Mara Zebest: Top Computer Graphic Expert In The Nation Going After Obama.

There is no misspelling after all. Thanks to the Birther website, TheObamafile.com, we are blessed with a high resolution scan of the birth certificate... much higher than the Whitehouse PDF.

Here is what the PDF looks like, and yes, it looks a lot like that might be an X rather than an H.

​

But the higher resolution proves this to be an illusion:

​

Your question there is difficult to understand, probably because its premise does not appear to be true. All of the text is "in digital format" and does in fact appear to be a scanned copy of the original. But that's actually neither here nor there.

As the only actual expert on digital imagery that has commented on the birth certificate notes:

"[D]igital document analysis can detect manipulation, but it cannot determine whether the original subject is authentic. The authenticity can only be determined by the State of Hawaii, and they already said that it is authentic."

And that is how we know it is authentic; The State of Hawaii says it is.

Because it is a certified copy that was only made two months ago.

First and foremost, what you are quoting in your question is not Dr. Fukino, but a reporter paraphrase of what she said.

Second, the entire "long form" held by State Health Departments is actually more than just the part released when people request and receive their "long form" birth certificates. Go here to see what the actual components of a complete long form birth certificate looks like. The sections after block 13 ("Information for Administrative Use" and "Information for Medical and Health Purposes Only") are not released, though they would have been what Fukino saw. So what was released is only part of what she saw.

Lastly, anybody who demands that a general comment like "half handwritten and half typed" should translate into exactly 50% of each is simply being an obtuse pedant.

 

You're denying the obvious. In both images, it is most certainly an 'X'. An 'H' has two vertical lines, does it not? That 'X' does not. Are you seriously contesting this?

It's clearly not a scanned copy of the original. Can you tell the difference between the letters in this image?



The '1' on the right is a scanned copy of the original text and the other numbers and letters are solid bitmap, meaning they was created by a computer, not from a scan. Maybe a computer decided to created these numbers based upon a scanned copy of the birth certificate but we cannot know for sure because all we can see here are solid bitmap images that are clearly not a scanned copy of the original text. Make sense?

 

Well I am not quite the expert that Wong is...but still more informed than Birthers...so lets give me a shot at this

He laid it out pretty simply to you. I see it- I would submit that you have a clear case of confirmation bias- you don't want it to be an "H" so you see the "X".

Of course more importantly- he spelled out to you what the only actual forensic document specialist said- that you can't prove or disprove a forgery by examining a digital document, but must refer to the official source.

And you completely ignored Wong's very on the point comment that the State of Hawaii has confirmed that this BC is authentic and accurate.

And by the way- have confirmed multiple times that Obama was born in Hawaii.

You are really left with two choices- either the BC President Obama showed the American people is correct, or the State of Hawaii is part of very big conspiracy- which do you believe?

You seem to be under several mistaken impressions-
a) the State of Hawaii decided what to photocopy and present to President Obama- he released what the State of Hawaii gave him- if you ever go read what the State of Hawaii said, you will learn about this. Google Hawaii Department of Health Obama to learn the facts.

b) Tell me what items were left out from Obama's BC that are on the Nordyke twins? Looks exactly the same to me, except that the Nordyke one is inferior since it is a negative rather than a positive image.

Wong clearly refuted everything you posited. You won't accept it because that doesn't fit your mindset.

Really?

President Obama is still President. No one is interested in this but a few dozen Birther conspiracy zealots. Wong just refutes the obvious falsehoods for fun, like I do. Birtherism is now on a level with the Flat Earth Society.

Finally, my patriotic friend- tell me how many Presidential Candidates you have demanded provide proof of their eligiblity? How many have you seen their Birth Certificates?

Do you really care anything at all about eligibility?

 

Looks like you're not as informed as you think you are. Not only that, but you do not even have the ability to recognize the difference between the letter H and the letter X. I would say that you have a clear case of confirmation bias - you don't want it to be an 'X', so you see an 'H'. Why? Because you know that if it's an 'X' then the entire document is a forgery. Does this letter have two vertical lines like an 'H' would have?

It's true that you cannot prove or disprove that the ORIGINAL document is a forgery just based upon the examination of a purported digital copy without also examining the original document but that does not mean you cannot nearly prove it to the point where it's obvious to most reasonable people that the digital document is a forgery. For example, if the digital document had the doctor's name misspelled or if the date was off by 20 years then that would tell you that the digital document was probably a forgery, would it not? Or if there was a misspelling in the stamp and yet every other document that has that same stamp was spelled correctly then this would be a strong indication that the digital document is a forgery as well, would it not?

Yes, I believe that certain people within the State of Hawaii are part of a conspiracy with Barack Obama. Is this an impossibility for you? Is it not possible for govt officials to conspire with one another?

