UPDATED INFORMATION: The Coming Crisis has come across additional information regarding the long form birth certificate situation, and will post this update and any others at the top of this article. Please read downward to view the original article that broke the discovery.1. It has been claimed by naysayers, despite overwhelming evidence, that any scanned document would turn up the artifacts and share the mysterious qualities found in the White House release of Obama's long form birth certificate. Well, someone has done just that, and now there's even more definitive proof that the document has been tampered with:
2. The following following birth certificate, purportedly Obama's, surfaced in 2010, and shows massive discrepancies with the White House release, including, but not limited to:
-- the inclusion of a birth time, which the White House release strangely omits
-- the birth location of Obama as being Kenya, not Hawaii
-- the more historically accurate racial filing of "Negro" as opposed to the politically correct and categorically incorrect "African" as shown in the White House release
-- The signatory party being someone other than Obama's father, as in the White House release
-- The box pertaining to evidence for delayed filing is completed in the 2010 certificate; the reason given is a Kenyan birth and then a delayed registration in Honolulu
Is this 2010 certificate fake? Is it real? Why does its information fall more parallel to historical evidence surrounding Obama than the White House release? Why is there so much inconsistency floating about? Why is there mention of a law in Hawaii to stop people asking about Obama's birth? Is it now against the law to pursue the rightful execution of the law?
The Coming Crisis will continue its investigation into this matter, and will keep readers posted.
****************
Main Article
****************
The Coming Crisis has a disturbing news bulletin for all our readers: we have come across definitive proof that Obama's long form birth certificate document released by the White House has been at minimum tampered with, and at most, presented as a forgery.
The White House release of Obama's long form birth certificate can be downloaded here.
In a previous post we determined that something was seriously wrong with the birth certificate, and reposted an article by The Smoking Gun that outlined many strange facts about the timing and content of the document. Others have pointed out further discrepancies.
We have come across a source who we will not name at this time (but will gladly post it if it is allowed -- we want to keep him safe in case something erupts as a result of this) who has taken the White House document and analyzed it through graphic design software, namely Adobe Illustrator.
What he found was truly disturbing, and we present it to you here.
Normally, when one scans a document, it produces a single picture just like with a photocopying machine -- what you see is what you get. However, the graphic design software shows that the document, while appearing as a PDF, is actually a series of "layers" that have been manufactured and assembled into a single document. Most people would never realize these other layers would exist unless they possessed the graphic design software and could conduct the test themselves.
In case this doesn't make sense to you, let me use the following analogy: take the Disney movie Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. This movie was of course hand-drawn. To do this, they would draw the background forest on a piece of glass. Then they would lay another piece of glass over it with the animals, then another piece on top of that with the dwarves, and so on until they had a complete scene composed of layers. Modern graphic design software works in a similar manner, since if you make a mistake or want changes on a specific part of the project, you only have to edit that layer, rather than redo the entire thing from scratch.
With Obama's long form birth certificate released by the White House, a similar design mechanism can be observed. The PDF file isn't a single, two dimensional image -- it is, in fact, a series of layers designed one on top of each other to form what appears as a single image.
This means that the White House document was created (forged) on a computer, and is being foisted on observers unfamiliar with computer design as a simple copy of the real thing.
This is an outright lie, and is constitutionally outrageous.
We at The Coming Crisis have replicated this experiment and can vouch that the discoverer of this forgery is telling the truth -- the PDF distributed by the White House website does indeed break down into clipping masks and design layers, just as he claimed, which acts as ample proof that this document is not real, if all the rest of the facts had yet to convince you.
To conduct this experiment yourself:
1. Download Obama's Long-Form White House Birth Certificate.
2. Open it with Adobe Illustrator.
3. Go to "Windows" and open the "Layers" panel.
4. Continue expanding the layers within the Layers panel.
5. Make various layers visible and invisible to see how the document has been constructed in parts.
In case you don't have the ability to conduct this experiment, we've posted the individual layers below for you to see: it's very clear that this was a manufactured document, and God only knows what's going to happen once word of this spreads. We ask all Americans and bloggers to please repost this so that as many people can learn about this as possible -- the truth must be spread at whatever cost.
-- Matt
(The Coming Crisis has preserved all original documents should they be pulled in the event of an emergency; please contact us if you would like them sent to you.)
