alice said:Yanuck, open this link and go down 4 images. There is the raised seal. Hypocrite "forgot" to include that, I guess...
http://open.salon.com/blog/hal_m/2009/07/30/that_pesky_obama_birth_certificate
Did the documents stop the rumours?
No. When Mr Obama's Certification of Live Birth was published, as a scanned document on the Obama campaign's website, some people began to question its authenticity.
It was alleged in blog posts, chain emails and internet forums that the document did not have an official stamp or seal and that it lacked an official signature. Some even suggested that the document had been faked using picture-altering software.
Was there any substance to these allegations?
No. Representatives from the Annenberg Public Policy Center's Political Fact Check project examined the hard copy of the document and verified that it did in fact bear an official seal, and had been signed by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T Onaka (using a signature stamp). Both the seal and the signature were on the (unscanned) reverse of the document.
Yanuck said:Alice do you see the seal in the first picture..yes or no
backhoeboogie said:Is it real or is it not? Who knows.
What I truly care about is that he applied for scholarships as a foreigner. Now he claims he is not foreign. Either way it is a lie and he committed fraud.
If he is not eligible, we shoulc be careful. Pelosi is third in line and I can think of nothing worse than her.
hypocritexposer said:I think it would end up being a do over.
If he is not eligible then the election was fraudulent, meaning his running mate was also not eligible.
Why's Hillary getting her campaign team up and running?
backhoeboogie said:Is it real or is it not? Who knows.
What I truly care about is that he applied for scholarships as a foreigner. Now he claims he is not foreign. Either way it is a lie and he committed fraud.
If he is not eligible, we shoulc be careful. Pelosi is third in line and I can think of nothing worse than her.
alice said:from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8171314.stm
Did the documents stop the rumours?
No. When Mr Obama's Certification of Live Birth was published, as a scanned document on the Obama campaign's website, some people began to question its authenticity.
It was alleged in blog posts, chain emails and internet forums that the document did not have an official stamp or seal and that it lacked an official signature. Some even suggested that the document had been faked using picture-altering software.
Was there any substance to these allegations?
No. Representatives from the Annenberg Public Policy Center's Political Fact Check project examined the hard copy of the document and verified that it did in fact bear an official seal, and had been signed by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T Onaka (using a signature stamp). Both the seal and the signature were on the (unscanned) reverse of the document.
Obama, Ayers, Annenberg, and ACORN: a family affair?
August 21, 2008 by texasdarlin
By Judah Benjamin and TexasDarlin
Introduction
In the past few days, we’ve published three articles separately that now appear to possibly be connected. Comments and feedback from readers got us thinking, then digging. We’ve been trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together, but we haven’t been able to do that yet, not completely. So the purpose of this post is to set forth a few observations and questions. We hope to turn this into a longer follow-on story.
In a nutshell, we believe that there are links worth investigating between the Barack Obama campaign, William Ayers, the Annenbergs, and ACORN.
The three stories that may be connected in ways that we initially did not realize, are:
Obama’s Caucus Fraud Trick: how the delegates were “won”.
The Annenberg Files: ACCESS BLOCKED!
Obama, ACORN, Citizen Services Inc: False FEC Filings; and
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Few Facts and Observations
First, keep in mind: Senator Obama was the first Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Division, or Project, of the Annenberg Foundation.
William (Bill) Ayers, unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist and a friend of the Obamas, was instrumental in founding the Challenge, thanks to his ties to Mayor Richard Daley. The first Daley was also a pal of Thomas Ayers, Bill’s father, former CEO of ComEd (owned by Exelon).
[Incidentally, the current CEO of ComEd, Frank M. Clark, is a major money bundler for the Obama campaign.]
You’ll recall from Wednesday’s story that the Annenberg files have suddenly been locked down under mysterious circumstances, after a reporter was promised access.
Factcheck.org, used as a resource by so many who wish to “debunk” negative coverage of Obama, is also a Division, or Project, of the Annenberg Foundation.
You’ll recall that Factcheck was the second site to publish the now-suspect Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) reportedly received from the Obama campaign.
[The Annenberg Foundation and family has an interesting history that we may examine in more detail.]
Second, keep in mind that ACORN has received payments of nearly a million dollars from the Barack Obama Campaign in 2008, as NancyA reported on this blog Aug. 15. Apparently the payments were funneled through Citizens Services Inc., and may have been falsely reported to the FEC.
