FactCheck’s Forged Barack Obama COLB

  The “FactCheck” COLB’s has been an issue since they were posted. In an attempt to backup the original forgery posted on “Fight the Smears”, there are glaring issues with both the “FactCheck” Colb’s. I reference that there are two separate and individual documents as one clearly shows an embossed SEAL while the other does not. The one that does contain an embossed SEAL, however is not an official SEAL from the State of Hawaii – Department of Health, and hence the document itself is already in question.

Here in an attempt to identify an additional ink markings from the Statement and Signature Stamp applied to the back of an authentic Certificate from the Vital Records Department, I will be using the “FactCheck” images and developing a composite image based on several layers, and seeing if any additional indications can be detected.

First let us provide an over-view of the images posted on FactCheck.

 

FactCheck posted nine (9) images none of which are head-on and provide clear reference points. If you look at the image in the upper right hand of the composite, you will notice one glaring issue. The area where there should be an embossed SEAL is shaded by the arm of the person taking the picture. Other images are similarly deceptive in angle or contrast.

However their attempt, they failed to resolve the issue of Obama’s Certification of Live Birth.

Issue #1. There are two separate COLB’s posted. As noted before one COLB has an embossed SEAL and the other does not.

Below are the images of the COLB’s

Here is the COLB with an embossed SEAl. The image has been resized and rotated to the correct orientation. We will call this COLB 1 for reference.

 

Now the second COLB without the embossed SEAL. We will call this COLB 2 for reference.

 

Let’s examine individual close-ups of the area and.

Here is COLB 1 cropped with the SEAL clearly visible and measurements in the area indicating the location of the embossed SEAL from points on the COLB that can be identified between different documents. I have increased the contrast of the image.

 

Now let’s look at the same area on the second COLB [COLB 2]

First let’s increase the brightness of the image to increase the light in the shaded area of the arm.

 

Now let’s crop into the area of where the SEAL should be. Again using the same area as COLB 1, below is the image of what we see. NOTHING there.

 

Notice that the Rattan Security lines are CLEARLY visible and solid. No breakage is seen. I then altered the image using the Hue and Saturation settings to change the coloring to be able to bring out the lines.

 

Again, using the same orientation points that we did for COLB 1, you can clearly see that there is NO line breakage indicating an embossed SEAL was ever applied to the document.  This is a high resolution image, here are is the info on both images.

 

Now let us turn our attention to the date stamp in the FactCheck COLB 1. Here again we will use the original COLB posted by Barack Obama on ‘Fight the Smears’ and compare it to COLB 1 on FactCheck.

Below is the “Date Stamp of the Barack Obama COLB”

 

 We have adjusted the Hue and Saturation for bleed-through on the Date Stamp.

Notice that there is NO additional ink markings within the entire region.

 Since we have detected NO additional ink markings in the region, we will use the original image as our reference. We then took the Official stamp off another “FactCheck” image and super-imposed onto this image.

 

 

Note how we have aligned the overlay to the Date stamp, all reference lines are now based on this orientation. Below is a minor off-set to show that the Date is actually in fact lined up.

 

 

From this image we will now use the FactCheck image. Image 8 for reference. We will create a transparent image of the background leaving the Black border and lettering to orient this image to the original one above.

 

And another from FactCheck. This is resized to show the entire image here.The next image that we will use is the one below. We will again, create a transparent background leaving the Date, statement, and the signature, as to align them with the original.

 

Now using the “State” letters as our reference point. Notice the large area under it.

Using the third image above, reposted here, notice that the “State” letters are inside the Border in the word ‘INVALIDATE’

 

Now, lets refer to the following image and see how far the bottom of the image is to the letters “State” I have added the Blue lines as a reference guide.

 

 

We will add the additional references. Here I will use the Letter ‘S’ from the word State and to the edge of the image there is space for at least four (4) additional S’s.