NEW: Video proof of elements within the document being capable of moving around -- more evidence that it's not a single scan, but rather a composition of computer-designed elements:
A second video pointing out many strange discrepancies with the long-form video that are beginning to come to light:
And in case you're wondering, this is what an actual, real birth certificate looks like from the time Obama was born -- please note the wear from multiple decades of storage, discoloration, and so on, compared to Obama's near-pristine document:
Certificate number discrepancy from 2007:
And from the top of the most recent form, which reads: 151 61 010641Where did that 19 go? Surely it represents the year, yet why are the numbers not the same? Why is there no consistency between the documents?
38 comments (read or post your own):
Your argument fails to account for the realities of how PDF documents are compiled by the Adobe software. When a PDF is created, the software automatically differentiates the image into layers for the purpose of distinguishing background from text. This enables text recognition in the PDF. What Illustrator is seeing is the result of the automatic PDF compilation process, not evidence of human compilation. Also, the image posted by the White House was likely obtained from microfilm (evidenced by the curl at the left edge), which is why it does not appear worn as does your "control" image.
Anonymous @1:33 Not sure whose payroll you're on, but that's the not the case at all. Illustrator does indeed sometimes create its own basic layers, but anyone who has opened the original document sees not only layers, which are nothing like you described, but isolated elements of the certificate -- such as additional digits and characters added onto words, isolated signatures and stamps, and a host of other bitmapped parts that were clearly rasterized elsewhere and added in. Numerous design experts have already voiced their opinion that tampering has likely taken place. To quote another: if this image represents a black and white copy of a birth certificate that was optically scanned or photocopied onto green security paper (the comeback against those who point out the crosshatch pattern doesn’t “curl” with the document’s left edge), why didn’t the White House’s scan of the document simply produce a single-layer PDF containing just the scan? Simply zooming in on the document shows different resolutions between elements on the page. Your response has miraculously been duplicated all over the web despite it not being the truth -- gee, isn't that convenient? I really hope all Americans ignore this disinformation and investigate the document themselves.
I wasn't speaking of Illustrator creating layers. Illustrator isn't the issue at all. I was speaking of the software that renders the PDF in the first place. As I stated, "When a PDF is created, the software automatically differentiates the image into layers for the purpose of distinguishing background from text. This enables text recognition in the PDF."
The issue is PDF creation. The PDF has layers that Illustrator sees. Fine. The question is, how did they get there? Your assumption is that the only plausible answer is human composition. I am stating that there is another, even more plausible answer - which is that the software which CREATES PDF files (NOT Illustrator, which is being used to VIEW the PDF) creates the PDF with layers, in order to differentiate text from background, thus enabling a PDF reader (such as Acrobat) to recognize the text. This is one way in which PDF documents differ from bitmapped documents. The layers are automatically created through the PDF creation process.
In addition, your assumption that I'm on someone's "payroll", and the implication that it is my response which has been, "miraculously been duplicated all over the web despite it not being the truth" only shows the non-objectivity of this web site and the mindset of people like yourself. In point of fact, I'm on no one's payroll who might in any way be affiliated with the Federal Government or an agenda to promote propoganda in favor of the Obama administration. In point of fact, I'm privately self-employed, a Republican who didn't vote for Obama, and who won't in 2012. The fact that I'm voicing a thesis regarding PDF composition which has also been voiced widely by others - doesn't indicate a conspiracy unless you're someone with a predispostion toward finding conspiracies. It simply indicates that I know something about PDF composition which many other people also know, but which you are ignorant of. Your a priori commitment to believing unproven conspiracy theories is not only blinding you to facts, it is coloring your interpretation of the evidence.
I work on graphic design for websites and use Illustrator and Photoshop regularly. I reproduced the same results. This document absolutely 100% was tampered with. It is one thing when you hear someone say something is a fake but it is quite another when you are in a profession that you know something about and can verify it yourself. The thing that does not make sense is that whoever produced this was so sloppy and did not take measures to flatten the layers and secure the PDF which would have been very easy to do.
It's already been debunked, folks. People are doing it all over the place. Download the PDF from the White House, print a physical copy of it. Then SCAN it into your computer, and render it as a PDF using PDF creation software that is capable of OCR (Optical Character Recognition). The Result? Layers. Not humanly made layers, but automatically generated layers BY the software as it separates the text out for OCR purposes. Try it... it DOES verifiably happen.
Here's a quote from just one person who's done it: "What’s plausible is that somewhere along the way — from the scanning device to the PDF-creation software, both of which can perform OCR (optical character recognition) — these partial/pseudo-text images were created and saved. What’s not plausible is that the government spent all this time manufacturing Obama’s birth certificate only to commit the laughably rookie mistake of exporting the layers from Photoshop, or whatever photo editing software they are meant to have used.
