CountryPlans Forum

I see that Sheriff Joe in AZ is running an investigation.  Hopefully he won't have the same wine that Breitbart had.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/1/sheriff-arpaio-obama-birth-certificate-forgery/

A year or so ago, when the birth cert was published on the white house web site, I saw the initial analysis by a graphics guru who pointed out that the document had a dozen or so layers that you could turn on or off, filling in some of the blanks.  He also pointed out that some of the handwriting was exceptionally pixelated, and some was not. 

Weird, huh?  I'm amazed that there has not been more direct media exposure (even in the conservative media) regarding this.

I saw this story as soon as it came out, went to the whitehouse web site and downloaded it for myself to look at.  I'll be doggone.  They were right, and my blood ran cold.

So....put me down for hell yes.

Not being a real big Fan of Sheriff Joe, I'll have to look at his end findings with the same amount of suspicion I look at Obama's Birth Records with....maybe a little more!

That said, I'm a potential Birther but the simple fact is, he's been President, he's already done the damage and if we hang him now for being low down and high smelling, that damage isn't going away.

I'm a lot more concerned about him being re-elected because the Republicans are doing what they always do when they have the advantage....blowing it!

I have to say I flip flop on this, but mostly I come up thinking that there have got to be more people who could have been anointed than just Obama, so selecting him, if you believe in that conspiracy, would not have been their best choice. Although I am fascinated by the layers. I do use Photoshop and took a good look at that. A big puzzle to me.

I'm pretty confused by the three votes that indicate that 10 layers of text, including digital pen signatures are not suspicious.  I'd love to hear their reasons why.

Here is the video.  Keep in mind that you can (or could, as I did) download this document. 

It is clearly, unarguably, a forgery.  Obama may have a legitimae US birth certificate, but the document that was posted as his birth cert was a fake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY

previous thread, for the curious

http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=10595.msg135030#msg135030

This is a political sideshow for voters.  The Sheriff is an elected position and he is running while being investigated by a Federal Grand Jury that has been empanelled since way before this (2009).

The reason this is a sideshow is they don't state any way that he has jurisdiction under any power as a County Sheriff for any law that was broken that he has the legal capability to enforce.

In every article, he carefully states this is not about Obama being qualified to be president, because he has no jurisdiction in that.
It is not about whether he proved to be on the ballot.  That was vetoed as a matter of law.  http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-18/politics/arizona.president.bill.veto_1_birther-bill-arizona-secretary-state-ballot?_s=PM:POLITICS

In a summary judgment motion you presuppose the fact that are alleged to be true, and even with that, if it is deficient by law, the action is dismissed.  So let's presuppose the document is fraudulent for purposes to even survive a claim.  It is published on a website in Washington, D.C. by no person that is a resident of Maricopa County.   A county sheriff cannot claim nationwide jurisdiction.  This is all before anyone would even rely on the supposed "expert" testimony of anyone.  I could put a birth certificate on my website saying I was born in Montana, the Maricopa sheriff has no jurisdiction.

This will electrify his base, distract from the Federal investigation, if he is indicted he can blame it on retribution, and if he is not reelected he can make a ton of cash speaking and writing about it.  Win/Win.  Smart Politician.

Edit: Maricopa

His team that he is relying on:
5 Tea party volunteers.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/02/us-sheriff-arizona-obama-idUSTRE82105V20120302?feedType=RSS&asid=e8d51908

QuoteArpaio told reporters on Thursday his review of Obama's birth certificate began in August, months before the Justice Department investigation findings in December

The Justice Departments findings were released in December, the investigation (which he was aware of) started in 2008 ( edit based on article listed below).

Credibility of the Accuser?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/15/justice-department-arpaio-violated-federal-law/

Well, I couldn't vote, since you didn't include the option of 'Firmly on the fence'. It would appear that something fishy is going on here, which has much larger implications than simply whether or not he was born in the US. Of course, those that are setting out to 'prove' this also have pretty big ambitions, so I don't feel I can fully trust them, either. I admit that I'm very concerned that our President's past has been so securely obscured. That in itself leads me to believe that there's a lot going on behind the curtain. I am pretty sure that the American people are being played, and that by the time it is obvious who is playing us and how, it will be far too late to reverse it. It may be already.

Tom Fife: The First Time I heard of Barack Obama

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24005912/The-First-Time-I-Heard-of-Barack-An-essay-by-Tom-Fife-11-20-2008

From a prominent Russian party member spoken 1992 to Tom Fife.