 

 

We will now apply the above Image 8 to the original. The one that we removed the Ratan Background [Security feature – see my blog posting on Security Features], leaving the Black border and lettering. Note that the alignment can be seen and the I in the word INVALIDATE shows the separation between the original image and the overlay.

 

 We will now use the layering tool to move this layer back one and then have the Date/Signature overlay on the top. Note that all are aligned very nicely.

 

 Now we even apply the second signature overlay to show that they do indeed line up. Notice that the “State” in the ‘INVALIDATE lines up correctly along with the words on all the other lines. All aligned off the “Jun -6 2007’ date.

 

 I have added the additional “S’s” to the overlay in an attempt to find the location to the bottom of the “FactCheck” COLB. As FactCheck did NOT photograph the entire back like they did for the two separate COLB’s they posted. IE: One COLB with a SEAL and the other without a SEAL. Hence two separate COLB’s. “FactCheck” only posted close-ups of the stamp area with any orientation points.

 

 

 There is NO additional ink bleed through in the ENTIRE area. It appears that the original “JUN – 6 2007” Date stamp was applied to the top of the ‘FactCheck” COLB and was not applied on the back. On the front, as if it was printed when the COLB was printed.

However with the absence of any other ink bleed through and being able to identify WHERE the additional lettering from the Statement/Signature Stamp if any impression was available.

With all these overlays and switching back and forth under the layering tool. No indications were detected. No increase of the brightness/contrast or hue and saturation brought out any additional markings or indications that any ink or impressions were applied to the back of ‘either’ document. However there is clear indication that an image of the date ‘Jun 6- 2007’ was copied and applied to the original COLB posted on ‘Fight the Smears’ and this was transferred to the FactCheck document when it was printed out. 

 

 

My original conclusion stands, that the Date on the COLB was printed on the top when the document was created, by printing out the ‘Fight the Smears’ COLB and then attempting to apply an embossed seal to the document in an attempt to produce a forged Birth Certification. However they produced two completely different documents one with a SEAL and the other without one. I believe they noticed that during the process that the document was missing a SEAL, applied one, and did not catch the image without one till it was too late and already posted.

 They are forgeries, plain and simple.

Forgery #1 – The COLB posted on ‘Fight the Smears’ – No Stamp, No Seal, evidence of tampering and forgery. Sandra Ramsey Lines, Ron Polirak, and myself, among others.

Forgery #2 – FactCheck – Two different COLB’s one with a SEAL, however NOT an Official State of Hawaii Department of Health SEAL

Forgery #3 – FactCheck – COLB without a SEAL, image of COLB being held up. High resolution and NO indicating of a SEAL.

So how can there be three versions of a document that Hawaii NEVER issued?

The Adoption of Obama

The Adoption of Obama

 Like with ‘anything’ regarding the past of Obama, nothing should be taken for granted or on face value. Both of his books by Obama’s own words can NOT be taken literally. They are nothing more then a facade, a mask of the true background and nature of Barack Obama, created to produce the Obama effect on whomever wants to believe in unicorns and forest fairies.

 

Currently Obama refuses to release any documents regarding his past. We are to except what is written as fact, regardless if it conflicts with, or when the document is changed by necessity.

 Let us reason why Obama refuses to show where he was born.  Obama claims to have been born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center Hospital, then within months claims to have been born in Queens Hospital.

Claiming and facts are different.  Fact is that both hospitals fail to claim Barack Obama being born there as do other medical centers that have been contacted by researchers.

 We know from several separate statements made by his Grandmother Sarah that the following are known.

1. Obama was born in Kenya
2. She [Grandmother Sarah] was present at his birth

 Now, the remarks of one person might be questioned. But even back in the beginning of his campaign ads with “Kenyan-Born” crept up overseas, and the recent trip to Ghana again was riddled with “Returning to his Continent of Birth” and news video of people stating that Obama was Kenyan.

 But again, another ‘UNKNOWN’ must be included. Who was Barack Obama’s birth mother?

