Barack Hussein Obama and all Muslim Nations move closer to making criticism of Islam (aka free speech) an international crime

Posted: September 3, 2011 | Author: barenakedislam |

Apparently doing a website like this will soon be a crime if our Muslim-in-Chief and the Organization of Islamic States get their way. And you deniers out there still don’t believe Obama is a Muslim? HAH!

National Review (H/T Annie) An unprecedented collaboration between the Obama administration and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC, formerly called the Organization of the Islamic Conference) to combat “Islamophobia” may soon result in the delegitimization of freedom of expression as a human right.

The Obama regime is taking the lead in an international effort to “implement” a U.N. resolution against religious “stereotyping,” specifically as applied to Islam. To be sure, it argues that the effort should not result in free-speech curbs. However, its partners in the collaboration, the 56 member states of the OIC, have no such qualms. Many of them police private speech through Islamic blasphemy laws and the OIC has long worked to see such codes applied universally. Under Muslim pressure, Western Europe now has laws against religious hate speech that serve as proxies for Islamic blasphemy codes.

Last March, U.S. diplomats maneuvered the adoption of Resolution 16/18 within the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC). Non-binding, this resolution, inter alia, expresses concern about religious “stereotyping” and “negative profiling” but does not limit free speech. It was intended to — and did — replace the OIC’s decidedly dangerous resolution against “defamation of religions,” which protected religious institutions instead of individual freedoms.

But thanks to a puzzling U.S. diplomatic initiative that was unveiled in July, Resolution 16/18 is poised to become a springboard for a greatly reinvigorated international effort to criminalize speech against Islam, the very thing it was designed to quash.

Citing a need to “move to implementation” of Resolution 16/18, the Obama administration has inexplicably decided to launch a major international effort against Islamophobia in partnership with the Saudi-based OIC. This is being voluntarily assumed at American expense, outside the U.N. framework, and is not required by the resolution itself.

On July 15, a few days after the Norway massacre, Secretary of State Hijab Hillary Clinton co-chaired an OIC session in Istanbul on religious intolerance. It was there that she announced the initiative, inviting the OIC member-states’ foreign ministers and representatives to the inaugural meeting of the effort that the U.S. government would host this fall in Washington. She envisions it as the first in a series of meetings to decide how best to implement Resolution 16/18.

In making the announcement, Clinton was firm in asserting that the U.S. does not want to see speech restrictions: (CRAP) “The resolution calls upon states to ‘counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate . . . but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.’”(But who decides what incitement is?)

With the United States providing this new world stage for presenting grievances of “Islamophobia” against the West, the OIC rallied around the initiative as the propaganda windfall that it is. It promptly reasserted its demands for global blasphemy laws, once again sounding the call of its failed U.N. campaign for international laws against the so-called defamation of Islam. It has made plain its aim to use the upcoming conference to further pressure Western governments to regulate speech on behalf of Islam.

The OIC’s understanding of the upcoming meetings is that they will “aim at developing a legal basis for the U.N. Human Rights Council’s resolution which [will] help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions.”(No, ONLY Islam)

In an August 17 op-ed on the initiative, OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu was enthusiastic. He expressed concern that “anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attitudes and activities, known as Islamophobia, are increasingly finding place in the agenda of ultra-right wing political parties and civil societies in the West in their anti-immigrant and anti-multiculturalism policies,” and that “their views are being promoted under the banner of freedom of expression.” This parallels the old Soviet-bloc attack on the First Amendment as an official sanctioning of racism.

Citing a familiar litany of examples — “the publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur’an burnings” — Ihsanoglu was emphatic that “no one has the right to insult another for their beliefs or to incite hatred and prejudice” and that “freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility.”

In a separate OIC news report, Ihsanoglu raised the stakes further. He warned against the “institutionalization of the phenomenon of Islamophobia through the involvement of the European extreme right in government institutions and political action.”

Amb. Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s Permanent Representative on behalf of the OIC to the HRC, commented regarding the initiative that the OIC would not compromise on “anything against the Quran, anything against the Prophet and anything against the Muslim community in terms of discrimination.”

As for reciprocity — for example, reforming the Saudi national curriculum that continues to teach students to “kill” Jews, “fight” polytheists, view Christians as “enemies,” and spread Islam through “jihad” — there probably won’t be any.

This initiative is shaping up to be one-sided. As Akram said, “The Resolution 16/18 was driven more by the kind of discrimination in Europe and the West in general against Muslims.” He added: “I don’t think any country in the Muslim world is deliberately discriminating against minorities.” Ihsanoglu took a similar tack, writing that “the Islamic faith is based on tolerance and acceptance of other religions. (HAH!) It does not condone discrimination of human beings on the basis of caste, creed, color, or faith.” In his op-ed, Ihsanoglu also declared that “the OIC has never sought to limit freedom of expression.” (Everything about Islam is about limiting freedoms)

Having won the latest round in the ideological contest for individual rights and freedoms at the United Nations this past March, the Obama regime is now gratuitously establishing a new “transnational” forum to essentially re-litigate the matter with a body that is openly hostile to such freedoms. This forum’s agenda is to be structured so that freedom of expression will be put on trial and inevitably condemned by most forum participants as, itself, a human-rights violation. In raising OIC expectations that “anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attitudes” will be dealt with under soon-to-be-drafted “implementation” procedures, the administration is riding a tiger.

In his 2009 Cairo speech, President Obama said, “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam whenever they appear.” There are a number of problems with this statement: One is that it encourages the diplomatic folly that is this conference.

Obama and his Muslims ...more lies

Palestinians (trans-Jordanians) claim to be Muslims BUT according to their Koran who are the words of Mohammad Surah 9:5 


But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

These are Mohammad's words "The forbidden Months", which includes Ramadan as one of the Forbidden Months that Muslims are not allowed to kill make war or any acts of violence against anyone. However these Palestinians do not obey the words of Mohammad and decided to go to war with Israel during their "Holy Month of Ramadan". Therefore its not about Mohammad or the Koran which never mentions Jerusalem. It's about the Oil and Natural Gas. It's about money! How much Hamas can make and become rich off of Israel because they never thought the barren lands that were never explored were so rich with oil and natural gases. So the Palestinians, who claim to be Muslims, decided it's time to kill some Jews and to start a war. 