The Senator has been working with ACORN since his first days as a Community Organizer in Chicago:
“In 1992, Acorn Hired Mr. Obama To Run A Voter Registration Effort. He Later Became A Trainer For The Group, As Well As Its Lawyer In Election Law Cases.” (John Fund, Op-Ed, “Obama’s Liberal Shock Troops,” “The Wall Street Journal”, 7/12/08 )
and
“Representing ACORN, Obama And Other Attorneys Sued The State Of Illinois, Forcing It To Implement Federal “Motor Voter” Legislation That Makes It Easier For The Poor And Minorities To Register To Vote.” (”Some Cases Obama Worked On In His Career As An Attorney,” “The Associated Press”, 2/20/07). Hence again impartiality is not possible.
More Press Quotes on ACORN:
ACORN Used “In Your Face” Tactics Like Disrupting Hearings, Bursting Into City Council Meetings, And Protesting Mayor’s Homes. (Stanley Kurtz, Op-Ed, “Inside Obama’s Acorn,” “National Review”, 5/29/08 )
“ACORN Has Been Accused Of Voter Fraud In 13 StatesSince 2004 And Was Convicted Of Falsifying Signatures In A Voter Registration Drive Last July, Drawing A Fine Of $25,000 In Washington State.” (Editorial, “George Soros: The Man, The Mind And The Money Behind MoveOn,” “Investor’s Business Daily”, 9/21/07)
“ACORN Has Been Implicated In Similar Schemes In 14 Other States - Including Ohio, Where A Worker Traded Crack Cocaine For Fraudulent Registrations.” (Editorial, “Another ACORN Scandal,” “New York Post”, 7/13/08 )
[Notice that the first of these quotes is from the very man (Kurtz, from National Review) who has been denied access on flimsy, and possibly illegal grounds, to the Annenberg Files.]
Meanwhile, keep in mind: ACORN has been a beneficiary of grants from the Chicago-based Woods Fund, which has a history of issuing controversial grants. Ayres and Obama served together on the Fund’s board (and are still listed). [Other grantees during their tenure included PLO employee Rashid Khalidi and the Obamas' church, Trinity United.]
Conclusions
Are you starting to see the potential connections and conflicts of interest? Here’s what we see:
1. Potential conflict of interest between Obama and anything funded by the Annenbergs, including Factcheck.org. [For starters, why were they one of only a small handful of media to get a copy of the COLB?]
2. Obvious conflict of interest between Obama and ACORN: He has been directly involved in funding ACORN, has worked for ACORN, and is now PAYING ACORN in exchange for assistance to his campaign.
3. What kind of assistance is ACORN providing the campaign? When we read about ACORN’s expertise in “voter fraud” and “in-your-face” tactics, it instantly reminded us of Obama’s caucus fraud tricks (see Wednesday’s story).
4. Is there a direct connection between the Annenberg Foundation and ACORN, or are they just three degrees of separation apart, with Ayres and Obama smack in the middle? We are curious about that. [Walter Annenberg, founder of the $500 million gift that funded the Annenberg Challenge, had deeply rooted Chicago ties that clearly intersect with some of the same ties to Thomas and William Ayres.]
Posted on Saturday, November 22, 2008 11:08:58 PM by Polarik
Polarik's final report: Obama's 'Born' Conspiracy
Forged images, phony photos, and felony fraud
By Ron Polarik, PhD
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since the beginning of Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidential campaign on February 11, 2007, there had been numerous rumors regarding Obama’s citizenship status. Several reporters had asked for a copy of Obama’s birth certificate, however, all requests were subsequently denied.
On or about June 12, 2008, the Daily Kos blog, a pro-Obama website, received an image from the Obama Campaign that they claimed was a scanned copy of Obama’s “original birth certificate,”. Before this document image was cropped to 2427 x 2369 pixels, it measured 2550 x 3300 pixels, or 8 1/2” x 11” when printed.
Also, on or about June 12, 2008, the Obama Campaign posted a smaller copy of the same cropped image, measuring 1000 x 1024 pixels:
“You may have recently heard right-wing smears questioning Barack Obama's birth certificate and citizenship. These assertions are completely false and designed to play into the worst kind of stereotypes. You can see Barack Obama's birth certificate for yourself and help push back with the truth...”
The very next day, which was on or about June 13, 2008, Obama’s Campaign replaced the first document image they posted with a smaller copy which they posted to a new website, “Fight The Smears” (fightthesmears.com). The smaller image was disproportionately reduced to 585 x 575 pixels, which was almost half the size of the original posted image, and one-third of its quality.
