IS HE QUALIFIED?
NO QUARTER REPORTS ON FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE:
Birth Certificate Mystery Ongoing
By TexasDarlincloseAuthor: TexasDarlin Name: Texas Darlin
Email: susanunpc@gmail.com
Site: http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com
About: See Authors Posts (39) on June 30, 2008 at 11:04 AM in Bamboozling, Barack Obama, Certification of Birth, Daily Kos, birth certificate
In the past 48 hours, several new pieces of information related to Barack Obama’s birth certificate have come to my attention. I will attempt to consolidate the pieces here, and post the questions raised by this set of information. The developments in this story are dynamic and fast-moving. I will do my best, and hopefully we will start to get some answers.
The Daily Kos Diary
In the No Quarter story Saturday, Daily Kos, an Obama Activist, and Forged Birth Certifications, JimJ presented evidence suggesting that the Certification of Live Birth posted in a June 12 Daily Kos story, Obama’s birth certificate by Kos (Markos Moulitsas Zuniga) may have been forged by Opendna, whom JimJ believes to be Jay McKinnon.
Upon reading JimJ’s story, I did a little digging.
The first thing I noticed when I re-read the Kos story is that Kos does not explain how he acquired Obama’s certification, which seems curious given his alleged credentials as a serious blogger.
As it was explained to me by the Hawaii Attorney’s General office, the Hawaii State Department of Health does not issue certifications to the press or public, only to a person with a “direct and tangible” relationship to the registrant (in this case, Barack Obama). So Kos could not have lawfully acquired the certification from the State of Hawaii.
However, within the substantial body of comments (648 at this writing) to Kos’s diary, several posters referenced a comment by Kos in which he explains that he asked the Obama campaign for the certification via e-mail, and they sent it to him. The problem is that I cannot find the original comment from Kos which so many other posters reference; perhaps my search tool is not working well and I could not find it among the 648 comments, and someone else can locate it.
Second, this sentence by Kos caught my eye: “Note, I have trimmed the edges of the scan, so before someone tries to inevitably ‘debunk’ this based on the dimensions of a Hawaiian birth certificate, that should be noted.”
My first thought was that Kos had somehow acquired a hard copy of the certification, and trimmed it for the scanner. But then I remembered that he supposedly received it via e-mail.
If the certification was sent to Kos by the Obama campaign electronically, why would he “trim” the “scan”? Why not just re-post the image that was sent to him the way that it was sent? Now, I write tons of html-coded diaries and all you need to do, if the original image is too big, is insert a measurement into the jpg code to decrease the size of the image.
Even if Kos did get a hard copy what exactly did he trim? I assume the certification sent by the DOH in Hawaii is on a standard size piece of paper.
Needless to say, this notation struck me as quite odd, especially because it was not explained.
Third, I found a comment by Opendna about a third of the way into the comments section of Kos’s story, posted at 4:35:46 PM EST on June 12:
[Why don’t you print one up for him? (1+ / 0-)
Here’s a blank template:
— “opendna is high and just makin’ shit up outta nowhere.” - greenskeeper
Where did Opendna get that template, which JimJ pointed out shows the same time and county as Obama’s alleged certification? And why did he boldly publish this template in a comment?
Finally, I noticed that Kos posted his diary at 11:44:37 AM EST on June 12, according to the DailyKos site. For some reason, though, the first comment, by “Addison” shows an earlier time: Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 11:10:34 AM EST. I don’t know how Kos’s timestamps operate, but I thought it was strange. Maybe someone else can explain.
FightTheSmears
Based on Google searches, I ascertained that the Obama campaign published the Certification of Live Birth directly on its FightTheSmears website sometime during the evening of June 12 or the morning of June 13, shortly after the Kos story was published. As of this writing, here is the link to that web page: barackobama.com birth certificate.
