foreign attachments.
          The question in my mind is whether or not under the Art. of Confederation governors were required to be natural born citizens since they had authority over their state militias in time of war and insurrection.
          As for: ” IMO, they recognized that not all of the free citizens of the states were “natural born free citizens”, some were born in other countries.” it’s actually simpler than that. All fellow State citizens had equal rights whether natural born, native-born “sons of the soil”, or naturalized, so the only distinction in fact was not in comparing the treatment of citizens of other countries to that of U.S. citizens but in comparing a home-state citizen to a foreigner, -meaning people from another State, (which were labeled as foreigners) while not including in the comparison those who were indentured servants or imprisoned felons, hence the use of the word “free”.

  19. Adrien Nash says:

    The significance of the smiling face
    The appearance of an alteration to the cursive letter “A” in the stamped signature of Alvin Onaka -the Hawaiian State Registrar, seems to be something more than an odd co-incidence. The alteration happens to have the appearance of a smiling face. It’s isn’t some stretch of the imagination to see it. When people see “the Virgin Mary” in a stain on a wall, it’s because it is a clearly visible image. But it isn’t a miracle, it is pure natural coincidence. But the smiling face appearance is not a natural phenomenon, and since it looks like it is the result of a very carefully placed alteration, (like the number “3″ upside-down), one must suspect that it was deliberately caused. Any shift left or right, up or down, of the “squiggle” that forms the face would not create a smiling face. The odds against it being the result of something like dirt are astronomical. Therefore it is justified to speculate on what was behind its formation. Allow me to speculate.
    Putting on my Sherlockian forensic profiler’s hat, I have a theory that might not be the truth, but makes perfect sense. It begins with the presumption that it was deliberately made. Accepting that proposition, leads to imagining a reason to do that. It can be assumed that it would only have been done by someone who had responsibility over the PDF image, not a child or an interloper. The only reason for putting such a thing on an important document must be that the person who did it a). had unlimited access to it, b). had a reason to do so, and c). thought it would not be noticed.

    smiling A in Alvin

    B. ~A reason to do so~. There is only one logical reason to do it, and that is that it was meant to be a secret fact that could be pointed to someday to prove that the handler had a hand in working on a very significant document, one with historical significance. Like a painter who, after working for hours or days or weeks on a work of art, finally adds his personal signature -written small in an unnoticeable spot down in a corner. That provides
    the artist with proof that it was their own creation, -no unrewarding anonymity.

    For someone to be similarly motivated in putting such an effect onto the PDF would require that they had a connection to it similar to that which an artist has to his painting. That would mean that he worked on it. What would that imply? It would imply that he made changes to it, working “digital magic” to change something of great significance. He was responsible for the result for which he could never claim credit, -never exercise bragging rights. No one would ever know that he was the master of the greatest forensic coup/counterfeit successfully perpetrated since some pre-teen sisters created photos of themselves interacting with fairies in their backyard back near the beginning of the last century. Millions of people believed in them, a movie was made about it (John Good man starred), and they didn’t admit the truth for 60 years.
    But who would want to have to wait that long to get credit for their handiwork? No one. He wanted, sometime sooner than that, to be able to share his accomplishment with some present or future significant other, but any claim couldn’t be believed unless something that no one else knew could be pointed to as proof.
    How did he come up with the smiley face idea? Only one logical answer. His name begins with the letter “A” and he picked up the trick while in a graphics class, or while doodling during endless hours of boredom while sitting in classes all day, -a perfect touch to serve as a unique covert signature.
    C. ~it would not be noticed~ If you check the Adobe “Properties” of the opened PDF file, you’ll see that it’s “Created”, and “Modified” date/time says 12:09 PM on the day it was posted to the Internet. * “Created” translates to the first time that it was saved on the computer that it was opened and saved on, (“Modified” refers to the last time it was saved after being altered).

    That time is UTC time (Universal Coordinated Time) based in Europe, translating to 8:09 AM Washington time if it was “Saved” in the Eastern time zone, or 4:09AM Pacific Time. If it was Saved in the West, like in Seattle where Obama’s personal lawyer lives, -the one that is said to have flown to Honolulu to get the certified copies and then to Washington so the charade could be completed, it would have been 4:09 AM Pacific time. If the forgery conspiracy included the lawyer, (in addition to the Hawaiian officials), then Obama would have been protected by attorney-client confidentiality, very ideal, not including anyone in the White House beside the White House attorney. The “alterer” probably worked on it until the wee hours of the morning, and by then was like I get at that hour when editing photos for 12 hours. One’s mind isn’t too sharp and one forgets things, like turning off lights, and locking doors.