Meanwhile idiot Obama is on vacation or somewhere traveling in his new black bus somewhere in the USA hiding during this war. He has given Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood over 800 billion dollars for "schools" (suicide bomber schools) and for homes (bunkers to build bombs) and to rebuild Mosques (meeting places for terrorist). Meanwhile the Greek church in NYC still stands as an empty shell after the Muslim attack of 9/11 while his Muslims cheered in Gaza and the West Bank. It has been over 10 years and Federal Funds were never offered in the millions to fix the Greek Church. But Obama needs to fix Mosques. That a boy you are a Good Muslim using Jewish and Christian Money to rebuild Mosques so they can plan killing Coptic Christians and attacks on Israel.


And the idiotic/Moronic Liberal Jews and Christians  support this Obama as he gives money to murder innocent people in the Middle East because Obama claims to have Jewish ancestry and a committed Christian which are lies and he has shown no proof. But it's okay because Christian and Jewish blood is cheap and ex-spendable  according to Obama's thinking as he continues to tell you moronic Liberals he is a "Committed Christian" when he spent more the a quarter of his adult life as a Muslim and still is a Muslim. No matter how you look at it Obama is a Muslim. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it is a duck!

Here is a video how your tax money for "schools" for Palestinians are spent!




When Obama was in Jerusalem a brave Rabbinical Student was watching Obama place a paper in the Eastern Wall of the Temple. Never in since 1967 has any papers been removed until that day. The fear that came over the Rabbinical Student fearing Obama was the Evil one predicted in the scripts out to destroy Israel. 

Once the paper is removed than the evil one is removed. Obama is the Anti-Messiah, A man of the unknown, a man of many nation.

His note read : LORD, PROTECT MY FAMILY AND ME. FORGIVE ME MY SINS, AND HELP ME GUARD AGAINST PRIDE AND DESPAIR. GIVE ME THE WISDOM TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT AND JUST. AND MAKE ME AN INSTRUMENT OF YOUR WILL

He did not write  God! Obama wrote LORD. Who is Obama's Lord? The Anti-Messiah must conquer Jerusalem. The Anti Messiah must leave a claim in Jerusalem.  Obama wants Israel to push back to the 1967 borders. Obama wants the Muslims to attack Israel. Obama wants to enter Israel as the Peace Maker the Messiah with his army. The False Messiah is the Anti Messiah! Obama claims Jewish ancestry and the Anti Messiah come from a claim of Jewish ancestry. YOU DECIDE!
Just a note of interest Isnt the car / limo of Obama's called the "BEAST"!

Revelation, Chapter 13

13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

"The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty two months. It is Satan's secret desire to have other creatures worship him. The Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy because He said He was God, and He was crucified for blasphemy. But declaring that one is God is blasphemous only when untrue.

In the case of Antichrist during the Tribulation period, it will be untrue, but such supernatural powers will be given him by the devil himself that he will appear to have Godlike characteristics and thus deceive many human beings.

Thus during the first 3-1/2 years of the Tribulation the Antichrist will be merely a man endowed with demonic power, but during the last 3-1/2 years, he will actually be Satan himself, clothed with the Antichrist's body as the antichrist is the second person to be indwelled by Satan. Judas was the first. Remember Satan is not divine. He does not have the power to create, that is, to make something out of nothing. 

August 20th 2011

JERUSALEM — Palestinian militants from Gaza fired rockets at cities deep inside Israeli territory on Saturday, killing one person. AndIsrael struck a squad that was firing mortars from northern Gaza as violence continued in the wake of an attack on Thursday that killed eight Israelis, Israeli officials said.

Related

• Nations Race to Defuse Crisis Between Egypt and Israel(August 21, 2011)

• Israelis Hit Gaza and Militants Fire Rockets After Deadly Attacks (August 20, 2011)

The Popular Resistance Committees militant group in Gaza claimed responsibility for rocket fire on Beersheba that killed the Israeli civilian and wounded another six, one critically. But in a new development late Saturday, the military wing of Hamas, the group that rules Gaza, took credit for firing four rockets at the Israeli town of Ofakim, its first claim of participation in this round of violence. The move pointed to a possible escalation with Israeli security forces.

Israel blamed The Popular Resistance Committees for Thursday’s attack and killed its top commanders in an airstrike later that day, igniting cross-border exchanges after months of relative quiet under an informal cease-fire with Hamas.

It also indicated a possible split between the military and political wings of Hamas, with the political echelon having tried earlier in the day to restore calm. The Popular Resistance Committees and another group, Islamic Jihad, said they rejected the efforts to renew the cease-fire.

An Islamic Jihad member was killed late Friday in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City. A boy, 5, and another civilian were killed in that attack, according to Gaza medical officials. Islamic Jihad’s military wing said that it would force Israel “to pay a high price.”

At least 14 Palestinians, four of them civilians, have been killed in Israeli airstrikes on Gaza since Thursday. The Israeli military says it has been striking at Hamas training facilities, weapons manufacturing sites, smugglers’ tunnels, and rocket and mortar teams preparing to attack.

Some 50 rockets have been fired at Israel since Thursday. Three Palestinian laborers were wounded Saturday morning by a rocket that exploded on the outskirts of the port city of Ashdod. In the evening, a rocket that hit a house in Ofakim wounded three, including an infant and a child.

Isabel Kershner reported from Jerusalem and Ashdod, and Fares Akram from Gaza

Kerning, More evidence of the Fake Obama Long form BC.

More proof the Obama Long Form BC is a Fake see this video
Also see this link on Wikipedia about Kerning






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerning

Hawaii considering law to ignore Obama ‘birthers’

By ar On March 18, 2010 · 364 Comments

Obama’s Birth Certificate?
Birthers beware: Hawaii may start ignoring your repeated requests for proof that President Barack Obama was born here.
As the state continues to receive e-mails seeking Obama’s birth certificate, the state House Judiciary Committee heard a bill Tuesday permitting government officials to ignore people who won’t give up.
“Sometimes we may be dealing with a cohort of people who believe lack of evidence is evidence of a conspiracy,” said Lorrin Kim, chief of the Hawaii Department of Health’s Office of Planning, Policy and Program Development.
So-called “birthers” claim Obama is ineligible to be president because, they argue, he was actually born outside the United States, and therefore doesn’t meet a constitutional requirement for being president.
Read more …
Source: AP News / Hawaii Legislature

Tagged with: Barack Obama • Hawaii

brought to you by the Committee to Elect Leah Lax
www.LeahLax.com

The demonstration for August 5th, 2011 has been postponed until the end of the month

The demonstration for August 5th, 2011 has been postponed until the end of the month. We will have the exact date after August 8th, 2011. At this moment it is TBA. Orly Tans has asked me for this postponement because we want to see the outcome of the subpeona for Obama's "birth certificate" record book that is supposed to come directly from the vital statistics in Hawaii where he has allegedly claimed to be recorded. So far there has been no delivery of said record book nor has there been any known objection to the delivery. This deadline is supposed to be August 8, 2011 and a plan of action is being made if Obama does not produce said record book both legally and through massive demonstrations. We will keep you informed of the time and date since this is not a permit area we can demonstrate without a permit massivly.