Although the certification posted by Kos and the one posted by the Obama campaign appear to be identical, people who have “peered” inside the images say that each has been opened in Photoshop or some other Adobe program. Here’s one message I received:
“Open the Daily KOS, and Obama’s official images with “Wordpad,” or a Hex editor, and you’ll find them having been photoshopped. The KOS image will show “Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh 2008:06:12 08:42:36,” embedded, while Omama’s will show “Ducky” embedded.
And here’s a comment left today (Sun. June 29) by the blogger Polarik:
Way back on June 18, the Greater Evil blog (http://polarik.blogtownhall.com) demonstrated that the images on the Daily Kos and BarackObama.com were forged — intentionally altered with a graphics program.
The Greater Evil has now discovered that the image posted on the Daily Kos was edited with Adobe Photoshop CS3 on a Mac, running OS 2.0, and saved at 8:42am on June 12th, right around the time when the Kos posted what it claimed was BHO’s “birth certificate.”
We know this to be a fact because it comes directly from the Exif information embedded in the JPG image posted by the Kos
Similarly, the image posted on BarackObama.com, aka Fight The Smears, aka Fact Check, also took a trip to Adobe land, although the program used to fix the borders remains unknown. What we did find is that the creator of the image, someone named, “Ducky,” appears on the inside of the JPG.
Conclusive proof that these images have been forged. It is patently obvious that a graphics program was used to produce a black rectangle over the certificate number, and, if you read my analyses, you will also conclude that the rest of the text has also been entered via a graphics program.
Why would “Ducky” be working on Obama’s birth certificate? To cover up the certificate number with a black block? If that’s the reason, and it was sent to Kos after the certificate number was hidden, why then would Kos open this image in Photoshop? To “trim” it? (See questions above about that).
Anyone happen to know who “Ducky” is?
Please note again the prominent language at the bottom of the form: “ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE”.
If Barack Obama ordered his certificate of birth, one would logically presume that upon receipt of that actual document, a simple scan would be made of both sides, and the images from the scans then published. The certificate number could have been covered with a simple piece of black tape before scanning the document.
Instead, if one is to believe that this certification is authentic, it appears that the Obama campaign scanned the document sent by Hawaii OHSM, then altered the scanned image in some kind of Adobe program. This should be explained in light of the importance of presenting an authentic document that has not been altered.
There has been much written, also, about the missing embossed seal and registrar’s stamp/signature on Obama’s document. If it’s on the back, let’s see the entire document in real time (like at a press conference). Enough with this monkey business with Photoshop. As important, as I said in a previous post, Obama should make available the long version of his birth certificate, which includes more detail about his birth. The State of Hawaii should have that on file, in case he’s lost the original that he said he had located in High School (per Dreams From My Father).
The Obama campaign should also explain the “chain of command” of this document given the weird story by Kos and the suspicious time-line of the DailyKos and FightTheSmears publications.
Further, Kos should explain how, when, and where he received the certification, why he “trimmed” it, and exactly how it was trimmed.
Finally, Kos and/or Opendna/Jay McKinnon should explain how Opendna was able to post a “template” for Obama’s certification, containing two pieces of information identical to Obama’s certification, on DailyKos shortly after that diary was published. And what is Mr. McKinnon’s association with Kos and with the Obama campaign? See JimJ’s story for much more about that mystery.
Hawaii State Department of Health
I have previously promised an updated post on my communication with Janice Okubo of the DOH and my communication with the Hawaii Attorney’s General office, but I keep getting sidetracked by these other developments and sometimes I have to sleep. Because this post is getting long, I will write a separate story about Okubo and the obfuscation I’ve experienced with the State of Hawaii. In short, Ms. Okubo has now backpedaled away from her original assertions that the certification shown on Obama’s website was a valid certificate issued by her office. Notably, her shift came after my conversation with the Hawaii Attorney’s General office.
In the meantime, an interesting story was published on a blog Sunday about Hawaii’s legal duty to investigate.