Just like with and I quote ‘EVERYTHING’ that is known and factual; the facts go so far and then drop off.  Again, notice the above, Obama was born in Kenya and she was there, but it stops at a critical point, who was his mother.

 Recently Barack Obama stated that he was a few months old when the Bay of Pigs invasion happened. A slip of the tongue or a genuine remark. Let’s dissect that statement with known facts. The Bay of Pigs invasion took place on April 1961. Obama claims to have been born on Aug 4^th 1961, four months after the event. What if in reality Obama was born prior to April 1961.

“Obama openly admits he is offering a psychological autobiography, not a chronological one.  The dialogue is an ‘approximation’ . . . the characters are ‘composites’ … ‘events appear out of precise chronology.'”

Let’s take another time period that Obama has placed relevance in, Nov 1960. The time period that Obama ‘CLAIMS’ his parents meet. Combine that with the statement from Grandma Sarah and you have the picture a little more clearly.

 Obama was dumped on Stanley Ann and Obama Sr took off to parts unknown and elsewhere like Harvard.

 Well if Stanley Ann Durham was NOT his mother then who was/is?

 First off, the gloves come off. We have always assumed that Stanley Ann was his mother. What if the reason Obama refuses to release his ‘RECORD’ that Hawaii has on files, is that it is NOT a Birth record, but an adoption record?

 Imagine that Obama finds his Birth Certificate in the box as described in “Dreams of My Father” and discovers that whom he thought was his mother WASN’T. Think of the resentment, the betrayal. when he’s old enough he starts using his ‘African’ name instead of his whitey name. He then goes on his travel of discovery, back to Africa to find his roots, To find his REAL mother, only Granny Sarah confirms the story. then to Indonesia to confront his mother and onto Pakistan where the real Barry finds solstice in the breeding hatred of Islam, and back to the US, and he uses the name Obama again. Dropping Soetoro as the anger against his mother is festering and now he’s Barack Obama ONLY. Created by paper once before, he re-creates himself again by using ‘HIS’ name.

 

 It also explains his white race hatred, esp. the teachings of Black theology in Wright’s Church. His non-advertising his ‘mother’s race’

 From Dreams of My Father: ‘I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.’

 From Dreams of My Father: ‘I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.’

 From Dreams of My Father: ‘There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.’

 From Dreams of My Father: ‘It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.’

From Dreams of My Father: ‘I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.’

 From Audacity of Hope: ‘I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.’

 This is a perverse/warped/twisted individual outlook on his own biological mother is nothing less then alarming! It only adds to the mounting evidence that Stanley Ann was NOT his birth mother and the resentment that Barack Obama fostered because of the lies that were told to him. Stanley Ann became the evil step-mother in Cinderella and Obama’s used that fantasy to foster the hatred not only towards his mother, but also to his mother’s race.   

 This also clears up, the Dr Rodney West story that was floated around just prior to the inauguration. Dr Rodney West, whom the Obots touted as the Dr who first spanked Obama NEVER came forward and said that he delivered him. When he [Dr Rodney West] was still alive during the beginning of the campaign no mention was ever made.  Dr Rodney West would also have all his patient records as an infant and possibly for his mother. SO we have the Dr, who died last year who like the hospital has NEVER stepped forward and confirmed ANYTHING.

 And lastly the documents that Kenya has stated they have sealed are explained. The birth certificate that was generated by law when Barack Obama was born in Kenya has his real birth’s mother name and that is why they have protected it from seeing the light of day, as it contains a name other then Stanley Ann Obama.

 Here are the official State of Hawaii guidelines concerning adoption records.

 http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0020_0005.htm

  §338-20.5  Adoption; foreign born persons.  (a)  The department of health shall establish a Hawaii certificate of birth for a person born in a foreign country and for whom a final decree of adoption has been entered in a court of competent jurisdiction in Hawaii, when it receives the following:

      (1)  A properly certified copy of the adoption decree, or certified abstract thereof on a form approved by the department; and

      (2)  A copy of any investigatory report and recommendation which may have been prepared by the director of social services; and

      (3)  A report on a form to be approved by the department of health setting forth the following:

          (A)  Date of assumption of custody;

          (B)  Sex;

          (C)  Color or race;

          (D)  Approximate age of child;

          (E)  Name and address of the person or persons adopting said child;

          (F)  Name given to child by adoptive parent or parents;

          (G)    True or probable country of birth.