UPDATE: I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home."
You graphic designers ARE seeing layers. The problem I have is that you are assuming that they were humanly engineered in an attempt to deliberately forge the document.
If this website - and others that are also promoting the forgery theory - are honest at ALL, they will at least try rendering the PDF via OCR capable software and show the resulting layer composition. If you aren't willing to do that, you have no moral or intellectual integrity whatsoever.
Fine. Go ahead and delete my posts because they show your ignorance. The person above who said that you have no moral or intellectual integrity is exactly right. It's hypocrisy. You accuse them of manipulating truth - but you do exactly that.
So pathetic. Sucks when you're proven wrong, doesn't it? Embarassing, huh? What choice do you really HAVE when that happens, but to delete the comments that have proven you wrong? You must be a really insecure person. Deep, abiding inadequacies that you overcompensate for by way of these pathetic fear-mongering theories. Hyopcrite! YOU are the manipulator of Truth. YOU are the one suppressing fact. YOU are the one trying to control people through fear. And that impulse abides in you so deeply, that you see it in everyone else too. Everyone except yourself. Pathetic.
many designers are coming forth to say the same thing, but there is the usual paid / brainwashed / unquestioning minority who will latch onto any reason to defend the status quo, because lets face it, if this is true, its a scary proposition, and it puts the country into a tough position
the big question is what will we do about it? what happens next?
I am President of a highly successful marketing and digital content creation corporation. I have over 25 years of high-level experience with digital content and am an expert by any measure with Adobe's entire software suite, including Acrobat, Illustrator and Photoshop. We work with the arcane, hidden, "under-the-hood" aspects of such content (involving layers, flattening, and links, placed images, etc.) on a daily basis, and have seen just about every possible combination of output results. Based on this expertise, it is our unequivocal opinion that the PDF document we downloaded (from the White House website) has been substantially edited after being scanned. It is most definitely not simply a “scan-to-PDF”, in which Acrobat (or some other PDF creation software app) “arbitrarily generated the various linked objects through its OCR or other imaging process”, as some people have attempted to assert. The placed objects are not indicative of any conceivable output schema that we have ever seen in the course of working with tens of thousands of scans and PDF documents. Moreover, all of the placed objects have been transformed (rotated -90 degrees and scaled; all but one to 24%). This, in and of itself would not be particularly damning, except that the overall page’s green patterned “security” background has been scaled to 48%. That makes zero sense if this is a genuine representation of the scanned document, as the White House is purporting it to be. Forget all the other irregularities that have been cited; the inconsistent transformation issue alone makes it inarguable that the document has been manually altered from its original state. What does all this mean? We’re not sure. But one thing is for certain…the dumbass who talked BHO into releasing this obviously lashed-up document should be fired. Oh wait, Obama can’t fire Trump, can he (not yet, anyway)?
This will just sound like sour grapes if you can't make a strong, solid case. Get the proof once and for all or forget it and move on. At this time he looks like someone that is just picked on - God knows they picked enough on Bush. I do not want people feeling sorry for Obama.
if regular people had 5 million dollars for a legal team like obama did to spend on hiding history, that would probably happen, but until then we have to do things piece by piece until justice prevails
Why isn't this all over CNN or the BBC?
Why aren't all the Adobe experts lining up to be televised and interviewed?
Even Fon News is silent!
The conspiracy is bigger than anyone imagined.
What is Fon News?
Of course I meant FoX News.
I won't be any good at Photoshopping, I can see.
The only way to force the issue at this point is to FLOOD THE FEDERAL COURTS with lawsuits over Section 1, Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution. I will be posting a template lawsuit that anybody can use to file the suit, pro se. The only way to remove and disqualify Obama is through the courts, as politics won't work.
Obama's obvious forgery has made an instant "birther" out of me. Being always the skeptic, I downloaded a free trial of Adobe Illustrator, openen the PDF that I downloaded directly from the official White House website, Selected "Release Clipping Mask" and voila! The fraud was immediately evident. Actually, it looked fake the moment I first saw it, but now I'm positive.
By the way, has anyone noticed that Obama chose the time of release for his fake document to coincide with the distractions of not only the Royal Wedding, but also the announcement of the killing of Bin Laden,which he knew was likely to happen a week ago (or did actually happen a week ago, and they were just "waiting for the DNA results." What reporter is going to spoil the mood by bringing up that nasty forged document issue?