Does Obama have a Pacifier and a Baba????Or is his diaper wet???

Does Obama have a Pacifier and a Baba????Or is his diaper wet???
Obama has proven he isn't a leader. He is not able to control his temper and his latest example was yesterday, July 13, 2011, as he stormed out of a meeting with US Senators and Congressman who are trying to come with a workable solution to fix the debt. However, Obama, who wants it his or no way  at all, yelled and screamed stompt his feet like a child having a temper tantrum and stormed out. Obama, 50 years old, still throwing his toys out of the playpen. 

This display of childlike behavior is dangerous because he can't control his temper he could have a total meltdown in front of a foreign government official and cause nuclear war where it could not matter who wins because we would all be dead as Obama heads for the underground tunnels that are designed to save the government who would be the government of the dead people of the USA.

Is this the type of President you want, a loose cannon? A lethal weapon? He can't make compromises. He can't make up his mind but his comment on if you don't do it my way I am going tell mommy who are the American People.  

However he reminds me of a character from the book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, where Veruca Salt the spoiled little rich girl who demand "I want and do my way or I'll scream" because she wanted a squirrel who was picking bad nuts and throwing them away, only she ends up being a bad nut and tossed down to the garbage.

When Obama can;t get his way he acts like a child having a temper-tantrum only he's not 3 years old but supposed to be an adult of 50 years old who has been proven to We the People of the many mental disorders described by the DSM and ICD. He cannot control his temper. Maybe he does need a vacation, a permanent vacation in a nice padded room with a nice straight jacket and the men in white to feed him. Then Michelle can call all the attendants "Whitey". But then again we all know Michelle is a Racist who hates Whites,

Obama is a dangerous man-child who is just as immature as the Late Micheal Jackson if not more. Remove him from office on the 25th Amendment and relieve him of the pressures of this job before he has a total melt down in front a head of another country. 

Obama Storms Out of Debt Ceiling Meeting

Written by Raven Clabough

Thursday, 14 July 2011 12:18

According to House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi, “Nobody can out debate” President Obama in the debt ceiling debate. Why then has President Obama reportedly scolded congressional leaders during a debt meeting and then stormed out, contending, “Enough is enough?”

The meeting began to become contentious when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor told President Obama that “Congress should instead consider a series of debt ceiling votes based on spending cuts that already have been identified. Talks could then continue to identify additional cuts for subsequent voters.”

Cantor told reporters at the meeting, “I suggested we were so far apart I didn’t see in the time before us how we get to where he wants us to be.”

The President’s reaction was a bit defensive. The Blaze reports: Obama, in his typical affable and diplomatic manner, warned Cantor not to set such an ultimatum and threatened to veto legislation that would extend the debt ceiling only for a short period.

“The president told me, ‘Eric, don’t call my bluff. I’m going to take this to the American people,’ ” Cantor said.

President Obama went on to criticize both sides.

“This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political position and protecting their base than solving real problems,” Obama said.

The Blaze notes the irony of the President’s assertions, however:

Of course, this is coming from the man who warned Tuesday that failure to raise the debt ceiling could mean that Social Security checks, veterans benefits and other government obligations would not be paid as scheduled in August. If anyone knows anything about posturing, surely it is Obama.

After the verbal tongue-lashing issued by the President, a top Republican accused the White House of playing political games to provoke a “yes” vote on extending the ceiling. President Obama then allegedly stormed out of the meeting.

According to Cantor, “He became very agitated. He said ‘Ronald Reagan wouldn’t sit here. You either have to compromise on the dollar figure or the grand bargain.’ ” Cantor said Obama then shoved back and said, “We’ll see you tomorrow.”

Democrats have tried to deny that the President actually “walked out” of the meeting. One official explained, “Left abruptly is perfectly fair. But the meeting was over — in no sense did he walk out on it.”

One Democratic aide said, ““Obama was concluding the meeting, giving the closing remarks and talking about meeting tomorrow. Cantor interrupted him and raised for the third time doing a short-term (so after it had already been addressed twice), and Obama shut him down. Cantor was playing the role he’s played throughout this whole thing — being not productive.”

But according to another congressional aide, Obama “dressed down” Eric Cantor.

“The President spoke for several minutes uninterrupted about how he would not be deterred in doing what is best for the country,” the aide said. “The meeting ended with Cantor being dressed down while sitting in silence.”

Still others defended the President’s reaction. “[Obama] was most insistent that he wanted the debt limit extended into 2013, because he believes a repeat of what we’re going through now, when things will be politically more tense, would be very destabilizing,” claimed another aide.

According to other aides present at the meeting, who wished to remain anonymous, the meeting was the most heated that they’ve experienced during the past few months of discussions on the debt ceiling.

Cantor made a similar assertion, saying it was “the most intense meeting of the week.”

Some sources claim the president walked out on the meeting simply because Republicans have refused Democrats’ calls for taxes.

The Los Angeles Times explains:

Republicans have refused to vote for the debt ceiling increase unless it is accompanied by steep spending cuts equaling about $2.4 trillion over the next decade, though their own spending plan requires that the limit be raised. Obama is seeking a larger deficit reduction plan, totaling about $4 trillion over the decade, but would include both spending cuts and tax revenue. The GOP has rejected that idea.

Congress and the White House have been engaged in a stalemate for over a month on whether the debt $14.3 trillion debt ceiling should be raised. The administration claims that without raising the debt ceiling by the time it reaches its limit on August 2, the government will be unable to pay all of its bills.

Meanwhile, Moody’s Investors Services warned that the United States credit rating is about to be downgraded again, which could potentially impact financial markets.

Photo: President Barack Obama meets with Congressional leaders regarding the debt ceiling, July 13, 2011, in the Cabinet Room at the White House. From left are, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Va., House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of Calif., House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, and Obama: AP Images

I'm listening America Radio

Time

Thursday, July 7 · 9:00pm - 10:00pm

---

Location

www.blogtalkradio.com/leahlax4-president

---

Created By

Leah Lax

---

I'm Listening with Leah Lax Presidential Candidate and Co-host Jim Seigfreid at 9 p.m. EST to 10pm EST, British time 2am to 3am Israel time 4am to 5am

call-in number: 1 (323) 843-6037 ,
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/leahlax4-president
On I'm Listening
We will have an open forum
Disscusion of Code Pink and a funny thing happen to me on the way to the New Floatilla, Obama harassment and more

U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN HONOLULU SUBPOENAS LORETTA J. FUDDY, HAWAII HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR

from the Mail and Post

U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN HONOLULU SUBPOENAS LORETTA J. FUDDY, HAWAII HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR

by Sharon Rondeau

The United States District Court for the District of Hawaii issued and served a subpoena on July 5, 2011 to the director of the Hawaii Health Department for Obama's original birth certificate

(Jul. 5, 2011) — A process server has delivered a Hawaii court-issued subpoena to Loretta J. Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, commanding her “to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying testing, or sampling of the material:”

original 1961 typewritten birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, III [sic] issued 08.08.1961, signed by Dr. David Sinclair, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and registrar Lee, stored in the Health Department of the State of HI from 08081961 until now.