 Or this;

 http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0021.htm

     §338-21  Children born to parents not married to each other.  (a)  All children born to parents not married to each other, irrespective of the marriage of either natural parent to another, (1) on the marriage of the natural parents with each other, (2) on the voluntary, written acknowledgements of paternity under oath signed by the natural father and the natural mother, or (3) on establishment of the parent and child relationship under chapter 584, are entitled to the same rights as those born to parents married to each other and shall take the name so stipulated by their parents or, if the parents do not agree on the name, shall take the name specified by a court of competent jurisdiction to be the name that is in the best interests of the child.  The original certificate of birth shall contain the name so stipulated.  The child or children or the parents thereof may petition the department of health to issue a new original certificate of birth, and not a duplicate of the original certificate that has been amended, altered, or modified, in the new name of the child, and the department shall issue the new original certificate of birth.  As used in this section “name” includes the first name, middle name, or last name.

     (b)  The evidence upon which the new original certificate is made, and the superseded original certificate shall be sealed and filed and may be opened only upon order of a court of record.

     (c)  If the child’s natural parents marry each other and desire to change the child’s name, the child’s name may be changed and a new original certificate of birth prepared.

    (d)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the power of the courts to order the department to prepare new certificates of birth under section 584-23. [L 1949, c 327, §25; RL 1955, §57-24; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; am L 1967, c 6, §2; HRS §338-21; am L 1975, c 66, §2(4); am L 1980, c 153, §5; am L 1983, c 65, §2; am L 1986, c 287, §1; am L 1987, c 100, §2; am L 1988, c 141, §27; am L 1993, c 131, §3]

           The true or probable country of birth shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation.  This report shall constitute an original certificate of birth; and

 (4)     A request that a new certificate of birth be established.

 Attorney General Opinions

  Department of health’s preparation of a new birth certificate pursuant to paternity orders.  Att. Gen. Op. 87-6.

 Case Notes

   Legitimacy or illegitimacy fixed at birth and cannot be changed by subsequent legislation.  3 H. 459; 4 H. 548.  Prior to amendment of Act 71, L 1907, children of adulterous intercourse not legitimated by subsequent marriage of parents.  4 H. 292; 17 H. 45, 415, aff’d 210 U.S. 149.  Legitimation by subsequent marriage.  29 H. 258, aff’d 16 F.2d 273.

   Child begotten and born out of wedlock even though legitimated by statute on marriage of parents, is not “lawfully begotten child” within meaning of will.  14 H. 271.

   Presumption of legitimacy is not conclusive, but rebuttable.  30 H. 574.  Evidence to rebut presumption.  49 H. 273, 414 P.2d 925.

   Effect of legitimation on necessity of father’s consent to adoption of child.  52 H. 395, 477 P.2d 780.

 In short the ‘Adoption of  Obama’ into the marriage of Obama/Durham created on paper, the “Aug 4^th 1961 in Hawaii” existence of the one known as “Barack Hussein Obama” born of a foreign and British ‘subject’ Barack Obama Sr and others unknown in Kenya.  This fulfills the puzzle in a complete circle. But it also mandates that as long as Barack Hussein Obama can confuse and claim to be born in Hawaii or at least to a US Citizen mother, then a certain number of the public will be slumbered into believing a ‘Native’ Citizen is eligible for the Presidency, where as a foreign born, with foreign parents leaves no doubt that Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka Barry Durham aka Barry Obama is exactly who he ‘CLAIMS’ he is, at the moment he’s claiming it, but in no way a ‘Natural Born’ Citizen as required by the United States Constitution.