    The alterer forgot to convert the document image to a flat JPG (by choosing to “Export” it, instead of “Save”ing it). He picked “Save”, and the program being used was set as default to Save in the PDF format, so it would have been saved, and then uploaded to the White House web-site, as we see it, in PDF format.
    Once it was already posted and downloaded by a significant number of people, it was too late to change it. Then when they clicked on it to open it, and it opened with Adobe Reader as a multi-layer PDF image with numerous peculiarities, the “cat was out of the bag” and the speculation and suspicions began as people were inspired to examine it very closely, greatly enlarged. Eventually someone noticed that which was expected to never be noticed.
    But even if everything I’ve guess about is true, it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans since there is no way to prove any of it.
    “Fertile imagination” you say? For sure. But here’s my challenge; before rejecting it, come up with another reasonable explanation. I doubt that there is any.

  20. Adrien Nash says:

    RC said: “Of course there is the AP JPG which Zullo carefully never mentions because it cannot be explained to have had the PDF as a source document.” “So Adrien, tell me again how the AP jpg came from the the PDF?”
    You’re demonstration clarifies nothing except to show that the White House PDF is a much lower resolution than the original PDF which was not posted because it was unnecessarily large for internet sharing. The web version is a re-sized smaller version. So your claim is correct but it gives a totally false impression that the web pdf is the only pdf in existence. Nearly everything posted on the internet is re-sized downward. PS, I believe you err in calling the AP image a jpeg. I had to convert it from the only form I have of it which is pdf.

    “I have no idea how you got those colors”. And that’s part of the problem. You haven’t done your homework. Just open the dang pdf in any editor program and it will allow you to adjust the hue, color, saturation, contrast, brightness, size, etc. of all of the layers except, I believe, the text layer. All birth certificates and their pdf layers in the Hawaiian data base, (resulting from the digitization of the microfilm images) are monochrome (black) so any output from those files would also be black, and black cannot be changed to any other color. Only color files can be changed.

    “The “Non” was pulled into a separate mask with its own color. ”

    The Xerox copier must be shown to output color layers from black text before one can claim that counterfeiting was not involved in the creation and addition of those layers. But even if that can be shown, nothing can possibly explain the “non” layer and its supposed extraction into a separate color layer without any conceivable explanation, nor why it is several shades more pale in density than the “e”. My explanation is the only explanation.

    NBC said: “I have shown how, despite assurances from the CCP, multiple monochrome bitmap layers can indeed occur in MRC.” A respectable achievement, but it is only second base. It must be shown that color layers are also created from black or gray text.

    • RC said: “Of course there is the AP JPG which Zullo carefully never mentions because it cannot be explained to have had the PDF as a source document.” “So Adrien, tell me again how the AP jpg came from the the PDF?”
      You’re demonstration clarifies nothing except to show that the White House PDF is a much lower resolution than the original PDF which was not posted because it was unnecessarily large for internet sharing. The web version is a re-sized smaller version. So your claim is correct but it gives a totally false impression that the web pdf is the only pdf in existence. Nearly everything posted on the internet is re-sized downward. PS, I believe you err in calling the AP image a jpeg. I had to convert it from the only form I have of it which is pdf.

      Ardien now has a brand new theory: The PDF posted on the White House web site is not the original PDF. it is a “downsized” version of the original forged PDF. Just for kicks though the forger inserted a backwards “3” into the downsized PDF that is not in the original forged PDF. I think I just saw the goalposts flying by my house and Adrien was pushing them as fast as he could. This claim is so incredibly stupid it desires its own article which I will write when I get time this weekend. BTW the AP scan is and always was a jpg not a pdf. AP JPG

      • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

        I’ve seen some news sites that converted it to a PDF. But yeah, the original was JPEG.

      • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

        Looking at the JPEG, I am reminded of something I noticed last week but forgot to mention. There was a court filing, in which you could see ghost images of the following sheet on most of the pages. It was one of the Orly cases, I think.

        • Kevin

          That was the AP image. I had forgotten that! You have to play with the contrast and brightness. A copy of President Obama’s COLB was behind the LFBC when it was copied. It was probably stapled or in a binder. That could explain the tint also. The Green COLB could have been filtered through the paper as a blueish tint. That is just a conjecture.

          Here is the enhanced image: (right click and select “view image” to see the full page)

          Poor Adrien two more crazy theories shot to hell.

          Edit: I wonder if that folder is marked “Birther Smackdowns?

          • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

            The AP image with the COLB showing through is what reminded me of the filing. This was text from a filing.

        • Yes, I think the same thing happened with one of Orly’s court filings.

    • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

      NBC said: “I have shown how, despite assurances from the CCP, multiple monochrome bitmap layers can indeed occur in MRC.”

      Adrien Nash said: A respectable achievement, but it is only second base. It must be shown that color layers are also created from black or gray text.

      That’s easy. Here’s a way to simulate this in MS Paint. Start out by reducing the size of your canvas to 8 pixels and zooming to 800%. Next, paint the entire canvas light green, Then paint a 5×5 pixel black square in the top left corner. The black represents the text on the original, the green represents the background on the original. Now, shrink it by 25% along each axis – you should now have a 2×2 picture. This simulates scanning at a low resolution. Each 4×4 square is compressed to a single pixel, and the color of the pixel is the average of the original 16 pixels. So the pixel in the top left corner will stay black, but because the black overlapped the 4×4 boundary, the pixels in the top right and bottom left are a medium-dark green, and the one in the bottom right is a grey-green. Now, all of these pixels represent part of the text, because of the overlap. So if we want the text to be a single color, we need to take the average of the colors of the pixels identified as part of the text. So we shrink by 50% along each axis to create a single pixel. This pixel will,by definition, have a uniform color and represents the color of our text. If you followed directions, you will see that the color is actually a dark green. You can resize by 500% this if it’s too small to see the color.

      And that’s how black text becomes dark green.
      RC: Edited at the request of the original commenter for clarity.]

      • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

        To be clear, I’m quoting Adrien, who is quoting NBC in part of the quote.
        RC: I added the second quote for clarity. I hope you do not mind.

        • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

          Thanks! I trust you to use your discretion in the future (just leave an indicator in case someone comments on the original wording).

  21. gorefan says:

    To: Mr. Nash
    One of the first recorded uses of the term natural born citizen occurred in late 1776, when the Continental Congress was drafting the Articles of Confederation.

    Draft:

    “5. And the better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse between the people of the different States in this Union, the Inhabitants of every State, Paupers Vagabonds and fugitives from Justice excepted, going to reside in another State shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges of the natural born free Citizens of the State to which they go to reside:”

    Final:

    “Article IV. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different States in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States”

    The reason for the change is not explained but IMO, they recognized that not all of the free citizens of the states were “natural born free citizens”, some were born in other countries.

    And here are just two examples of the Massachusetts naturalization acts

    February, 1785, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING NICHOLAS ROUSSELET AND GEORGE SMITH.” in which it was declared that Nicholas Rousselet and George Smith “shall be deemed, adjudged, and taken to be citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, rights and privileges of natural born citizens.”

    March, 1787, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING WILLIAM MARTIN AND OTHERS.” in which it was declared that William Martin and Others,”shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born subjects.”

  22. Adrien Nash says:

    “I think I just saw the goalposts flying by my house and Adrien was pushing them as fast as he could.”
    What goal posts are you speaking of? I have nothing to do with goal posts since I’m not involved in game playing. Are scientists involved in such juvenile approaches to truth as they investigate the unknown? Reason doesn’t deal with goal posts nor strawmen nor gamesmanship. To paraphrase a 2,000 year old quote; “Let Truth reign though the sky fall”. PS, growing up would be highly recommended.

  23. Adrien Nash says:

    “The Onaka smiley face “mystery” goes away when you look at the higher resolution AP jpg. Where is your idiotic and imaginary “3″?

    As I stated in my graphic, an obvious attempt to erase it was made. It should not look like the irregular mess seen in the AP photo. No other letter in the stamp looks like it has leprosy. What it should look like instead is this: http://h2ooflife.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/birth_certificate_9-alvin.jpg?w=1278

    RC wrote: “Adrien Nash claims that he recreated the AP jpg just by manipulating the PDF image to remove the background. Of course that claim is ridiculous because the AP jpg is a higher resolution image.”
    You don’t understand nuance very well. I was not claiming to have reproduced the AP jpg but to have recreated a perfect equivalent and done it in about two minutes via basis photo editing. If you don’t know how to do it also then you don’t know anything about photo editing. As for me, I’ve edited over 15,000 photos.
    The point is that the AP jpg is from the same file as the down-sized White House pdf. Its appearance is not minus the background layer (just the security paper appearance) because remnant imagery of it can be seen in the bound edge at the left. It was manipulated exactly as I said, although it’s conceivable that that could have been the result of the contrast setting of a copier since clean copies require contrast boost since it results in purer black and white, and as little gray as possible (green being gray to a monochrome copier).