The subpoena allows Fuddy until August 8, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. to produce the document.

The designated place of production is noted as:

Health Department
State of HI
1250 Punchbowl str. room 325
Honolulu, HI 96813

Above the date, the following text appears:

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45 (d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached.

The subpoena is signed by a deputy clerk as evidenced by an underline appearing beneath that term under the signature line. It is dated “0705.2011″ just above the signature.

A second page titled “Proof of Service” reads:

This subpoena for (name of individual and title, if any) Loretta Fuddywas received by me on (date) 0705.2011

A box is checked and the following preprinted text states:

I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows:

and the lines are completed with the following:

by certified mail return receipt sent to Attorney General of HI, 485 South King str, room 200, Honolulu, HI 96813 on (date) 07.05.2011; or

The checkbox and line below are blank.

Zeroes appearing on lines with dollar signs indicate that there are no fees charged for the service.

A final statement reads:

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date: 07.05.2011

The server’s signature appears in cursive writing and is printed on the line below. It is stamped with the following below the process server’s signature and printed name:

Law Offices of Orly Taitz, Esq.
29639 Santa Margarita Pkwy. Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688

Proof of Service of the Subpoena from the U.S. District Court in Hawaii to the Health Department Director and the Hawaii Attorney General

Envelope in which Dr. Orly Taitz received a copy of the subpoena and its second page, which is the Proof of Service document

Loretta Fuddy and Dr. Alvin Onaka, Registrar of the Hawaii Department of Health, had previously refused Taitz’s request to release Obama’s original birth certificate, citing concerns for “privacy.” Taitz responded to Onaka’s refusal with a letter copied to several congressmen, putative Attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, and the statement:

…we have an individual with a forged birth certificate and an invalid Social Security number usurping the position of the US president and Commander in Chief of the whole US military. Your and Ms. Fuddy’s refusal to provide access to the original birth certificate can be viewed as aiding and abetting to uttering of a forged document and elections fraud. Based on all of the above, I am respectfully requesting an administrative review of my appeal and granting access to the original document in question. If the appeal is not granted within 30 days, I will be taking further action.

On April 27, 2011, the White House released what it claimed was a certified copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate on television and the internet. However, numerous document examiners, typesetting experts, and graphics consultants have come forward to state in formal presentations and reports that the image presented to the public is a poor forgery.

“THIS IS TREASON”

by Sharon Rondeau

Why was this image created and supplied as a certified copy of Obama's original birth certificate? Why is the Kenyan government investigating Obama's possible birth there?

(Jun. 2, 2011) — Mr. Douglas Vogt is the author of several books which focus on science and religion as well as owner of Vector Associates, a book publishing company. He has also worked as an accountant and owned a typesetting company for 11 years. Regarding the image purported to be Obama’s birth certificate released to the public on April 27, 2011, Vogt states:

I have a unique background for analyzing this document. I owned a typesetting company for 11 years so I know type and form design very well. I currently own Archive Index Systems since 1993, which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imaging software (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging systems and everything about the design of such programs. This will be important in understanding what has happened with Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth.

On May 12, Vogt submitted an affidavit which was included in a Motion to Intervene filed by Atty. Orly Taitz with the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana in regard to the case of Hornbeck v. Salazar. The affidavit consisted of a sworn statement and detailed report stating Vogt’s conclusion that the image a purported long-form birth certificate bearing the name of Barack Hussein Obama II is a forgery.

Vogt told The Post & Email that he had written the report for his own purposes prior to its inclusion in Taitz’s Motion to Intervene.

On May 22, 2011, Vogt updated the report, which declares that forgery of a government document would be a felony under U.S. Code, Title 18, and included it in acriminal complaint filed with the FBI.

The Post & Email asked Mr. Vogt how he arrived at his conclusions, and his answers are presented here in great detail. He referred to the May 22 updated analysis by the number of each subtitled section. The graphics are referred to as “Figures.”

MR. VOGT: I have no financial interest in this whatsoever. But here is what happened: I heard the presidential announcement on the 27th, and a friend of mine contacted me and said that there were layers in the image. He sent me a link to the White House blog. I logged on on the 28th and got another version. It explains in Subsection 8 of the long (updated) report that people were reporting nine layers. I decided I was going to write a report of what I found, and it was written independently of Orly’s case.

This is a blatant, obvious forgery. The thing I had in my mind as I was discovering it was, “Why did the forger go to such trouble to do these things which were seemingly unnecessary and blatant?” the last one being the stamped signature on the lower right-hand side, supposedly done on the 25th of the month. Where the words are, “THE” is deliberately misspelled as “TXE.” If you scroll down to page 11, you can see it. That’s not an “H.” The graphic artist who did this thing literally built that “X” by clicking pixels. It wasn’t an ‘H.” Also, the “F” in “OF” has also been doctored or came from someplace else because it’s closed off on the right-hand side. It’s not like the stamp that was done about a month before on the bottom of page 10; that stamp is perfectly fine, not crooked.

Those two things gave it away as a fraud: the “X” is “THE” and what they did to the word “OF.” But also, the stamp is too straight. This is hand stamp that someone takes with his hand and slaps it down. It’s called “skewing.” It’s skewed, but this one is off only two pixels over three inches over the length of the thing, which is unusually straight, which I don’t think they could do. That’s 1/150th of an inch off, and that’s really somebody placing it on the background image of the security paper.

The other thing is that on the “A” for “Alvin,” there’s a script “e” embedded on it, and if you look at the bottom of the previous one, it’s not really there. The “A” is smudged because of the rubber stamp, and they must have hit from the right-hand side of the stamp, as it’s darker there. But the point is that somebody has put something there.

Now the question is, “Was the “e” originally there on the original paper and they didn’t erase it before they put this thing down, or is the forger basically screaming at us that this thing is a forgery?” And I’m beginning to think that the forger may actually be the hero here because some of this stuff is so blatant, figuring that when he or she sent the PDF to the White House or to Hawaii and then Hawaii sent the PDF to the White House, they would have just printed it out on a color printer and scanned that in and presented it to the public.