Also, on or about June 13, Politifact.org, a supposedly nonpartisan, fact checking website that is unquestionably pro-Obama, published a copy of the same image as that posted on the Daily Kos, but was also disproportionately reduced it to 811 x 786 pixels, or 1/3 of its size and 1/6 of its image quality.
On or about June 16, 2008, Factcheck.org, a pro-Obama fact checking website ,posted a full-sized image copy of same document image that appeared on the Daily Kos. Factcheck’s image copy was identical to the Daily Kos image copy before that image was cropped. Factcheck.org is owned by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania; a center run by Obama supporters and funded by the Annenberg Public Policy Center.
Factcheck.org made the following statement to explain how they received their image copy:
"Bloggers raised questions based on the absence of evidence, specifically the lack of a publicly available copy of a birth certificate and the supposed secrecy surrounding it". According to FactCheck, Tommy Vietor at the Obama campaign sent a message to them and "other reporters" saying, "I know there have been some rumors spreading about Obama’s citizenship, so I wanted to make sure you all had a copy of his birth certificate."
I first noticed that the image posted to the Daily Kos and purported to be the “original birth certificate” of Barack H. Obama, did not look like a regular birth certificate. This image was made only from the front side of a COLB: no copy of the reverse side of this COLB has ever been made, :birth certificate” document was ever scanned, a side that contains all of the official certification instruments, such as the official Hawaiian Seal, State Registrar’s signature, and date stamp of when the document was printed.
To validate my findings that the text in this COLB document image was the result of graphic alternations, and not a result of any printer or scanner artifacts, I made over 700 test scans and images using an actual paper COLB and different scanners that were subjected to different combinations of scanning and image parameters. I was finally able to replicate the Kos image so closely that other image experts thought it was the same Kos image, and not my “clone.”
From this date forward, when I first discovered the evidence of tampering, and regardless of the unfamiliar format of the COLB and the questionable information it contained, I collected a great deal of additional evidence, that the scanned image alleged to be a true copy of Obama’s original COLB was forged, and that this altered image of an official state-issued document is nothing less than a false identification document as defined by Chapter 18, Section 1028 of the United States Code.
All of my findings pertaining to a single source image and the four copies made from of it that are still posted on the four (4) websites, DAILYKOS.COM, FIGHTTHESMEARS.COM, FACTCHECK.ORG, and POLITIFACT.COM, as referred to and described above, are outlined in my Final Report
On August 21, slightly more than two months after the publication of the image on the Daily Kos and Obama's website, Factcheck published their story about nine photos they claimed were allegedly taken of Obama's "real" COLB at his campaign headquarters – the same COLB used to make the document image they posted on June 16.
There was no longer any question in my mind that the COLB image Factcheck posted is a forgery and that Obama's real COLB, as proffered by Factcheck, is a nonexistent document. However, Factcheck created a conundrum for me: if the image Factcheck posted is a forgery of a nonexistent document image, then how can any genuine photos be made of it? The answer had to be that both the image and the photos were forgeries.
I have thoroughly examined the photographs that FactCheck published, and have subsequently found clear and irrefutable evidence of tampering with both the alleged COLB objects photographed and with the photos themselves. One of those COLB objects was, in fact, a printout of a forged document image with the Seal superimposed onto it for the final pictures.
FactCheck’s photos reveal both the absence of known, relevant features found on genuine COLBs along with the presence of illogical and impossible features that would never be found on a real 2007 COLB. Specifically, on the COLB objects photographed, the security border closely matches the border found on a real 2007 COLB. However, both the embossed Seal and the State Registrar’s Signature stamp do not match the same elements found on a real 2007 COLB, but perfectly match those found on a real 2008 COLB; or, in other words, something that would never happen in real life.
Hawaii made three important changes to their COLBs from 2007 to 2008, including the use of a larger certificate layout, a new security border, and, much to the chagrin of Factcheck and the Obama Campaign, a new Seal and Signature stamp that can now be stamped on a COLB by a machine.
With my experience and specialization in document imaging, my findings are conclusive and irrefutable that the COLB images posted by Obama to his campaign website, fightthesmears.com, to the dailykos.com, a pro-Obama blog, to FactCheck.org, a pro-Obama political research group, and to Politifact.org, are, in fact, image forgeries with the intent to defraud the American People into believing that these images were digitally scanned from Obama’s genuine, “original” birth certificate.