Did you ever use an OCR software? No need to be an IT specialist to know that those softwares create layers with the different parts of a picture trying to dissociate the text from the rest of the document. That's why if you remove the text layers you'll have the text's "shadow" in blank on the background. Also this is why you some manuscripts objects are not in separated layers, because the OCR software couldn't dissociate them from the backgroud.
Clearly no doubts.
I have seen a few posts stating that it is pdf layers, OCR, etc. Well..... WRONG!! try selecting the text... whats that.. you cant, because adobe pdf reader sees it as an IMAGE ONLY. These layers are not the difference between text and background as you would claim, because if that was the case you would be able to select the text only from within adobe pdf reader.
Why haven't the people who created this report, forwarded this to donald Trump. It seems he is the only person in the US that can make enough noise to get any attention. I knew this document was a fake the moment i saw the stamped date. Plus, they didnt use the term African but rather Negro back in 1961. We werent that politically correct then. Just find another African birth certificate from 1961. It says Negro! Its a Fake American!!
C'mon people, this crazy conspiracy talk just makes people look stupid. Obama was born in Hawai'i; I don't think there is anything that would convince the 'birthers' of anything else. I hope you realize how stupid the VAST majority of Americans think you are.
Do you really think they would forge it then be careless enough to not flatten it? If anything this was done deliberately to further alienate the far right from the mainstream. You're playing right into Obama's hands.
This pdf-file was created 27 apr (D:20110427120924Z00'00') with Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext.
Can anyone checks optimization options in this product?
Trump is just a distraction.. think about it.
HOW WOULD ANYONE KNOW ITS A FAKE UNLESS THEY DID IT? jUST SAYING ALSO IS PRESIDENT OBAMA REAL? ALIVE AFRICAN AND DID ANYONE HERE WITNESS HIS BIRTH? LMAO
On the Kenyan Mombasa long form birth certificate series 3 it shows Obama's BABY FOOT PRINT. A BABY FOOT PRINT A baby foot print grows but the pattern stays the same. Obama and his Justice department BLOCKED it in 2009. Why, Why doesn't Obama want that foot print compared with his foot print. Because a foot print Never Lies. Why are all his relatives saying he was born in the Mombasa hospital and Obama put a gag order in 2010.
Part 1: You can download the latest version of Adobe Illustrator and install it as a free 30 day trial, and use it to verify what I'm about to say.
I can say with absolute certainty that this image is a composite generated from multiple scans of multiple documents. Note that the "file number" in the top right contains several pure black and white characters (no gradient) in the same resolution, followed by the last "1" which is in a lower resolution and contains a gradient.
Note that the pixel pattern of the 1's in "151" are identical. Note that the pixel pattern of the first two check boxes in field 4 are identical. Note the random handwritten markings in a number of the fields.
Note that the "Non" in field 17a was overlaid on top. It is a separate image. The "e" appears to be original to whatever document the form lines were sourced from. Note how strangely far indented into the box that "e" is located. The source document probably contained something like "Housewife" or "Private Nurse" or any number of professions that end in "e". (In the Nordyke Twins' birth certificates, "None" appears in this very field, but is located very far to the left of the box)
Part 2: If you leave the green background layer visible, and toggle the main form detail layer visibility on and off, you will notice that some gradient artifacting from the text remains in the green background layer. From my experience with photoshop, I can definitively state that this is because the text was first flattened into the background at some point, then selected with a wand or lasso tool, and then the text layer was created "via cut", which leaves a strange inverted gradient footprint behind.
There are other discrepancies, such as numerous characters exhibiting identical pixel patterns. Just look for yourself. See if you can spot them.
All three of the date stamps and the "Alvin T. Onaka" signature show up in the "links" dialog box. These were images that were imported, rotated, and scaled after being imported.
My final piece of evidence: the signature of the local registrar reads "U K L Lee", no doubt a taunting reference to "Ukelele". Our forger appears to have a sense of humor.
Part 3: Finally, the pdf document was created on 4/27/2011 at 12:09 pm using Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext. It appears this person used Photoshop for Mac to create the image, and then exported it to a PDF using Photoshop or some other program, not knowing that it would preserve the layers. Note that April 17th is the exact day that the White House released the document, so this was really down-to-the-wire.