I know the state of Hawaii has to have it. Besides, when I saw the image that Obama produced, I knew they had scanned this thing from one of the postbinder books, which is what #1 is, where I describe it. That’s one of the first things that gave it away: the typewriter lines were straight, but there was a paralax for the form itself, and I said, “OK; it’s been overlaid. That’s impossible.”

MRS. RONDEAU: Could you explain the term “parallax?” What does that mean?

MR. VOGT: It’s a optic term. It’s a distortion of the image. That’s all it means. It’s because when you put the paper down on the flatbed scanner, which is what they did, where the binder is (known as a gutter), was higher off the glass than the rest of it. So it looks as if it’s stanched down to the left. That’s an optical distortion, because they never took the pages out of the postbinder. These are all originally single pages, and the pages were actually printed most likely on letter-press, hot-metal letter-press, which was developed in the 50s and 60s.

The county would print up the birth certificate forms and send them to the hospital, and from the birth certificate, the hospital would type up and fill in the long form that the county gives them. Then the doctor would sign it, the mother would sign it, and they would mail it to the county.

I tried to explain the whole procedure so that people understood that this is what actually happened in all counties. This is how the procedure goes. In the old days, the county would microfilm it like the examples we had there that had been recorded before – the Nordyke twins.

The stamp that the state of Hawaii has is two and one-quarter inches; that’s larger than normal. Usually they’re less than two inches. You’ll notice the stamp on the Nordyke twins’ birth certificates are very close to the edge of the paper, and there is another one that was printed and stamped on the right-hand edge near the top. You can clearly see the embossing of the county seal. That’s Figure 18 on the latest report. I know the machine they used; they used an electronic machine, and it’s pretty obvious that the one that Obama presented was a second- or third-generation image of what was originally on the background color that the artist used.

I gave examples where, even on the Nordyke twins’s birth certificates, which is really an inverse of the microfilm copy, you can clearly see the imprint of the embossment seal. You can’t see it at all on Obama’s, and his is brand new. Those electronic stampers produce a lot of force. They’ll emboss three or four pieces of paper at once which can be seen very clearly. But this thing was just an artifact on the background image, so it’s just a joke. From that, I know that the whole story is not plausible.

If you open up the file in Wordpad or Notepad, then you’ll actually see the hexadecimal code and the commands within the document. I put the one I have on that page on Vectorpub.com, and that basically showed clearly that objects 13-21 were the parameters, in pixels – it tells you horizontally and vertically – where these images are. So there’s no argument, and they can’t prove it wrong. I have it from within the document from the White House that the thing is a multi-layered document. It had XML code on the very bottom of the file. If you open it yourself, you’ll see it. It gave a creation date and a modification date.

MRS. RONDEAU: What were those dates?

MR. VOGT: Well, the one I had had a creation date of April 27, 2011 at 12:09 p.m.; modification date of April 28 at 9:58 a.m. That’s the one I had pulled out. Dr. Corsi had sent me two more, but his were dated May 9 and 12, and one them didn’t have the XML data.

MRS. RONDEAU: Where did he find those?

MR. VOGT: People sent it to him thinking that was the first one, and it wasn’t.

MRS. RONDEAU: So you did an analysis and found that they were created on yet different dates from the first two?

MR. VOGT: That’s correct. I have one from at least the second day, but it really doesn’t matter at this point; I have the evidence from the White House.

MRS. RONDEAU: Do you have any thoughts on the short-form certificate which former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs claimed he “put out on the internet?”

MR. VOGT: I don’t know. I’ve seen it, but they blocked out the serial number on the upper right-hand corner because they probably didn’t have one. It’s unknown right now.

Let’s go through the eight items so that you understand what they are.

We already talked about the distorted image that’s covered in #1. If you scroll down just above Subheading #2, you’ll see that the letters “N,” “s,” “H,” and “al” are grayscale, and the rest are binary, black and white. Even below it, the “d” in “residence” is grayscale. The document is just loaded with that kind of stuff, where you have letters that are grayscale and the rest are binary, black and white. At first I asked, “Well, why did he or she do that?” and I realized that the form is such that he or she needed to establish the baseline of the original form. That’s why it was done. Some of the letters were still there from a previous form, in grayscale, because he had to establish the baseline of the type, because if he got that wrong, it would have been really obvious that it was a forgery because the baseline would have been different from what is normally on any of the forms in points or picas.

That gave it away: the type, the name of the hospital, and the graphic above, “Male,” which didn’t bend down, but everything on the paper did bend down. So the typewriter stuff was another layer imposed on top of the form.

Subheading #2 is about the haloing around all the type. I gave examples of what it’s supposed to look like, both in grayscale, binary or even in color. With a background security paper, the type is supposed to show through, and his doesn’t at all. It’s due to a couple of different things. I didn’t go into it totally because it might be too technical, but basically, if the person was scanning in on grayscale or color, and then did that to the black and white but he had thresholding, what would happen is the boxes around real 100% black would still have a value in it; 256 is totally black, and zero (0) is white. But if he mistakenly didn’t have the thresholding correct, what would happen is that the boxes around the type would still have a value in it. It might be 20, 30 or 10; it would still look like white, but it really isn’t. So when he overlaid it on the color background and he said, “Type forward,” that it should be above the layer of the security paper, it would then block out the image of the security paper behind it because there was still a value in those little pixels. That’s the reason for the haloing effect around all the type.

MRS. RONDEAU: So that haloing should not be present on any copy of an original document?

MR. VOGT: That’s correct. That’s why I gave examples on page 3 and at the top of page 4. You can clearly see on Figure 6 or 7 that there is no haloing whatsoever, and you see the security paper behind it, both the green or the grayscale one. Figure 5 is a haloing effect; it should not be there: period, end of subject. It just can’t be there.

At the top of the next page, Figure 9, is a blowup of what grayscale letters look like. What happened when they went to binary, they made a mistake on the thresholding, so those little boxes that look like a faint gray when the program would convert it to a black and white image as with Figure 8, it still had a value around those letters. The value might have been 10, 20 or 30, but it still looked like white. But when they overlaid it, it really was a color, so it blacks out the background color, the background layer. That’s technically how it would happen, but if I did go into it, it would really be over everyone’s head.

MRS. RONDEAU: Is there a way to create a forged document which no one can detect?