------------------

I'm not under any mistaken impressions here. I know what the State of Hawaii said, I just don't believe them. Do you always believe everything govt officials tell you?

You want me to tell you which items were left out from Obama's BC that are on the Nordyke's BC? You say they look exactly the same? Seriously? No wonder you cannot discern the difference between the letter 'H' and the letter 'X'. The Nordyke twins BC has the name and signature of the Director of Health, the signature and name of the Register General, and a raised seal. Obama's BC has a stamped name and signature of the State Registrar. Really? You couldn't see these differences for yourself?

Why isn't the BC "half typed, half handwritten" like the MSNBC report claimed? You dodged that one I noticed.

------------------

Also, why haven't you tried to explain why the Obama BC does not have any signs of aging? It's not a scanned copy of the original, now is it?

What about the solid bitmap text? That's not a scanned copy of the original either, is it?

You claim that you are more informed than I am and yet you don't even understand the fundamentals of why Obama has been challenged on his eligibility and yet other presidents have not. I bet, in your small mind, you think it's because he's black, don't you? Let me fill your empty brain with some knowledge, ok?

Every president before Obama, with the exception of possibly one, about a hundred years ago, had at least one parent who could confer US citizenship. Obama did not. His father was not an American and his mother was too young, according to US Nationality law at the time, to confer citizenship to her son. The law required her to have lived in the US for five years after the age of 14 which means she would've had to have been 19 at the time of his birth. She was only 18. Therefore, the only way Obama could have been born a citizen and therefore a natural born citizen is if he were born in the US. This was not the case with any president before him with the exception of that one I mentioned.

So it didn't matter where George Bush or Bill Clinton were born, they would still have been born natural born citizens. However, of course I would like every candidate to display their birth certificates and every other document that could conclusively prove their eligibility but Obama's case is clearly more critical because no parent could confer citizenship. Are you able to understand this? I have my doubts but I hope you give it your best shot.

So, it looks like you're going to have to try harder next time. A birther just made you look like a fool, just like I did your buddy, Wong.

 

I wonder what's going to happen when Obama gets re-elected.

Are these people going to commit mass-suicide?

 

I noticed that you're unable to even attempt to answer the questions I put forth. I wonder what's going to happen when the country finds out that Obama is a con-man? Are you and your fellow Obots going to commit mass-suicide?

 

Hey, I am comfortable that I am not the one looking like a fool- because I am not the Birther here.

So to recap:

You think Hawaii is part of a vast conspiracy.

You didn't care whether Bush or Clinton were elgible or not because you assumed their parents were citizens- without any evidence of course that they were.

You aren't asking for any other candidates to provide anything to establish eligiblity.

Oh and the half written/half typed thing? Wong covered it. But if you want to have that conversation- lets start with Dr. Fukino's official statements that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen- and work our way to her unofficial statements that he was born in Hawaii and that Birthers would never accept anything that was released and that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, and that his birth certificate is on file- we can discuss it as sort of a unified statement.

 

It appears you know you've lost this one. You know how I know that? Because you're doing exactly the same thing that every other brain dead Obot does. After losing on every argument you'll end your comments with something like: I choose to believe Hawaiian officials. Of course you'll be ignoring everything else in the process but that's exactly what you're saying now.

I think that certain officials in Hawaii are part of a conspiracy, yes. Not the entire state. You continue to willfully ignore that caveat. Yes, I care if Bush and Clinton were eligible, I explained that and I explained why Obama's case is very different and yet you conveniently ignore that as well.

There's no evidence that Bush and Clinton's parents are citizens? You're serious? Of course there's evidence, there's lots of evidence. I don't think you fully understand what the word 'evidence' means just like you can't tell the difference between the letters 'X' and 'H'. I also noticed that you ignored that whole issue again but I'll ask the question again. Are there two vertical lines in the purported 'H' like an 'H' would have? Your silence proves my point.

What about the solid bitmap of the text proving that it's not a scanned copy of the original. Your answer: silence. Your silence proves my point.

The half written/half typed thing... Wong covered it you say? How so? He explained nothing except that he supposes that there might have been more to the birth certificate that was possibly handwritten. What kind of an explanation is that? I'll ask you again: is Obama's BC anything close to half typed, half handwritten?

Who cares what Fukino says. You don't think it's possible that she could lie? Seriously? How about we look at the evidence and use some logic. I've brought up four points that show clearly that this document presented by the white house is not a scanned copy of the original and that it is likely a forgery. You can't even pick off a single one of these points. Everything you're saying is basically: I trust Hawaiian officials and why didn't you go after Bush and Clinton? You're pathetic!

 

please provide a direct quote from fukino saying it is "half typed and half hand written".