With my experience and specialization in photography and digital imaging, my findings are conclusive and irrefutable that the COLB photographs posted by FactCheck.org, a pro-Obama political research group, and to Politifact.org, are, in fact, photographic forgeries with the intent to defraud the American People into believing that these digital photographs were taken of Obama’s genuine, “original” birth certificate.
alice said:http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis-Part-II.html
Polarik is a fraud. He was debunked long ago.
Alice
hopalong said:alice said:http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis-Part-II.html
Polarik is a fraud. He was debunked long ago.
Alice
By whom???
alice said:http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis-Part-II.html
Polarik is a fraud. He was debunked long ago.
Alice
#2 ksdb on 2008-07-15 07:03 (Reply)
First, look at the EXIF data in the factcheck.org document. There are several Photoshop tags in there ... much more than would be needed to black out the certificate number. Unfortunately, the tags are unknown tags, so we can't track what type of manipulation was done, but something definitely was done to the document as posted.
Second, there's a typo under the date filed. There's no space between the comma and the year. Contrast that to the space with the date of birth. The large amount of space between all the first, middle and last names suggests that the state of HI prints certificates from a database with a template and field codes. (If you've printed address labels through a database merge, you'll know what I'm talking about.) There's no reason the spacing on the dates would be inconsistent ... and they aren't on three other known HI birth certificates. This suggests that the date was manually entered on the document, such as through the photoshop text tool. Otherwise, some poor soul at the Department of Health at Hawaii has to enter birth certificate information by hand for each request?? Doesn't seem very likely.
Third, someone had described the method for opendna to make his blank certificate that caused degradation of the raised state seal. They explained that he could have modified it with a graphics program, printed it and then rescanned it. This technique would also explain why Obama's seal can't be seen clearly (without graphic manipulation) on the factcheck, KOS or Fight the Smears images. It would also explain why several of the things that Dr. Krawetz looked for did not show up. Maybe a blank or 'erased' certificate was scanned and all the text was added back in ... and then printed and scanned again ... this time with the number blacked out.
The other thing that points to some sort of tampering is the black box over the certificate number. The edges are blurry. If you simply place a black box on an image in photoshop and save it, the edges should be sharp. This blurring could be an indication that a filter was applied to the image, perhaps to make it look less than 'perfect.' It could also be the result of compressing the image when it was saved or resizing the image. The factcheck image has the largest dimensions and file size of those other certificates that are posted, so one expects not to see compression or resizing on that image. For the images posted on Web sites that had to be resized, yes, but for the original image, it shouldn't be necessary.
I don't necessarily think the Obama certificate is an outright forgery, but there are enough anomalies to suspect tampering. This could easily be cleared up if Obama releases unaltered scans of the frong and back of his certificate.
#2.1 Dr. Neal Krawetz (Homepage) on 2008-07-15 08:37 (Reply)
Hi ksdb,
Clearly, you have not analyzed at many JPEG images. First, I suggest downloading exiftool and using it to view the metadata. Now, to address your comments:
1. You stated, "There are several Photoshop tags in there ... much more than would be needed to black out the certificate number." You are incorrect. Photoshop always adds in those tags, even if you only save the image once. Moreover, the use of Photoshop is not even abnormal -- this image appears to be scanned in, and many people use Photoshop to read data from the scanner.
2. You point out a missing space in the registrar's date. This could be attributed to human data entry. As I mentioned, there is no evidence of digital manipulation.
You also said, "Otherwise, some poor soul at the Department of Health at Hawaii has to enter birth certificate information by hand for each request?? Doesn't seem very likely." Clearly, you have never worked for the government. It strikes me as VERY likely -- a human probably handles all requests for duplicate birth certificates.
However, let's assume it is automated. This would mean the program that prints the date is missing a comma. Programs like this are created by the lowest bidder. Moreover, they charge for bug fixes (like "add a comma"). Assuming a program and assuming anyone in the Hawaii government noticed, they probably didn't want to pay to have the comma-space fixed.
Arguing why the space is not there does not change the fact that there is no evidence of digital manipulation.
3. With regards to OpenDNA (see http://s100.photobucket.com/albums/m35/opendna/?action=view¤t=HI_birthcert.jpg). I love it! Use error level analysis on the image -- it has clearly been doctored! Xenon has his own analysis of it where he shows all of the evidence of manipulation. (http://xenon.arcticus.com/barack-obama-birth-certificate-image-tampering-analysis-redux)
4. You also wrote about the censor box in the top corner. You wrote, "The edges are blurry. If you simply place a black box on an image in photoshop and save it, the edges should be sharp." The large image from factcheck.org was saved at a relatively low quality (88% -- Photoshop "8 High" quality, see my jpegquality tool). What you are seeing are JPEG artifacts and not evidence of manipulation.