MR. VOGT: It depends on the type of document. With this one, the unusual part is the parallax, or the curved image from the book. If it’s a flat image, it’s a lot easier. The curved one makes it much tougher. It’s really tough. The ones who are the experts at doing things like that is the CIA, and I can tell you right now that the CIA did not do this or any other intelligence agency. They would stay so far away from something like this; they never would have touched it. In fact, it would be the biggest red light to all of them; they’d investigate who is this guy in the White House now? They wouldn’t tolerate this; they just wouldn’t tolerate it at all.

Figure 10 is an inverted image of the black and white microfilm copy of Susan Nordyke’s birth certificate, and you can clearly see what it looks like and what the inverted image looks like.

Subsection #3: Obama’s document is loaded with both binary and grayscale. The person did it because they needed to establish the baseline of the type. Sometimes he didn’t do such a hot job. I’m saying “he,” but it could be a “she.” That’s the reason why they left these letters in there; they needed points by which to register the baseline of the forgery.

If you scroll down to Figure 13, which is on page 7, it’s his name: “Barack,” and the “r” is grayscale, visibly, and the rest is binary. They did that for registration reasons; they had to register the type. They figured no one would ever see it.

MRS. RONDEAU: What does “registering the type” mean?

MR. VOGT: The baseline. The baseline is where the type sits, the bottom of the type; that’s called a baseline, or baseline rule, in the typesetting business. That’s why my unique experience in typesetting told me immediately that this was a fraud. I recognize things that other people would not have.

Figure 14 is a separate offense. Do you see the “1″ where the number is in #14? That’s grayscale. Its baseline is different from the rest of it.

MRS. RONDEAU: So it will always look different if it’s grayscale?

MR. VOGT: Yes, that’s it, because it’s not a white dot or a black dot, which is binary; it’s rather 256 levels of gray to black. That’s the whole point. So it’s easy to spot like that. That told me immediately that we really don’t know what number he is or if he even has a number. He probably doesn’t at all. The interesting thing is this: the way the federal law is written, this is a separate offense that gives you five years in prison: that alone.

MRS. RONDEAU: Why would someone create something that is such an obvious forgery? I haven’t heard of one analyst who has vouched for the document except for one on fox News, but even he didn’t declare it authentic.

MR. VOGT: Yes, you’ll read it on the bottom; I answered him. He knows nothing. I’m going to send my material off to Fox News, but in my humble opinion, the guy is an idiot for even saying it.

Anyway, let’s go on. The sequential number is a fraud; that’s #4, and it goes through the law section a little bit and also the fact that even though his was submitted three days earlier than the Nordyke twins’s, who have a lower number, he has a higher number, and it’s just impossible. In counties, when any document comes in, regardless of department, they open up the mail and they stamp it because that’s the legal requirement. They wouldn’t have forgotten that; it’s a legal requirement, and they’re forced to do it. So it is impossible for him to have a number higher than someone’s who was mailed or OK’d three days earlier, just impossible. It’s an immediate red flag.

MRS. RONDEAU: From the paragraph which begins “The facts I have shown you in #3 and 4,” it looks as if you have heard the story of Virginia Sunahara. Some researchers believe that Obama could have been given her number because she was born on August 4 and died the next day. It’s possible that they assigned the death certificate before the birth certificate, which might account for the higher number.

MR. VOGT: If you read that paragraph, you’ll see that there are two possibilities. She was born in one hospital. They’re the ones who are legally supposed to submit the birth certificate. They would have mailed it, and they would have assigned a number to her. Then she was transferred to the other hospital, Kapiolani, where she died the next day. They would have been legally responsible to file the death certificate, which would have been mailed that next week. So the point is that she would have had a birth certificate and a death certificate. The law that the federal government passed in December 2004 said that you had to link the two together; they both had to be in the database. So they had access to who had died, so it was very convenient. But it also means, as I have in the third or fourth sentence, that we really don’t know if Obama’s birthday was really the fourth. We can’t assume anything at all. Maybe a long lie has been out there for all these years, but it doesn’t mean it’s true. You have to prove it. That’s the whole point. And I don’t think he has; it’s just a joke, the whole thing.

But the security hole is that the Kenyans say that his birth certificate was stolen or destroyed, which means that it probably wasn’t destroyed, but whomever is blackmailing him has the original. They have the original. So that’s the problem.

Number 5 is two different colors. This was really weird. Actually, it was in three places. I mention all three. There are two things here with the rubber stamp; it’s not just one curiosity. It’s on page 8 and 9, having to do with boxes 22 and 20. When the document comes into the registrar’s office, it’s the same rubber stamp; they stamp it on the left-hand side; they stamp it on the right-hand side, and the guy signs it off. The guy’s name in this case is U.K.L. Lee.

MRS. RONDEAU: A lot of people have questioned if that was a real person.

MR. VOGT: The other part that I was suspicious about, even though I’ve seen his name on a 1962 Certificate of Live Birth, he was supposed to legally have signed his whole name; no initials. That’s the law: it’s supposed to be his whole name. But he didn’t do that.

MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think that was a law in 1961?

MR. VOGT: You could see that for the Nordyke twins, the registrar signed his whole name without middle initials. His whole name was there. So the person who signed that one knew that he had to sign his whole name with no initials. So that’s suspicious.

Now, look at #22 and then #20. This should never have been, because there’s a color value to date “A” – August (Aug) and then the sixth, and that can’t be. This thing is supposed to have been scanned in grayscale or binary. We can’t have a color here, but we do. It is a dark green. I gave the color value on the bottom of page 8. Then we have box #20 at Figure 16, and we have a rubber stamp. This can’t be. They used the same rubber stamp the same day: the guy has a rubber stamp in his hand with the date, and he stamps left and right, and then he signs it. This can’t be. So it’s not only just the color, but it’s also the fact that it was two different rubber stamps with two different sizes. That’s can’t be.

Also, he grabbed the word “Date” in “A” because the “August” touched those letters, so he was stuck having to grab the top part as well as the date part. When you read the whole report, it is so obvious that this thing is a Frankenstein form.

That’s not the only place. In the third place it shows up, it’s mentioned just above Figure 16, that in box 17a, it displays the word “None,” but “Non” is in dark green, but not the “e.” It’s crazy stuff! That’s why I’m saying that the forger either was paid a lot of money but didn’t like what he was doing or hated what he was doing and was being forced to do it by his boss, and he was going to put enough things in there that a professional who knew this stuff could wind up spotting and say, “This thing is a forgery.” So in essence, the forger may actually be the hero.

Why did he insert a color in it? There are two different color values here. It’s not the same color.