I believe Trump's pressure forced the WH to scramble to come up with something. They used at least two birth certificates to create a composite form. They scanned a page of blank security paper, scaled it, and used it as the background. This security paper appears to be the exact security paper available to the HDOH, so it is very likely that the HDOH assisted in sourcing documents and material for compiling this document. If nothing else, they would have had to provide at least one of the following birth certificates: 10640, 10642-10649, all in file 151, year 1961. The trailing "1" was sourced elsewhere. The reason they had to do this is because they already locked themselves into the official number "10641" as it appeared on Obama's forged short form, so they had to use whatever certificate was on hand from the 1064X series to source from.
Part 3: ***EDIT***
...Note that April 27th is the exact day that the White House released the document...
Part 4: This is quite damning evidence. The WH's short form is a forgery as well, but its a damn good forgery. It was created by the HDOH, afterall. What gives it away is the fact that the registrar's signature and seal are applied to the back of the document (the seal is raised to the back; debossed from the front). Hawaiian law dictates that, in order for a COLB to be legally valid, it must have the registrar's signature and seal applied to the front. So, in order to avoid a legal pickle for fraudulently certifying that a valid COLB was on file at the HDOH, the registrar merely printed up a short form, and then intentionally applied the seal and signature in such a way as to wash him or herself of all legal consequences for document forgery or illegal certification.
The reason the short form was so "good" is because they had plenty of time to work on it. They had time to work the channels of communication, make sure people got compensated, etc. With the long form, Trump's out-of-the-blue demands caught them off guard. They didn't have a long-form prepped, because they didn't think they need one, and a long-form is far more difficult to forge, because the HDOH doesn't have typewriters anymore, and forging signatures is very very difficult to do right. They didn't have the time to get their ducks in a row for a proper expert forgery, so they had someone who knew photoshop well enough to be dangerous do the digital forgery, and then they decided to play the Osama kill wild card to immediately flush the long-form certificate from the national consciousness. Whether Osama was killed in the raid in Abottobad, or many months ago, I do not know. All I know is, the announcement was strategic: to cool down the heat from the birth certificate.
I am a life long graphic artist who has worked for private graphic agencies and public publishing firms in the US. The PDF form in question does have alterations to it that go beyond any novice interpretation of standard layering of PDF files and OCR. If the Obama believers were to hold on to this OCR theory, all of the text would be contained on one later but the text is broken up in several layers with partial words being broken up mid-word. Also, some of the words and dates contain individual letters that are RGB full color while other letters are 100% black (K). Alarm bells should be going off that this a sloppy paste and edit job taken from one document to the next. One of the above posters mentioned that some individual items were scanned separately and then rotated before being placed in at a correct angle. A whole document can be turned 90% but only partial elements being turned within the document is a clear sign of editing and tampering. In an Adobe court of law, this graphic artist would be guilty with no chance of parole. There must have been a lot to hide if they simply couldnt scan the original certificate without editing it this much.
That Birth Certificate is a forgery. I am a Computer Science student and use Adobe products extensively. If that was a faxed document as The White House stated the layering would not be accessible when you download it. The reason that the layering is compiled and shown is because the document was created and then uploaded to the White House webpage and made available to be downloaded to the public. If that was a real scanned and then faxed birth certificate that layering would not be view able with the Adobe software. I never believed all the birther stuff until now. Whomever forged this document did it hurry or was just plain sloppy. It is not even a good forgery
Also there are characters in the form that are part hand written and part word processed. There are also characters that have been rotated to fit into place yet are offset on the document. The document is altered in one place to provide room for the forged date which is also not off of one single stamping. It is a forgery. If you took that to a DMV in VA. to get your Drivers License you would be in trouble.
Though Obama's mother is white...there are no details /photos of the "white side of his family".
Who is this guy?....who is sitting in the White House and has the power to push the button and nuke.
And is there any reason why this 'proof' is not being reported on FOX? I would think this would be Sean Hannity's wet dream. In fact, why isn't it reported anywhere else? Oh well, throw it in the '9/11 Was an Inside Job' bin and move on. At least until you can actually prove tampering beyond sloppy computer editing skills. Or perhaps prove that birth certificates from different times and in different formats from different states never have discrepancies.
all of the text would be contained on one later but the text is broken up in several layers with partial words being broken up mid-word. Also,
Birthcertificate
Post a Comment
WANT YOUR COMMENT TO APPEAR?
Please, do not engage in any commercial or promotional activity. This includes linking to businesses, book sales, political or religious groups, etc. We welcome links that expound the discussion and investigation.