==================================================================
Old Atlantic Lighthouse
Hawaii legal basis test error or fraud Obama birth certificate
June 29, 2008
The state of Hawaii has a legal basis to investigate and report on whether the birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama II posted on his website is valid or not. The State of Hawaii has said that only Obama or a family member can request a birth certificate. However, checking for error or fraud in a birth certificate used by Obama to obtain a benefit is something the state of Hawaii can do spontaneously.
The two primary purposes of not letting anyone get anyone’s birth certificate are privacy and to prevent fraud. Since Obama has posted the purported certificate, he has waived privacy. Since the state of Hawaii has already expressed the view that the birth certificate posted on-line lacks the seal and signature that is standard, they have a basis to suspect fraud.
The fraud purpose of the law is so that someone doesn’t get a birth certificate of another person and then use that to get a passport, driver’s license, etc. In this case, the question is whether the Obama campaign are engaged in fraud. So investigating the birth certificate, b.c., in this case is preventing fraud. Moreover, the risk of someone using an Obama b.c. to get a passport or driver’s license or job is already at issue.
Preventing fraud means when there is evidence of fraud its investigated. By not investigating evidence of fraud, the state actually emboldens potential fraudsters to engage in the type of fraud that Obama’s campaign is suspected of by some.
If the b.c. on the Obama website is fake, then there is likely fraud not just error. This is evidence tending in that direction.
The state of Hawaii does not need to prove fraud to correct error. If a b.c. is purported to be authentic in a public manner on a website and it lacks a seal that is a basis for the state of Hawaii to correct error. It has a public interest in doing so. The state of Hawaii has an interest in showing that it polices the use of its b.c.’s and prevents incorrect ones being used to get a job, security clearance, or for some other purpose.
The US government also has standing to investigate the use of a possibly fraudulent birth certificate or one that has errors. The federal elections commission presumably can investigate whether a person is eligible for office or uses documents that contain errors to establish eligibility.
Hawaii has standing to protect its own voters, ballot and those of other states. Voters in other states have standing to request an investigation.
Where there is damage, the state of Hawaii can correct error. The many calls to the office in Hawaii show that the public feels damaged by the possibly false b.c. Damage plus error gives the state standing to investigate and publish its results.
The state of Hawaii is holding a presidential election with other states. It has a duty under the U.S. Constitution and its own constitution and laws to prevent fraud in that election. It has an obligation under the 14th Amendment to prevent election fraud. As an election administrator, the state of Hawaii has an obligation to investigate where evidence of possible fraud, error, or eligibility for office is presented.
The state of Hawaii has already determined that the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks a seal and signature. It also has the word African for race which may be suspect. Note the b.c. was issues after 2001, so that the state of Hawaii may use African at the time the b.c. was printed instead of colored or Negro if those terms were used at the time of issuance in 1961, if one was issued in 1961.
At a certain level of evidence of damage or error, the state of Hawaii has discretion to investigate. At a higher level, it has an obligation to investigate and publish its findings. That level may have been reached. As an administrator of a presidential election operating under the 14th Amendment and with an obligation to other states that are co-administrators of the election including as operators and members of the Electoral College, the state of Hawaii has substantial obligations to voters in its own state, in other states, and to other states.
In the federal system, the states are given duties. Holding elections is one of the duties they are given, including federal elections, including president. They have to see that all laws are enforced in those elections, including what is specified in the U.S. Constitution. Because Hawaii has the b.c. of Barack Obama according to Obama’s web site, it falls to Hawaii to check the b.c.
This is an obligation it has under the U.S. Constitution as an election administrator, and under federal supremacy, and under the Constitution directly to see that Obama meets the requirements written in the U.S. Constitution. When state officials take an oath to the Constitution of the United States, they take on that obligation to make sure that anyone running for president of the United States meets all qualifications in the U.S. Constitution.
Because Hawaii is the alleged holder of the Obama b.c., it has the obligation to check its original. It has that obligation since its own officials have determined that Obama has posted a b.c. on his web page lacking the seal and signature. Hawaii has that duty as a direct duty under the U.S. Constitution. That preempts state law on b.c. privacy.