Subsection 6 is about the seals. If you scroll down, Figure 19 is really an image under a color filter of the one that Obama submitted through the PDF. It’s only faintly there. If you scroll down to the next page, page 10, it’s actually invisible. In Figure 20, it’s almost not noticeable; it’s really a distortion in the background image. His first short-form is Figure 17, and you can clearly see that this thing was at least three inches from the bottom of the paper. I know the machine which embossed it; it was an electronic machine, not a hand stamp. It does a good job. You can clearly see it through their photographs.

Figure 18 is the positive – the inverted image from the microfilm copy of the Nordyke twins – and even if it was a microfilm, you can clearly see the embossment. It’s practically at the edge of the paper because the throat on those hand stamps won’t allow for very much distance between the edge of the paper and the edge of a two-and-one-quarter-inch seal. You can see it even on a microfilm copy. But we do not see it on his. That told me immediately that that was a second- or third-generation image from something else.

MRS. RONDEAU: Is there any stamp at all on the April 27 release?

MR. VOGT: No. There isn’t any, which means it’s not legal. Figure 21 was interesting: that was on a hand stamp, again, near the edge of the paper, less than an inch away from the edge, and you can clearly see the embossment. That’s an original, and it was from 1962.

Subsection 7 is the rubber stamp, which is skewed. That is normal; it’s a hand stamp, and nobody is trying to place the thing down by the pixel, but the one we have on Obama’s certificate of April 27 is about as straight as you can get with an eyeball. It’s only two pixels off over three inches. That’s been electronically leveled.

In Figure 23, the script on the capital “A” on “Alvin” in the signature, and the “X” in the word “TXE” were literally done by hitting pixels. They hit pixels to make something that looked like an “X,” but it’s not. When you blow it up, you can see it’s not an “X.” It’s something else. Again, it’s someone screaming at us, “This thing is a fraud!” That may be the most logical answer here.

Subsection 8 deals with the layers. This is embedded from within the PDF that the White House put up. It clearly shows from object 13-21 is the nine layers. It tells you the horizontal and vertical pixels of each one of the layers. Under each one of these headings, there’s a bunch of hexadecimal codes. This is where I pulled them all out and I sorted them, putting them in sequence. You have to actually open the file up in Wordpad and you’ll see exactly what I mean: just search for “style type/image” or something like that, and you’re going to find each one of the layers. There’s a bunch of layers in there, more than just these. Each one of the layers means something else. I could recognize it and know how to read some of the stuff. I could actually pull out one of these layers from the PDF and save it again, and that layer would disappear. You have to know how to do it, but it does tell you where the object starts and where the object ends. It’s something like an HTML, but it’s a different kind of code.

I put the links for videos that were on YouTube which explain the layers pretty well. I wanted to give these people credit; they deserve it. In Figure 25, I displayed the layer that has most of the type on it. As prima facie evidence, this thing is toast.

MRS. RONDEAU: What about the analyst from Canada whom Fox News featured who said that the image could be authentic?

Editor’s Note: The “leading expert” which Fox News quoted as having said, “You should not be so suspicious about this,” Jean-Claude Tremblay, states that his professional background includes more than 20 years in teaching Adobe products, Quark, and technical editing. It is this writer’s opinion that the title of the Fox News article, “Expert: No Doubt Obama’s Birth Certificate Is Legit,” is not an accurate reflection of Tremblay’s analysis of the birth certificate image, but rather, conjecture on the writer’s part.

It appears that Tremblay’s is the only analysis which Fox News has presented, despite the many reports and allegations that the image is a forgery.

MR. VOGT: On page 13, I wrote a rebuttal to discovery of the multi-layers found in the PDF. You’ll see in the last paragraph what my qualifications are for OCR. This guy knows nothing; he plainly does not know anything about it. You know something? Considering he wound up defending it on the 29th, the day after somebody found the layers, he would be my first suspect. If you looked at his qualifications, certified on a bunch of Adobe’s products, I would say he would be the first candidate I’d have for the one who put the thing together.

Somebody looked it up and said he was a supporter of Obama. Also, if they found a graphic artist who was sympathetic and was not from the country, there is less chance of his being subpoenaed to give testimony to Congress. They’re actually wrong about the investigation part; the reason is that there is a security treaty between the United States and Canada concerning national security, which this definitely does, and that means that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police will be investigating this guy to find out. He can be extradited to the United States to testify. He is not exempt from prosecution.

MRS. RONDEAU: Why do you think no one from the FBI has gone out to Hawaii to investigate the forgery?

MR. VOGT: If you go to the next section, page 13, I say in the Conclusion section that it is a “Frankenstein certificate.” Some guy actually drew a picture of Obama looking like Frankenstein. They’re selling T-shirts like that; they got the idea from me.

But here’s the answer to your question: Orly said she has reported things to the FBI and they haven’t done anything with it. This is the way a law enforcement agency works: First, the FBI is part of the Justice Department, and the Justice Department is controlled by a guy who is an Obama handmaiden. Unless a policing agency is notified that a crime has been committed, they’re not going to bother with it. It’s nothing. No matter how many YouTube things are out there or things on the web, unless somebody formally notifies a policing agency like the FBI, nothing is going to be done, because they weren’t told a crime has been committed.

For instance, if a bank is robbed, the banker will call the police department, which will in turn call the FBI, because it’s their purview. The banks are insured by the FDIC; therefore, they robbed the federal government, and the FBI investigates. They collect the data, hopefully catch the criminal, and then they give it to a federal attorney who prosecutes. But again, they have to be told that a crime has been committed. That’s the key thing; no one has ever done it.

I did. I sent it off to the Director of the FBI and also to the Field Agent in Charge in Hawaii. I sent it off twice to each one in different ways, all by mail. Hawaii will probably get it earlier because of the mail screening that occurs in Washington, DC. However, the crime was committed both in Hawaii and in Washington, DC. It’s very possible, since I see that the form was modified on the day of its presentation and the day after, that somebody in the White House was modifying it.

MRS. RONDEAU: So they might not have created it, but now they have it and are modifying it.

MR. VOGT: Correct, so the crime has been committed in both places. When you read the law at the bottom of the report, and I included the sections in red that I want people to understand, you realize that it’s a very, very serious crime. This comes under the heading of defrauding the United States. Everybody in the White House who knows this thing, as well as in the Department of Health in Hawaii, is in huge trouble. They have no idea that just on the face of the document itself, and the security number, is 20 years in prison. Considering they flagrantly flaunted their arrogance and knew what they were doing was wrong for somebody to become President of the United States who wasn’t even a citizen is treasonous. If the prosecution goes to the level of treason, which it should be, these people go to prison for the rest of their lives.

Some of those people are going to be talking their heads off not to go to prison for the rest of their lives. What I’ve done is make it irrelevant where the guy was born. It’s no longer a case of trying to prove he was born in Kenya, Timbuctu, Manchuria or New York City; it’s now a simple, provable case of forgery in the first degree.