 

There isn't. Never claimed there was. If you'd read what I said carefully you'll notice that I said that the MSNBC report claimed that Fukino said that the document was "half typed, half written". I put that in quotation marks because I'm quoting the article. That MSNBC report clearly states that she said this.

 

If you really read your MSNBC link, it is clearly the article author, Michael Ishikof that makes the "half typed, half handwritten" statement not Fukino.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42519951/ns/politics-more_politics/t/ex-hawaii-official-denounces-ludicrous-birther-claims/

 

The tinfoil hat companies are back in business I see...

 

He posted an unflattened .pdf. That's f***ing stupid as it gets. Whether it's doctored or not...you don't post a document that can be opened in it's native application (s). When you run it through basic pre-flighting software, mistakes pop out all over the document.

 

Guys, Jay559 is probably Apuzzo, NB or Wash sock puppet....

 

You're saying that Isikoff was making the claim that it was half typed and half handwritten? Huh? Isikoff never saw the birth certificate so how would he know? Look at the article again:

MSNBC article: "Before she would do so, Fukino said, she wanted to inspect the files — and did so, taking with her the state official in charge of vital records. She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files."

The first few words says, "Fukino said..." and then lists things that Fukino said she did and how she found the birth record which was "properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files."

Up to this point in time, Fukino was the only Hawaiian official who claimed to have seen the document so who else would have said that it was half typed and half handwritten. The article makes it clear that she made this claim. Could you Obots get any dumber?

 

Do you have any reading comprehension at all? It was Ishikof's words you quoted not Fukino's.

 

You're arguing with a sock puppet and a troll...

 

so you agree it's a non issue then? Since you can't find a single quotation of her actually saying it?

 

Oh goodie- you are back! More fun.

When did I lose any argument? Did I miss President Obama being tossed out of office yesterday? Did I miss a court case where the court didn't laugh Birthers out of the court? Did I miss Congress taking any action at all regarding the Birther agenda?

The fact remains that Birthers have lost every argument in every venue and jurisdiction there they have attempted to push their agenda. You have lost in the courts, to the voters, in Congress, in the media, and the public rightfully considers you all nuts.

So I would say- I haven't lost any argument to you yet. You have trotted out the usual Birther Conspiracy theory molehills and tried to blow them up into mountains

Oh for a layman, I am pretty confident about using the word evidence. After two years of replying to Birther BS about what is evidence and what is not I have gotten pretty comfortable with what is evidence.

For instance- actual evidence that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii(this is evidence that would be admissable in a court of law)
a) The Certification of Live Birth issued by Hawaii, a copy of which was published online.
b) The certified copy of the original Birth Certificate
c) The verification by the highest authority entrusted with this information in the State of Hawaii- the Director of Health- that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii- this was actually issued twice, by two different Directors of Health.
d) The Birth Index data available for anyone to see in Hawaii showing Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
e) Two contemporary birth announcements of his birth

See all of these are evidence- Birthers demand more from Obama...but lets look at the evidence that you have for say Bill Clinton's eligiblity- or his parents?

Birth Certificate for any of them? Verification from the States? Birth announcements? You said there is lots of evidence that Bill Clinton's parents were citizens- so answer this- what was the evidence that you knew when Clinton was running?

Of course you didn't know anything- you assumed- just as all Birthers automatically have assumed that every candidate. None of you bothered to check out anything about any other candidates...you assumed they were eligible- if you cared at all- and I doubt you ever even knew Bill Clinton's names.

But prove me wrong. Michelle Bachmann is an announced Republican candidate- show me where you have either:
a) verified with certainty her birth certificate- to the degree you insist for Barack Obama or
b) or using your logic, you have verified with certainty- that her parents were both U.S. citizens at the time of her birth. Now if you are not a total hypocrite, you would have already done this, so you should have this information at the tips of your fingers.

Or just admit- you don't really care whether any other candidate is eligible- you have always just assumed that every candidate except Barack Obama is eligible.

The lines in the "H' are clear on the high def image. Only Birther conspiracy zealots insist on seeing an "X". Wong's explanation was complete and accurate- that you can't understand it just shows that you don't care about the truth, you only care about your agenda.

I didn't respond to all your nonsense. I don't know what your point is and I don't care. Because it all comes down once again to whether this is a Conspiracy involving the highest levels of the Hawaiian government or not. If there is no Conspiracy, there can be no forgery.

Since you have provided no evidence of a Conspiracy nor of a forgery, then the birth certificate would be assumed correct and official by any court of law, and that is more than good enough for me. Matter of fact, good enough for all Americans except for a few loons.

 

I've explained this many times to your fellow morons. I assumed you were coming at it from a different angle but no, you're just repeating the same thing they said. Obviously you did not read what I originally wrote carefully and you did not read my reply to the other morons who said the same thing you're saying.