"Yes, it is true. This is not some idle talk. He is already born and he is educated and being groomed to be president right now. You will be impressed to know that he has gone to the best schools of Presidents. He is what you call "Ivy League". You don't believe me, but he is real and I even know his name. His name is Barack. His mother is white and American and his father is black from Africa. That's right, a chocolate baby! And he's going to be your President."

It's good that he remembered that 1992 conversation in 2008?  It is amazing that he never once wrote it down until he was a Obama presidential candidate.  He didn't write it down when Obama was later elected to state legislature. He only had 7 years to figure out the coming commie threat. You would think that would have jogged his memory. He didn't write it down when Obama was giving the Democratic National Committee address on National TV.  I guess that "Barack" state legislature guy addressing half the nation running for Senate didn't jog his memory. He didn't even bother when he was elected to the Senate, but after he became a presidential candidate, then he remembered that story in 1992 and bothered to tell people.

I get so confused is he an Atheist Russian Communist or a Secret Muslim Terrorist? rofl  Oh wait, I forgot, he was a radical Christian racist like his pastor Jeremiah Wright.


Oh wait, it was written on 11-20-2008, after he was elected president.  Great memory.

Didn't the communists collapse that year?

Quote from: Squirl on March 02, 2012, 06:21:47 PM
Didn't the communists collapse that year?

'91 more or less...

"The dissolution of the Soviet Union was a process of systematic disintegration, which occurred in economy, social structure and political structure. It resulted in the abolition of the Soviet Federal Government ("the Union center") and independence of the USSR's republics on 26 December 1991. The process was caused by weakening of the Soviet government, which led to disintegration and took place from about 19 January 1990 to 31 December 1991. The process was characterized by many of the republics of the Soviet Union declaring their independence and being recognized as sovereign nation-states." - wikipedia

Quote from: MountainDon on March 02, 2012, 06:34:46 PM
'91 more or less...

"The dissolution of the Soviet Union was a process of systematic disintegration, which occurred in economy, social structure and political structure. It resulted in the abolition of the Soviet Federal Government ("the Union center") and independence of the USSR's republics on 26 December 1991. The process was caused by weakening of the Soviet government, which led to disintegration and took place from about 19 January 1990 to 31 December 1991. The process was characterized by many of the republics of the Soviet Union declaring their independence and being recognized as sovereign nation-states." - wikipedia

As I've mentioned before Don...it was a time portal into what's happening here.
But, that's a subject for another rainy day. ;D
Gotta be a way to blame Obama for the rain.

Yes, please, let's rehash this stupidity once again.

Quote from: Ajax on March 02, 2012, 09:14:07 PM
Yes, please, let's rehash this stupidity once again.

Well I'll be darned. I didn't think it existed but right there it is in black...er..green and white. c*

Country Plans.
Rules and Regulations

Rule 428.7

Ajax is required to view every thread he hates. Further, he is directed to actively participate in the discussions, present evidence dispelling the opposing views and eat popcorn while reading.
No exceptions!

   Didn't vote on this one.

   Obama once described himself as a 'mutt' during a speech.

   I'm not real sure who he believes who his father was.

   But who am I to question that?




   sparks

We as a nation have gotten so politically correct that even if a video surfaced of the birth of the person in question showed delivery in a straw hut in Kenya, we would be quiet as a mouse about it.
We are so afraid of the (should I write it) R_CE card being played and we get portrayed as such. I believe we will even go so far as to vote against our convictions just to prove that we are not what the left says we are. We as a nation are so hung up with appearance and man pleasing.
It is too late even if S. Joe proves its a fake, what good will it do.
Didn't vote on this one either.
If Ron Paul would only change his stance on Israel.....

Quote from: peternap on March 02, 2012, 10:25:35 PM
Well I'll be darned. I didn't think it existed but right there it is in black...er..green and white. c*

Country Plans.
Rules and Regulations

Rule 428.7

Ajax is required to view every thread he hates. Further, he is directed to actively participate in the discussions, present evidence dispelling the opposing views and eat popcorn while reading.
No exceptions!

You got a point?  Is there something I can do for you?

All you need to know about this topic is here.

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

This has long since been settled.

From the fact check article:

QuoteUpdate, April 27, 2011: The White House released the long-form version of President Barack Obama's birth certificate, confirming (yet again) that he was born in the United States. The Hawaii Department of Health made an exception in Obama's case and issued copies of the "Certificate of Live Birth."

