The recent controversy on Glenn Beck’s remarks about forbidden subjects raises the Obama eligibility issue yet again. But another event took place that few noticed. Two experienced typesetters can show in twenty-five different ways that the Obama birth certificate is a fraud. Worse yet, they implicate Hawaiian officials and even a major media network in acts tantamount to treason.
Obama eligibility and Glenn Beck’s bombshell
Glenn Beck recently said various media outlets tell him to stay off some subjects. Dwight Kehoe and others reacted in outrage at this. Some asked Mr. Kehoe why he was talking about Obama eligibility again. He gave his answers. The short version of his answers: if we don’t defend the Constitution when our opponents break it, we’ll soon have no Constitution to defend. Dwight then touched on something else: some networks are worse about censoring “forbidden subjects” than others. He named ABC as a network that either does not practice, or does not enforce, such censorship. He also described what happened to Michael Savage:
Savage was no doubt told by his last station not to talk about those issues. He ignored them and was fired. That’s called principle over profit.
It wasn’t a station; it was a network. That network was NBC. And that turns out to mean something that even Dwight Kehoe missed. Perhaps he was not to know.
Dwight Kehoe publised his first essay two days ago. But nine days earlier (Saturday, March 16, 2013), two experienced typesetters announced new evidence in the Obama eligibility matter. This includes:
Twenty-five pieces of evidence against the Obama birth certificate and the PDF image that the White House released. (See our own copy here.)
Specific evidence that a major broadcast network lied about the news as it was happening. And the name of that network? NBC.
Obama eligibility: what’s wrong with the birth certificate?
Alleged long-form birth certificate. Credit: The Smoking Gun
The two typesetters, Doug Vogt and Paul Irey, began examining the Obama birth certificate almost immediately after the White House released it. On March 16, Mr. Vogt appeared with Mark Gillar, a free-lance “Internet radio” host with BlogTalkRadio.com. (See the BlogTalkRadio link here, and play the program from the embedded graphic below. See also this entry by Daniel Noe at the Western Journalism Center.)
Mr. Vogt has a list of twenty-five separate flaws in the Obama birth certificate, and a transcript of the April 27, 2011 White House press conference. Readers can read both documents here. This includes seventeen “points of forgery” and eight more problems with the PDF file. They are:
The number of the birth certificate is out-of-sequence by 144 to 199 numbers from a twin pair named Susan and Gretchen Nordyke, who were born on August 4, 1961, with their certificate accepted on August 8, 1961. If the acceptance date on the Obama certificate was August 11 or 12, either date would have been more in-line with the certificate number.
A reporter’s copy of the birth certificate has no evidence of a raised or embossed seal. Neither does the PDF file. But reporter Savannah Guthrie of NBC said she felt one. That’s a lie. And by telling such a lie, says Vogt, she became a principal in the crime of forgery. (Mr. Vogt has sworn, in writing, to the lies that Ms. Guthrie and others told.)
Vogt and Irey built their own birth-certificate example, and typeset it to conform with 1961 styles. They could not produce a copy that looked remotely like the Obama birth certificate. Holes in the typed characters tell the tale.
As CNAV has said before, the Obama document has white halos. You don’t get white halos in a true copy. The halo effect comes from an “unsharp mask” in the Adobe Photoshop program.
Microfilm copying would not have produced the result shown. The PDF did not come from an original. It had to come from more than one long form.
Creating a PDF from the test COLB (see Item 3) did not produce the halo effect.
The line spacing is off by 2 points. (1 point = 1/72 inch.) Whoever created the document kerned some of the lines. Such kerning would not have shown in an authentic original or a true copy.
The letter spacing is random. Typewriters of the period, especially those using the 10-pitch “pica” typeface, produced uniform spacing. (Your editor ought to know. He owns, and still knows how to use, an original Smith-Corona manual portable typewriter.)
The spacing of the words, between the left and right sides of the document, differs by two points. That can happen if someone is working on a document on a screen that cannot display the full width legibly.
The letters a, f, H, i, t, and y seem to have two different typefaces – in one document. This, in 1961, which predates the development of the IBM “Selectric” typewriters with their hot-swappable typeface balls.
The letters in some words have different baselines, as if they are “dancing.” Now any beginning typist might produce flying capitals, or diving lowercase letters. But no one could produce this sort of “dance” with a typewriter even if she tried.