    The proof that it is a sister to the White House version is the fact that all of the anomalous elements embedded in the background layer (which includes the lines of the form), are present and visible, which would be impossible if the background layer was missing.
    The process that produced the AP image without the security paper dashes is the same kind of process that the images of the microfilm birth certificates underwent, turning the imagery of the paper they were originally typed on to pure white, thereby making it easily possible to eliminate it as white paper and even as visible paper, leaving the original text on a blank transparent canvas which could be overlaid on top of another paper image, that of security paper.

    That abstracting process is vulnerable to photo editing and counterfeiting because it results in digital images in the digital domain, printed by computer printers, -not direct copy prints from the original or the microfilm. Now neither of them are ever access or touched anymore because everything is “on record” or “on file” in their computers. Comprendes?
    A TRUE COPY is an exact copy and includes the paper on which an original birth certificate was typed. That is much more difficult to alter and get perfect, whereas the digital version is all pure black & white and bits of gray-scale, but no aging paper to try to match exactly. Although I could probably accomplish it. Don’t believe me? Then look at my most recent restoration masterpiece, -of my great grandmother when quite young (1890s) suffering from a missing section and missing specks of the photo all over. http://nnjjob.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/charlotte-king-x2-b.jpg

  24. Adrien Nash says:

    PS. Here’s the Alvin from Savannah Guthrie’s photo enlarged 900%. It’s terrible quality but has no trace of the smiling alteration. http://h2ooflife.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/savannahguthrie-alvin-w-o-smile.jpg?w=486

    That shows that a print was made from the original pdf full-size version and the print may have been the first and only color print made, printed on security paper with a faint seal that would be unreadable, perhaps like this Hawaiian discard:

    • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

      I see traces of the “smiley face” on the Guthrie photo. Smudges right where the eye and mouth should be, in the same orientation. So all three images show traces of the “smiley face.”

  25. You know Adrien is getting closer to the truth. He now admits that neither posted PDF, the AP JPG nor the Guthrie photo are the source for the other two documents. That is progress. However, to keep his forgery fantasy alive he had to invent this never before seen master forged PDF. Why the hell someone would create an original forgery in PDF format he cannot explain of course. I think he has been thinking about PDFs for so long he is stuck in permanent PDF mode.

    So let’s try this explanation:

    1. An attorney goes to Hawaii and brings back two certified copies of the original brith certificate printed on the same green security paper Hawaii uses for birth certificates it prints every day.
    2. Copies are handed out to the press.
    3. An aide scans it to email on a Xerox 7566 WorkCentre. The same model that was used to scan the Obama’s tax returns.
    4. The aide opens the PDF in Preview, rotates it to portrait, and prints it to a new PDF
    5. The PDF is published on the web.
    6. The AP publishes a high contrast scan of the handout at the presser which was a copy made with the COLB behind it.
    7. Reporter Savannah Guthrie takes cell phone photos of one of the two certified copies and posts them.

    See how this neatly explains everything without the need for a forgery involving hundreds of people? It explains the PDF construction because we know that is how Xerox compresses images like the LFBC. I have done it and seen it. It explains why the Creator of the PDF is Preview.

    John Woodman came to the key conclusion that the three images I mentioned had to have a master source and none of them was the source for the other. The only logical conclusion is that source was a piece of paper.

    Ah but Adrien will jump up and down and say but what about the smiley “A” and the “3”? Humans see patterns especially faces where they do not exist. Remember the man in the moon and the face on Mars?

    Kevin Davidson, Doctor Conspiracy, did a wonderful article about the smiley face titled Agency and Patternicity that explains the face phenomenon very well.

    So Adrien will cling to his forgery claim based on an imaginary “3” and an imaginary “face”. How sad.

    • W. Kevin Vicklund says:

      One minor addendum to item 6. Change it to “high contrast scan” As Adrien points out, a high contrast scan will read the light green as a grey (and despite what your eye is telling you, the AP background is actually very close to grey). A high contrast scan also explains why the basketweave pattern is preserved at the left edge. When you look at the WH pdf, you can see that the shadow is printed on both the green and the white of the basketweave. However, printing over the green makes the shadow appear darker. Enough so that it bumps over the threshold of contrast for the scanner (remember, high contrast makes the darks darker and the lights lighter – there has to be an inflection point)

      • Thanks. I made the change.

        I ran a test a while back by scanning a color printout of the PDF through my home multifunction Brother machine using a grey-scale scan and the basket weave pattern completely disappeared except along the left edge just as seen in the AP JPG. That was with the default settings and at either 150 dpi and 300 dpi. What one cannot do is create the extra information in the higher res AP photo.