Without question, this is the greatest scandal in American history. Everybody agrees: nothing comes even remotely close; not the scandals in the Grant administration; in Harding’s Teapot Dome; in Watergate; Clinton was nothing…this tops everything.

Howard Coble, Obama birth certificate forged, Adobe Expert Mara Zebest video, 10 ex CIA agents stated that the image was fraudulent

Posted on June 29, 2011 by citizenwells| 10 Comments

Howard Coble, Obama birth certificate forged, Adobe Expert Mara Zebest video, 10 ex CIA agents stated that the image was fraudulent
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″
Earlier today the Citizen Wells blog responded to a letter from Congressman Howard Coble of NC.
“My response to the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov.
1. Aside from the Orwellian language used to convince the public, the image itself looked suspicious. It did not look like other certified copies from Hawaii.
2. Loretta J. Fuddy, Director of Health, stated that the copies are computer generated. I am an expert on computer business systems and have worked with many graphics formats, software applications as well as OCR. This was an immediate red flag. Computer generated can mean many things.
3. Since this involves the presidency of the US, and they were “making an exception,” why did they not copy and certify Obama’s birth certificate as they have done for average citizens?
4. Why did Major General Paul Vallely state that 10 ex CIA agents stated that the image was fraudulent?
5. Why did Jana Winter of Fox News misrepresent or lie about what a OCR expert stated about the image? The expert, Jean Claude Tremblay, has since criticized Winter and Fox for the misrepresentation.
6. World Net Daily, in the past week, has presented 2 high level experts. One has questioned the image. The last one, Mara Zebest, calls it a forgery.
Mr. Coble, thank you for your response and attention. I believe that you care deeply about this country and have honorable intentions. It is with that belief that I will endeavor to provide compelling evidence for your attention. As a starting point, I suggest you speak with retired Major General Paul Vallely.
Respectfully,
Citizen WElls”
Mr. Coble and Congress, here is the first installment of more evidence against the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov and Barack Obama.
Adobe Expert Mara Zebest at the National Press Club June 29, 2011

CERTIFIGATE
WND Exclusive
Mathematical 'proof' Obama birth certificate a forgery
Prominent software engineer presents 'self-evident' analysis

Posted: July 05, 2011
8:28 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
WND

The signature of President Obama's mother on the White House-released long-form birth certificate provides a mathematically certain proof of forgery, according to a prominent software engineer who works as a high-level programmer for a state government.
The source spoke on condition his name not be used, fearing he might lose his job. He asserted that revealing his name is not necessary, because the analysis is self-evident.
Many computer experts have noted that the PDF Obama birth certificate released April 27 has nine layers when viewed in Adobe Illustrator.
Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," autographed by Jerome Corsi, Ph.D.
Notably, the name "(Stanley) Ann Dunham Obama" is in two separate layers. "(Stanley) Ann D" is contained in Layer 8 while "unham Obama" is in Layer 9, as seen below in Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1: Obama long-form birth certificate, White House Release, April 27. Overlay showing Layer 8 (green Background) separated from Layer 9 (white Background)

A close-up of a screen capture of Layer 8 can be seen in Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2: Obama long-form birth certificate, White House Release, April 27. Close-up, Layer 9, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama signature.

"One of the changes, reflected by Layer 8, had me wondering the most," the software engineer told WND. "If you recall, this layer showed the mother's signature, along with the other two signatures on the image. Everything else was omitted, meaning the signatures were added as their own layer."
(Story continues below)
However, the last part of the mother's signature can only be seen in Layer 9, where it shows up, in bold as "unham Obama," distinct in appearance from the lighter "(Stanley) Ann D" in Layer 8.
In other words, the mother's signature is a composite image, formed when the image in Layer 8 is combined with the image in Layer 9.
"Graphics artists combine images day in and day out, taking parts of one image and over-laying another," he explained. "After adding multiple text layers, the composite image is saved to be placed into the final."
The key analysis focuses on the Ann Dunham signature contained in Layer 9.
"It's a disappointing signature," the software engineer said, "in that it cannot be Stanley Ann's unless she has perfect handwriting."
To prove this point, he brought up the birth certificate document in Windows Photo Viewer to magnify the "unham Obama" seen in Adobe Illustrator in Layer 9.
"After zooming into the maximum on this partial signature, I found that part of the name was in perfect alignment across the bottom, exactly one pixel from the bottom line of the text box for the signature."
The "unham" part of the mother's signature under magnification is demonstrated in Exhibit 3, with the "Obama" part of the mother's signature in Exhibit 4:

Exhibit 3: Mother's signature in Obama long-form birth certificate.

Exhibit 4: Mother's signature in Obama long-form birth certificate.

"I had to scrunch the image a bit to fit on the screen," he explained, but it still shows the perfect alignment of the pixels across the letters in 'unham' in the image above. The same perfect alignment is seen in the 'Obama' part of the mother's signature."
The signature, he insisted, provides mathematical proof the Obama birth certificate is a fraud.
"No person can write with mathematical perfection," he said. "It's impossible. But a computer can easily write with mathematical perfection."

Exhibit 5: Ann Dunham signature on Obama long-form birth certificate

Human signatures, he insisted, show imperfections such that some of the lettering will always drop below a mathematically perfect line drawn at the bottom of a word.
To prove the point, he pointed to examples of cursive handwriting generated by a computer on Fontspace.com, as seen in Exhibit 6.

Exhibit 6: Computer-generated cursive fonts (Fontspace.com)

The bottom of the computer-generated cursive handwriting as seen in Exhibit 5 produces a mathematically perfect bottom surface that plots straight-across on a horizontal line.
To stress the distinctiveness of the 'unham Obama' part of the mother's signature on the document, the software engineer examined under extreme magnification in the Windows Photo Viewer the signature of Dr. David A. Sinclair, the attending physician as described in the document, and found that pixels forming the signature extend below a mathematically perfect horizontal line drawn through the base of the signature, as seen in Exhibit 7.

Exhibit 7: Signature of Dr. David A. Sinclair on Obama long-form birth certificate

"Notice how Dr. Sinclair's signature meets and is over the line in may places," he observed. "It is not exactly one row of pixels parallel to the line."
The mother's signature provides mathematical proof the document is forged, he said.
"If the forger had wanted a perfect forgery, it would have been better to have a human being write in the 'unham Obama' part of the signature," he concluded. "Sometimes perfect detail can draw attention, and in this case, the hand-writing in Layer 9 was too perfect. No human being writes that mathematically perfect."