Well having been born  in Hawaii I have a copy of my long form birht certificate, and amazingly I did not need a special "exception" to get it. Just saying.....

I'm sorry but if that is the case, this "controversy" could have been settled long ago. There are too many unanswered questions, and everytime the administration tries to settle the debate they raise more questions than they answer. Sorry in this case where there is smoke there is fire.

Smoke and mirrors.

I have no doubt Obama was born in the USA.  OK, I do wonder a little about the whole Kenya thing from time to time but it's all just smoke and mirrors.

After all, if you spend time worrying about birth certs then maybe you won't notice the whole Marxist 'Hope and Change thing'....and well, the $4/gallon gas prices.

Conspiracies always, the good ones anyway, have some truth to them, that's what makes them so intriguing.  However, it doesn't matter because you won't change anything worrying about it but the Obama administration WILL change A LOT of things while you're not paying attention.

Heck, he'll probably even get re-elected.  After all, "when the people realize they can vote themselves money it will be the end of the Republic" to paraphrase Ben Franklin.

My consternation with this remains that fact that the document that the administration published has layers of information that has clearly been edited. 

If it had been scanned, it would have had a single layer. 

That document was faked up to look legit... it was not scanned.  Why post a fake if the original was available?

Again... Why post a fake?

I think this is a perfect example of a liberal vs. conservative argument.  The liberals vote in spite of tactile evidence proving otherwise.  We have at least 5 votes here indicating that they believe that the posted document is legit, in spite of the layering.  Not a single explanation why. 

Sixth now... Jarhead?

Quote from: NM_Shooter on March 03, 2012, 10:37:07 AM
My consternation with this remains that fact that the document that the administration published has layers of information that has clearly been edited. 

If it had been scanned, it would have had a single layer. 

That document was faked up to look legit... it was not scanned.  Why post a fake if the original was available?

Again... Why post a fake?

I think this is a perfect example of a liberal vs. conservative argument.  The liberals vote in spite of tactile evidence proving otherwise.  We have at least 5 votes here indicating that they believe that the posted document is legit, in spite of the layering.  Not a single explanation why.

Post a fake so you will worry about it.  Makes perfect sense and comes right out of their playbook.

Quote from: NM_Shooter on March 03, 2012, 10:39:08 AM
Sixth now... Jarhead?

Yes -- though I would have preferred "Who Cares, won't change a thing" instead.

Frankly, I believe that it will take years to prove either way because they want it that way.  They laugh at you for it too.  Now they can get back to calling 'birthers' racists instead of explaining why gas is $4/gallon.

Wait.. .you do realize that the poll question is whether the document was a fake, and not whether Obama has a US birth cert.  Right?

I'm getting some enlightenment here.  Not only on this thread but how people in general react to a topic being discussed.

The question that I posted had to deal with whether or not the posted document was a fake.  Not whether Obama is a fake. 

Seems like folks tend to react to the emotional issue behind the data rather than being able to examine data in a detached fashion. 

Interesting in a disturbing way.

Quote from: NM_Shooter on March 03, 2012, 10:43:08 AM
Wait.. .you do realize that the poll question is whether the document was a fake, and not whether Obama has a US birth cert.  Right?

Hmmm.....I did but chose to answer the way I did because I think there is a real one out there that they just chose not to share.

Perhaps this one is fake (that would not surprise me in the slightest) but I think they have the real one somewhere.

I should also add this:  where is yours?  I personally don't have mine, it was lost long long ago and I had to petition to get a replacement in order to join the Marine Corps.  It's a 'short form' I guess but then I don't know.  All I know is that it was issued in 1986 and I was born in 1965.

It is my understanding that Barry submitted his short form originally, which was also a re-issue.  Though I could be wrong.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that it's good for his re-election campaign for birthers to be talking about his legitimacy -- it is then more likely that he will win re-election.

NM, I think another question is why is this done in such blatantly 'in your face' way that even a PS amateur like myself can easily discover clear signs of fraud .

eg there are letters that have absolutely identical shapes when blown up to reveal the individual pixels.

This is   of course impossible in a scanned document

similarly the pathetic date stamp from BO's draft papers. Cutting a 2008 stamp in half and inverting it to make 80

pathetic for a man with unlimited resources to fake documents of such poor quality

IMO these 'documents' were made to be easily identified as fake

Why ?


Is it to divide us and ultimately demoralize us, much like the obvious voting machine fraud.