    • Adrien Nash says:

      Here’s the three versions of the Alvin “A” side-by-side. No one needs to depend on anyone else’s opinion about what is true or what their eyes see.
      RC said: “What one cannot do is create the extra information in the higher res AP photo.”
      Let’s see, a high resolution original counterfeit is produced, -from which a high resolution 8.5 X 11 print is made, which is used as a master copy to make more photocopies, with the COLB behind it on the scanner-copier.
      A lower resolution/ smaller size version is produced for web sharing. It’s saved to memory in the Portable Document Format (PDF), just as a compressed version of the higher resolution original was saved as a multi-layer PDF (it being perhaps only one tenth the file size as the original editing format).
      A fake cover-story is concocted to explain why Obama was unwilling for three years to produce his long form bc. Hawaii goes along with the lie that they don’t issue long form BCs even though there is no such law on the books (it being merely a policy of convenience which any Hawaiian can surmount via a request for the long form and an explanation as to why the it would be needed instead of the simple, bare-bones version.
      Fake communications are created along with the story of physically traveling to Hawaii at a cost of up to $5,000 and a distance of over 5,000 miles round-trip just to get something that is going to be “public” and could be sent via commercial or PS certified mail.
      But actually, the trip was unavoidable since the NSA would capture any communication via e-mail, so the original birth certificate source document files needed for the counterfeit had to be personally hand-delivered to someone who could shield Obama under attorney-client privilege and never have to testify against him. It had to be totally off-the-grid and legally protected communication. And it was.

      But the tired or forgetful counterfeiter forgot at the last minute to flatten the dang fake before uploading it to the WH server. Cut to the present. The dissection process continues.
      If one agreed to accept that all of anomalies were machine/software produced except the “non”, and the “accepted” date stamps, and the smiling face tweek, then it is still an uncertifiable fake because it has been altered, and altered in ways undetectable due to earlier saves in a flattened form. Those four specific anomalies cannot be innocently explained nor can they be reproduced via a thousand passes on a scanner. They are simply impossibilities.

      “Humans see patterns especially faces where they do not exist.” No, they see them where they Do exist but not due to a divine sign but due only to random patterns produced by nature. The smiling “A” was not produced by nature nor by machine buy by man (or woman). It is NOT equivalent to the Virgin Mary seen in a stain except in the sense that the mind knows that it is seeing something familiar.

      • I took a big dump this afternoon and looked down in the bowl and it spelled out “Rush” as plain as day. Coincidence you say? I think not.

      • Adrien Nash said

        Let’s see, a high resolution original counterfeit is produced, -from which a high resolution 8.5 X 11 print is made, which is used as a master copy to make more photocopies, with the COLB behind it on the scanner-copier.
        A lower resolution/ smaller size version is produced for web sharing. It’s saved to memory in the Portable Document Format (PDF), just as a compressed version of the higher resolution original was saved as a multi-layer PDF (it being perhaps only one tenth the file size as the original editing format).

        That is such a stupid theory I am beginning to believe you are a troll pretending to be a real Birther. According to your new theory you and all the Birther “experts” like Douglas Vogt, Mara Zebest, Karl Denninger, Tim Selaty, Jr., Garrett Papit, and Reed Hayes have been basing your analyses on a “scaled down” version file of a mysterious larger PDF file that has never been posted and you have never analyzed?

        Would you care to tell us by what process that scaling down to post the image on the internet was done? The obvious way would be to print a color copy then scan to email from machine like the Xerox 7655 that we already know was used to scan at least one other document posted on the White House web site. It is in the metadata. So that would be the easiest way. If you agree then tell me how you could tell the difference between that printed copy and one supplied by the State of Hawaii?

        You just keep digging that hole Adrien. Keep right on digging.

        • Adrien Nash says:

          I don’t claim that there is any evidence that the WH pdf was not the result of the original editing version of the components that went into producing the pdf. That working–editing version could have been psd or a dozen other proprietary digital image-editing formats like Photoshop, -formats that are uncompressed and therefore huge in size.
          That format was the source of the first print-out, -the one without the smiling face (that S. Guthrie took a snapshot of) and it was then resized smaller if it was a larger size to begin with, and then saved in the pdf format and uploaded to the WH website after the forger added his final secret signature touch of the smiling “a”. That, he thought, would ensure him closet bragging rights in the future if the fake was not exposed like the Bush National Guard counterfeit.

          I propose that the original file was larger than the pdf size only because that is the optimal way to work up a document or image. One size for printing and another smaller size for web sharing. That isn’t nearly as great a consideration as it was before high-speed internet when everyone had dial-up, which I had for a decade, until a few months ago.

Leave a Reply (Please see the RC Radio Blog comment policy). Your first comment will be moderated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s