This is what I said earlier to two separate people and now you:

Jay559: "Never said it was a direct quote from Dr. Fukino. I was quoting the article. That's why I prefaced the quote with 'According to an MSNBC report...'."



Originally Posted by rahl:
"please provide a direct quote from fukino saying it is "half typed and half hand written"."


Jay559: "There isn't. Never claimed there was. If you'd read what I said carefully you'll notice that I said that the MSNBC report claimed that Fukino said that the document was "half typed, half written". I put that in quotation marks because I'm quoting the article. That MSNBC report clearly states that she said this."


Looks like you have no reading comprehension, Daddy-O. I'll await your apology.

 

No, of course it's an issue. Michael Isikoff from NBC News claims that Fukino told him it was "half typed and half handwritten". And yet Obama's purported BC is clearly not that which means that either Isikoff and MSNBC are lying or Fukino is lying. That's significant, isn't it?

 

who is Mara Zabest-Nathanson? do a search and you find nothing but a link to this site with this post..a phony name? or is she a friend of Casey Anthony?

 

So you still can't find a quote from fukino saying it's half typed and half hand written?

no, it's not an issue.

 

You clearly have no capacity for being truthful or using logic. You deny the obvious again in your desperate attempt to support Obama. That letter does not have two vertical lines that make up an 'H'. This is the last I'll say about this because it's obvious, you know it, and you're just going to deny the obvious and there's nothing I can do about that.

----------------------

Whether or not Bill Clinton has proven his eligibility is a total distraction from the topic at hand but I'll address it again in a vain attempt to help you understand though I'm thoroughly convinced you're not interested in understanding.

I do think that all candidates should show their birth certificates and other documents that might prove their eligibility but I'm not going to make a big deal about it like I have with Obama because Obama's case was unique in that he had to have been born in the US to be eligible.

Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Bill Clinton's parents might not have been able to confer citizenship? No. There's no reason to suspect it. But with Obama, we already know that he had to have been born in the US therefore we needed to see the best evidence of his birth - his long form BC. Obama's case is very unique in that sense, isn't it?

----------------------------------------

Your comments about Bachmann just show how illogical your mind is. She's not the Republican nominee, I have no reason to suspect at this point that neither of her parents can confer citizenship, and she's already said that she will show a copy of her long form BC so I figure we should give her a chance considering she hasn't even won the nomination yet.

---------------------------------------

Once again you show your inability to understand logic. I said "who cares what Fukino says" meaning, obviously, that her statements do not make something a fact. I brought up her purported statements in the MSNBC article to show that the BC is different than what she described. This would obviously be something important to note. Can you seriously not understand this difference?

Once again you show your lack of knowledge on this issue. Fukino is the only person who had claimed to have seen Obama's long form BC. Alvin Onaka, Gov Lingle, and Gov Abercrombie all made their statements based upon information given to them by Fukino. This gives them plausible deniability.

--------------------------

The only additional portion of the BC that has ever been seen are the items that the Nordyke twins BC's had that Obama's did not and all of those were typed with exception of the signatures. We don't know if there is something in addition to that or whether it would be typed or handwritten and suggesting that there is, is just a way of creating some small doubt that there might be something else out there that would make Fukino's purported statement match Obama's BC.

-----------------------------------------

You're either an idiot then or you just don't want to consider it because you know it hurts your cause. Go read what I said again and look closely at the image I posted. It's extremely obvious that there's a difference between the 1 and the rest of the text. Do you see the difference? The 1 is a scanned copy and the rest are solid bitmap meaning they're digital creations from a computer. You really can't understand this? Really??


Back to the original four questions. Let's see how you've done:

1. How could there possibly be a misspelling in the stamp at the bottom of the document, namely, "TXE" instead of "THE"? Note: To date there is no other example of this stamp having that misspelling.

2. How could you possibly know that this document is authentic when the vast majority of the text is in digital format (AKA solid bitmap) and is clearly not a scanned copy of the original text?

3. Why is there no evidence of aging on this purported 50 year old document like all other birth certificates that are decades old?

4. According to an MSNBC report, the top Hawaiian official in charge of state health records, Fukino, claimed that Obama's long form BC was "half typed, half handwritten" and yet Obama's purported BC is all typed with the exception of the signatures and dates. Why doesn't Fukino's comment match Obama's birth certificate?


1. You: It's really an X. [denying the obvious]

2. You: I don't understand [nice try]

3. You: Silence [Not even gonna try? It's not a scanned copy of the original, is it?]

4. You: Wong says there could be more to the BC that we haven't seen [Yeah, there could be and a Kenyan BC for Obama might exist too but we don't know that, do we? And we probably shouldn't suggest that until we know that either actually exists.]


You've still failed on all four questions. This is hard for you, isn't it?

 

Never claimed there was a direct quote from her, did I? So who's lying then? Isikoff or Fukino?