When I first saw that it looked like someone fiddled with it in a basic easy to see fashion I was puzzled. There's no way a good forger would release that. So I figure it was either very sloppy because they are totally inept or because they have a sense of humor and want to have fun with the birther crowd.

Quote from: Ajax on March 03, 2012, 08:52:28 AM
You got a point?  Is there something I can do for you?

The point should be obvious...even to you,
and
Very, Very, unlikely

Quote from: NM_Shooter on March 03, 2012, 10:37:07 AM

If it had been scanned, it would have had a single layer. 

That statement shows that you clearly don't know what your talking about.

Fox news says it's legit (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/29/expert-says-obamas-birth-certificate-legit/)

Watch this guy do it (http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/adobe-pdf-document-layering-debunking-the-fake-obama-long-form-birth-certificate-theory/)

Quote from: OlJarhead on March 03, 2012, 10:41:32 AM
Now they can get back to calling 'birthers' racists instead of explaining why gas is $4/gallon.

What does the administration have to do with $4 gas?

Quote from: Windpower on March 03, 2012, 11:53:30 AM
NM, I think another question is why is this done in such blatantly 'in your face' way that even a PS amateur like myself can easily discover clear signs of fraud .

It's not fake, and The National Review agrees with me
(http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding)

Quote from: peternap on March 03, 2012, 12:34:54 PM
The point should be obvious...even to you,

What's obvious to me is that some folks on this board think they know more about PDF files than they actually do.

You're talking about PDF files?????
I don't think anyone mentioned them, but you you keep watching the sky. That will be your job! rofl
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rGrnl2zOc8Y/SoLFaOeVYGI/AAAAAAAABIU/_LnOkq8himc/s400/emperor.gif)

Quote from: NM_Shooter on March 03, 2012, 10:47:35 AM
I'm getting some enlightenment here.  Not only on this thread but how people in general react to a topic being discussed.

The question that I posted had to deal with whether or not the posted document was a fake.  Not whether Obama is a fake. 

Seems like folks tend to react to the emotional issue behind the data rather than being able to examine data in a detached fashion. 

Interesting in a disturbing way.

You've provided enlightenment as well. Was the poll question written in a detached or emotional way? Was there bias? Yet you feel it inappropriate that responses were emotional and biased. Also interesting in a disturbing way. I think the appropriate term is GIGO.

Quote from: Ajax on March 03, 2012, 07:01:39 PM
Fox news says it's legit (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/29/expert-says-obamas-birth-certificate-legit/)

Watch this guy do it (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding)
[/url]

Those are very interesting links. I never saw them before, but then I haven't spent a lot of time researching the matter since I first saw the controversies over the release of the document. It didn't  seem to be worthwhile to pursue.

I guess I should say thanks. Thanks

Quote from: Don_P on March 03, 2012, 09:56:23 PM
You've provided enlightenment as well. Was the poll question written in a detached or emotional way? Was there bias? Yet you feel it inappropriate that responses were emotional and biased. Also interesting in a disturbing way. I think the appropriate term is GIGO.

Actually, it was tongue in cheek cynicism.  I was amazed that folks were assuming / answering a question that I had not asked. 

Quote from: Ajax on March 03, 2012, 07:01:39 PM

What does the administration have to do with $4 gas?

It is possible 'nothing' is the correct answer but then you would have to ignore a whole lot of beurocratic stuff...but that wasn't my point.  When gas hit $3.89/gallon under Bush it was his fault.  When gas hits $3.89/gallon under Obama it won't be his fault.

See how that works?

But I digress:  high gas prices mean lower chances of being elected no matter who's fault it is, but if you can keep the news from talking about it then you can reduce the potential damage (this is high school stuff man).

So, keep the 'birthers' frothing at the mouth ;)

I will also admit that the evidence to the contrary that Ajax posted has pulled me into the middle to the "on the fence" group.

And I do have multiple valid birth certs for myself.  The original in a depost box, and I requested a duplicate for a submission for  a passport years ago (I did not want to send in my original).

As a liberal Democrat, I couldn't be happier that Sheriff Joe revived this dead horse.  Now we can focus on the President's birth certificate, and restricting access to contraception, and the snobbery of going to college instead of debating job creation and the economy.  Any other election year, with unemployment over 8% and gas over $4 a gallon, I would be worried about re-electing a Democratic incumbent. 