Others have standing to sue in federal court to get Hawaii to disclose the b.c. based on all the above if Hawaii doesn’t spontaneously investigate this itself. Hawaii should do so. It has the right to and the duty to. That comes directly from the U.S. Constitution. That preempts state law.
Obama by posting a fake b.c. may have engaged in some form of electoral fraud. This accrues as more information is posted. This accrues as his campaign knows the state of Hawaii has stated that the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature. The Obama campaign now has notice that the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature and that the state of Hawaii has said that.
That is additional evidence for the state of Hawaii to act. Its additional evidence for state and federal courts to act. Other state courts have jurisdiction to require Obama to give them a valid Hawaii b.c. So do other state electoral officials. Any state electoral official, local or state, has standing now to challenge Obama on the ballot because the state of Hawaii has said the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature.
Each state of the United States has an obligation to remove Obama from its ballot. This is an obligation under the U.S. Constitution on each state.
Moreover, Obama is not entitled to his delegates at the Democratic National Convention because he is using a b.c. on his web page that the state of Hawaii says lacks the seal and signature. Delegates pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and most have sworn allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. They have an obligation to deny Obama the nomination while he is using a b.c. determined by the state of Hawaii to lack the seal and signature on his web page.
==
In fighting fraud, it obviously makes no sense to say only the person engaging in possible fraud can request an investigation of the possible fraud. If a state has any information from any source that indicates possible error, fraud, or harm to 3rd parties, that gives it standing to investigate.
A law designed to prevent fraud can not be used to perpetuate a fraud. The law against giving b.c.’s to others is to prevent their using it for fraud. But here the issue is that Obama’s web page may be harming others by error or fraud.
There need not be fraud. The same arguments apply to error. Innocent parties that may be harmed by error have standing to seek correction or confirmation. That is a right they have in state and federal court. The state of Hawaii has a direct obligation under the U.S. Constitution to avoid error or fraud in this case.
The state of Hawaii, other states, and federal courts and agencies have an obligation to weight the costs and harms. The harm of allowing a b.c. that the state of Hawaii has said lacks the signature and seal to be accepted when posted on a candidate’s web page is huge. That undermines the public trust in all b.c.’s everywhere for all purposes. It undermines the rule of law in elections. It perpetuates that candidates are not accountable to the laws before, while and after elected.
Obama has an obligation himself as an elected official and candidate to see that the laws are upheld by his campaign. Using a b.c. that the state of Hawaii has said lacks the seal and signature on his web page is a failure by him. It disqualifies him from being president on a moral level.
==Reference
http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12944.htm
A senior official in the State of Hawaii’s Department of Health, Director of Communications Janice Okubo, confirms that the image published and circulated by the Obama campaign as his “birth certificate” lacks the necessary embossed seal and signature. Backing away from a quote attributed to her that the image on the campaign site was “valid,” she told the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times in an article published yesterday: “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”
http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12944.htm
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080422061946AAXTd5J
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
“when the campaign declined to give us one, we were stalled.”
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/21/obamas-birth-certificate-bamboozle-cont/
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/12/what-does-an-authentic-hawaiian-birth-certificate-look-like/
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_antismear_site_relies_o.html
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/28/daily-kos-an-obama-activist-and-forged-birth-certifications/
http://dailymusings.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!EBAB74DA8F94C559!5351.entry
http://cyrilalmeida.com/2008/04/09/obamas-pakistan-visit/
Obama “birth certificate” Hawaii
Obama Pakistan trip 1981
fake birth certificate.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2036015/posts
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/24/hawaii-vital-records-question-1/
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2037867/posts?page=140
==
The above is hypotheses, speculation, or opinion. This is draft and preliminary. This is subject to revision. Comments and corrections welcome. Please restate statements as questions. No criticism is made of any person. All other disclaimers apply.
________________________________________