You also wrote "So one expects not to see compression or resizing on that image." I see no evidence of resizing on factcheck.org's image. And as far as seeing compression goes, JPEG is a lossy image file format. Any time an image is saved as a JPEG, there is a little image corruption introduced. With JPEGs, corruption will show up strongest along high-contrast colors that are not on an 8x8 grid boundary. This accurately describes the black censor line. Although the top is along an 8x8 boundary (and the top is crisp), the sides and bottom of the box are not on the 8x8 boundary, so they appear blurry.
While you may see anomalies and suspect tampering, I see none. I see no evidence of image manipulation, no abnormalities to raise suspicion, and no motive. Remember: Obama is already a Senator and has been vetted for security clearance. Otherwise he could not be on committees like the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs -- both committees have access to classified information. If he did misrepresent his birth certificate, then it would be immediately contradicted by his background check and would be used against him by his opposition.
Obama is a Senator. As such, he certainly has skeletons in his closet and stuff he is likely trying to hide. (There are no purely innocent Senators.) However, I believe that Obama's birth certificate is not one of these dirty secrets. (And the same argument goes for McCain. At least we know Hillary's dirt -- it's her husband.)
#3 ksdb on 2008-07-15 09:48 (Reply)
1) This is absolutely false. I've tested several jpgs and did not come up with the same tags that were embedded in the factcheck.org document. Many of these tags do NOT appear in the KOS and Fight the Smears document. They were either saved for the web or used with software program other than photoshop by KOS. This suspsicion stands to reason because the St. Petersburg Times posted copies of the certificate and saved them in photoshop, which embedded a new date while preserving some of the original tags. This was NOT the case with the KOS images, which still showed the same embedded time stamp as the factcheck document, but without some of the other photoshop tags. Clearly some sort of image manipulation occurred beyond blacking out the certificate number. Whatever was done MIGHT be innocent, but we won't know unless we see a document that was NOT opened and saved in Photoshop or if a physical copy is presented to reporters.
2) I already mentioned there could be human error, but it shouldn't happen if the process is automated by processing the data with merge codes. I'm aware of three other examples where the certificates were printed without this error. This leaves a strong suspicion of tampering - that the date was changed but not proofread to catch the typo. If it can be shown that the state of HI has this problem with other certificates, then we have a reasonable explanation for the mistake. Until then, it's definitely cause for suspicion.
3) Sorry, but I'm not seeing where xenon is utilizing the same tests you applied, i.e., lumninance, color density, etc. The evidence of forgery Xenon found can be seen pretty easily with the naked eye, so sorry, I'm not impressed by the smoke and mirrors he used. I mentioned the opendna image because the seal is less visible than it is on Obama's, which is barely visible to begin with. This goes in stark contrast to the three other known certficates that I mentioned in the previous point. If opendna copies the KOS image, printed it and rescanned it, it explains why his seal is less visible then Obama's. This same technique could explain Obama's seal is much less visible than the other three documents I mentioned. Each time it's scanned, printed and/or resized, it fades further and further away.
4) This explanation fails by simple testing. I created a new document, added a black rectangle and saved the image at jpg level 8. When reopened, the box is clean with no artifacts. I also did a second test by creating a black box in the factcheck image and saved it at 8. Again, when reopened, no blurring of ANY edges.
5) Obama's security clearance would not vet him as being a natural born citizen, which is constitutionally required for being president. He is a citizen, which is not in question, but not necessarily a natural born citizen. We can't assume anything about his status as a natural born citizen based on his position as senator.
Also, this particular certificate is obviously NOT the certificate he would have used to get any kind of a clearance (if a birth certificate was even requested), since it is barely more than a year old.
As far the information being found before, no one has had direct access to Obama's birth certficate. The state of Hawaii doesn't allow it. The St. Petersburg Times requested it since April, but it wasn't until June (after Hillary conceded) that Obama finally released the certificate.
One last thing - Obama has no reason to black out the certificate number. It is the least sensitive information on the document and the one piece of information that could actually confirm its legitimacy. Covering up that number makes it look like Obama has something to hide. John McCain presented his birth certificate without blacking out the certificate number, so we can certainly expect the same from Obama.
Bottom line, the evidence of Photoshop and the the typo hints at tampering. Your analysis does nothing to change that.
alice said:hopalong said:alice said:http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis-Part-II.html
Polarik is a fraud. He was debunked long ago.
Alice
By whom???
Check out the link...
Alice