The letter e in the word “Male” in Box 2 is rotated.
Three of the lines are not flush-left, as they should be.
The certificate gives the age of Barack H. Obama, Senior, as 25. But Obama Senior’s entry papers show him born June 18, 1944. That would make him 27 years old, not 25. The problem: when Obama Senior applied to go to Harvard, he lied about his age to matriculate as a “foreign student” younger than twenty-six.
The registrar’s stamp has the sort of errors one would not see in a metal, embossed stamp.
The certificate gives Obama’s race as “African.” In those days, a clerk would say “Negro” or “Black.” No one ever used “African.” No one even used “African-American” until the Seventies.
Not once, on any other document, does Barack Hussein Obama (Senior) say publicly that he is the father of Barack Hussein Obama the Second. The elder Obama once claimed a “Roy Obama” as his son. Roy Obama did exist – and was his son by marriage to a woman other than Stanley Ann Dunham Obama.
The nine layers of the PDF document would not result from optimization. At most, a straight scan would produce one or two layers.
These nine layers show different print resolutions. These vary from 200 to 300 dots per inch.
The birth certificate number is split between two layers – and each layer has a different resolution.
The PDF document has no evidence of a raised seal.
The PDF document has the halo effect, again from an unsharp mask.
Some of the words and date stamps have green color values. The problem: many scanners use green light during the scan, and that would cancel those values out. Worse yet: Alvin T. Onaka, the Hawaii Registrar, once tried to change the color values in a PDF file he submitted in a Mississippi case that Orly Taitz brought. That implies direct contact between Mr. Onaka and the forger.
The PDF file has both grayscale and “binary” images. That is highly unlikely.
The last layer shows signs of cropping by 1/8 to 1/4 inch as it printed.
Obama eligibility: motives
Why would a reporter from NBC or any other network say something that she knows is false? Vogt suggests she acted on orders from an NBC executive. Why? For a cascade of reasons:
GE Capital owns NBC. (They bought it from its original founder, RCA.)
GE Capital also held several toxic mortgages, though they did not qualify as a bank.
The Obama administration did GE Capital a favor in having another agency of the government buy those mortgages.
And then the Obama administration “called in a marker” from GE Capital. So someone at GE Capital called NBC; the administration of NBC called the news division; someone at the news desk then told Savannah Guthrie to say she felt a raised seal when she did not.
That would also explain why NBC has the worst record of censorship of “forbidden subjects,” worse even than CBS, which infamously used the Killian Memoranda though they knew they were forgeries.
Obama eligibility: consequences
The Obama eligibility issue is about more than a stolen election. Vogt believes Obama simply does not have a birth certificate. Even the fearfully lax Hawaii Department of Health never issued one. In fact, one can get a birth certificate in Hawaii with ridiculous ease. Any couple, who are lawful residents of Hawaii, may get a birth certificate even for a child born off Hawaii or even in a foreign country. Vogt calls the Hawaii Department of Health “a birth-certificate mill” for that reason.
More than that, says Vogt, the Obama eligibility affair now involves a crime tantamount to treason. When Barack Obama found he never had a birth certificate, someone forged one. Whoever did that, and whoever had a hand in telling this person to do it, is a principal in forgery, according to 18 USC.
So why treason? Because the forgery was a means to deceive election officials in fifty States, and the District of Columbia, into listing an ineligible candidate. Ineligible because he was an alien, within the meaning of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution. We deal here with installing a foreign agent as President of the United States. That would be a “grave risk to national security,” within the meaning of 18 USC chapter 228 section 3592. That section describes when the penalty of death might apply to the principals. Another circumstance that Vogt named: putting another person at a grave risk of death. Vogt cites the killings of several persons close to the Clintons as evidence of this last. (He also cites a horrific case in Kenya. A church burned to the ground and killed 40 to 50 people inside. The cause: arson. At the time, most assumed this was typical ethnic violence. Vogt now alleges someone gave orders to eliminate some witnesses in that congregation.)
Thus whoever forged the Obama birth certificate document, brought consequences on herself (Vogt says the forger is female) and everyone up the chain that none of them ever thought about. No doubt, as Vogt supposes, they thought the Obama eligibility issue was a great game. Perhaps they still do. But felony forgery is no game. Especially when it is tantamount to treason.