But instead, with the current slate of GOP clowns insisting on a circular firing squad and endless conservative purity tests, I am laughing all the way to the ballot box, and dreaming of a reboot of 1964, when we took not only the White House, but both houses of Congress, and Republicans were shut out completely.

In the immortal words of Flounder from Animal House, "Boy, this is going to be great!!"

;D

Boy I hate agreeing with you Pox! d*

"High Jack Alert"

"restrict access to contraception"

Hey! I have an idea!  A really proactive move would include the elimination of insurance coverage for Viagra and the other copy cat Rxs.  After all, it would serve to end ethical problems with the "when life begins" issue, because less lives would "begin". Certainly would also serve to lower health care costs such as maternity and heart attacks.

Sounds fair to me! Put that in front of the all male House Oversight Committee on Birth Control and see how they respond. 

Quote from: considerations on March 30, 2012, 10:25:17 AM
"High Jack Alert"

"restrict access to contraception"

Hey! I have an idea!  A really proactive move would include the elimination of insurance coverage for Viagra and the other copy cat Rxs.  After all, it would serve to end ethical problems with the "when life begins" issue, because less lives would "begin". Certainly would also serve to lower health care costs such as maternity and heart attacks.

Sounds fair to me! Put that in front of the all male House Oversight Committee on Birth Control and see how they respond.

Don't remember how we got here, considerations, maybe you made just a straight out hijack  c*  Although I am completely "pro-life" as far as abortions go (volunteer at a Crisis Pregnancy Center doing ultrasounds).  I totally agree w/you about the Viagra et al  :D 

When I used to work in the clinics at the Veterans Hospital, I had a 50 something guy come in during the lunch break - no docs available, I just happened to still be in the office...  anyway, he demands that I get his Viagra refilled.  I calmly explained that I'd need to schedule him in w/a doc in the afternoon to get the refill...  he got very angry & started yelling at me.  I told him that he could purchase the pills at a pharmacy outside the VA.  He got madder & told me he didn't have the money.  I asked him if he ever took his girlfriend on a date, like out to eat or to a movie - he replied "yes."  I said "if you have the money to do those things & the Viagra is so important to you, I would think you would spend the money on a couple pills."  He started yelling at me in the middle of the waiting room where he started the whole conversation...  then reported me to the patient advocate that I was embarrassing him in front of everyone. 

Goes to show what a hot button issue this is.    d*

Well it did come with a highjack alert.   ;D

Maybe a topic unto itself? 

Thanks, Mountain Don, but I don't think the pro life/pro choice / health care issue(s) deserve a thread of their own, let alone a place in the political campaigns leading up to a presidential election.  Suffice it to say I believe those discussions belong in the privacy of a family circle.  I just popped off after getting a full craw (outside of this forum) of politicians and media pundits spewing out their list of "shoulds" for the rest of the country.  Temporary lapse, won't happen again... d*

Quote from: considerations on March 30, 2012, 10:25:17 AMSounds fair to me! Put that in front of the all male House Oversight Committee on Birth Control and see how they respond.

Maybe they will follow the lead of the Arizona Republicans in the state legislature, who proposed a law that would define life as beginning two weeks before conception (http://rt.com/usa/news/arizona-bill-conception-abortion-387/):

Quote
Under Arizona’s H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child’s life to be the first day of its mother’s last menstrual period. The legislation is being proposed so that lawmakers can outlaw abortions on fetuses past the age of 20-weeks, but the verbiage its authors use to construct a time cycle for the baby would mean that the start of the child's life could very well occur up to two weeks before the mother and father even ponder procreating.

...

"...it’s safe to assume that they’d simply prefer a situation where all women of reproductive age are considered to be pregnant, on the grounds that they could be two weeks from now,”

Perhaps Arizona just couldn't bear to be less idiotic than Florida and Texas, so they figured they would swing for the fences.

Quote from: Pox Eclipse on April 09, 2012, 07:48:58 PM
Maybe they will follow the lead of the Arizona Republicans in the state legislature, who proposed a law that would define life as beginning two weeks before conception (http://rt.com/usa/news/arizona-bill-conception-abortion-387/):
Perhaps Arizona just couldn't bear to be less idiotic than Florida and Texas, so they figured they would swing for the fences.

Everyone knows life begins at closing time ! :-\


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-0lV5qs1Qw

Quote from: considerations on April 09, 2012, 11:13:45 AM
  Suffice it to say I believe those discussions belong in the privacy of a family circle.

Agreed.