Major Birther Broadcast: Numerous Computer Experts Discuss Obama's Forged Birth Certificate; Tear Apart Obama Supporters Bogus Claims

Youtube Video: Experts Doubt The Authenticity of Obama's Birth Certificate --- Interview by Mark Gillar @ Blog Talk Radio

Jerome Corsi - The New York Times Best Selling Author who recently released Where's The Birth Certificate: The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible To Be President.

Retired Major General Paul Vallely - Fox News Contributor who recently revealed that former CIA agents have confirmed that Obama's birth certificate is a forgery.

Susan Daniels - a P.I. from Ohio who claims that she can prove Obama's has been using a fake social security number since 1986.

Orly Taitz - the California Attorney who is pursuing Barack Obama's birth Certificate through legal channels will give us an update on her activities.

Karl Denninger - a computer documents' expert who uncovered some of the more relevant issues with the electronically released long form birth certificate. Video

Mara Zebest - a recognized Adobe expert and author whose written report on the problems with Obama's birth certificate is a must read!

Albert Einstein Renshaw Ph.D. - Introducing the 16 year old computer whiz kid who owns his own software firm and received 1.3 million hits on his video that ripped Obama's long form to pieces. 

Joseph M. Newcomer - the person who exposed the "Killian documents" in the Rathergate scandal as fraudulent in 2004. 

Tom Harrison - a software designer with more than 30 years experience in graphic design. Harrison - a 58 year-old Dartmouth graduate with a background in mathematics, physics and computer science – believes the dots prove the document is a forgery.



News Release: Expanded Analysis of Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth - May 22, 2011

Orly Taitz v. Kathy Ruemmler / White House Counsel - FOIA - US District Court for the District of Columbia - Obama SSN/Birth Certificate

Orly Taitz v. Kathy Ruemmler/White House Counsel - Freedom of Information Act - US District Court for the District of Columbia - Obama Social Security Number and Birth Certificate - Oral Argument Requested

Kathy Ruemmler / White House counsel

COMPLAINT

JURISDICTION

Current complaint is filed under Federal statute 5 U.S.C. 552 Freedom of Information Act and diversity

PARTIES

Plaintiff, Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ, President of “Defend our Freedoms Foundation”, resident of California

Defendant, Kathy Ruemmler, in her official capacity as the White House Counsel, with business address in Washington DC

ALLEGATIONS

1. For a period of nearly three years Mr. Obama has kept hidden his long form birth certificate, attesting to his Natural Born status, which is a requirement for one to become the U.S. President based on Article 2, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

2. Plaintiff herein, Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ,(hereinafter “Taitz”) is an attorney, who is a counsel in a legal action Barnett, Keyes, et al v Obama 8:09 cv 00082 USDC CD CA, and 10-55084 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, dealing with Mr. Obama’s lack of the Natural Born status.

3. On MAY 2, 2011, Plaintiff was scheduled to conduct an oral argument in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Barnett, Keyes et al v Obama on the issue of Obama’s lack of eligibility.

4. On April 27. 2011, only a few days prior to an oral argument, and with polls showing 2/3 of the American public doubting his birth place and legitimacy, Mr. Obama released, what he alleged to be a true and correct copy of his original long form birth certificate maintained in the vault of the Health Department of Hawaii.

5. On the same day Mr. Obama, together with former White House counsel, Robert Bauer, conducted a press conference, attesting to the legitimacy of his birth certificate and attacking political dissident leaders and civil rights attorneys questioning his eligibility, by calling them “sideshow and carnival barkers”.

6. Mr. Obama and Mr. Bauer alleged, that Mr. Obama’s attorney Judith Curley travelled to Hawaii, received 2(two) separate certified copies of the original birth certificate, contained on file in the state department in Hawaii and delivered these two documents to the White House.

7. Mr. Obama and Mr. Bauer conducted a press conference and provided a white background copy of the document and made it available to the NBC reporter Savannah Guthrie and other reporters.

8. Another copy on secure green paper was posted on the official web site for the WhiteHouse.gov.

9. Within a short period of time multiple experts rendered an opinion, that the document posted on the White House.gov is not a true and correct copy of a 1961 original birth certificate, but a cheap forgery, a computer generated “document”, created by cutting and pasting parts of different documents.

10. Printing and typesetting expert Paul Irey provided an affidavit (Exhibit 1), stating, that the document in question is clearly a forgery and contains letters and numbers from different type settings, which can be seen only in a forged document.

11. Adobe expert Chito Papa provided an affidavit, showing, that parts of the document were created in Adobe computer program in layers. (Exhibit 2)

12. Scanning and printing machines expert Douglas Vogt has provided an affidavit, showing kerning, different typesetting, different color, digital, color and grayscale intertwined imaging and other signs of forgery. (Exhibit 3)

13. At the same time Taitz, Plaintiff herein, obtained verification from the Selective Service, that Obama is using a Connecticut Social security number xxx-xx-4425, while Obama was never a resident of Connecticut (Exhibit 4, redacted selective Service certification of Barack Obama) (Exhibit 5, unredacted Selective Service certificate of Barack Obama submitted under seal)

14. Social Security Verification systems provided a response, that the Social Security number in question xxx-xx-4425 was never issued to Barack Obama, which show that Obama is fraudulently using a social security number, which was never issued to him. This represents additional evidence pointing to lack of a valid birth certificate, as typically individuals without a valid birth certificate have to resort to using invalid and fraudulently obtained social security numbers.(Exhibit 6 redacted Social Security Verification Systems letter ) (Exhibit 7, unredacted Social Security verification letter submitted under seal)

15. Taitz obtained from the Student Clearing house an official record of Obama’s attendance at the Columbia university, which shows him attending that university only for 9 (nine) month in contrast to Obama’s assertions, which points to the general pattern of fraud in relation to Obama’s vital records. (Exhibit 8 Student Clearing house certification of attendance of Columbia University by Obama for only 9 months.)

16. On June 1, 2011 USDC for the District of Columbia issued an order for the parties to file dispositive pleadings in Taitz v Astrue 11-cv-402 RCL, a case, where the same Plaintiff is seeking an original SS-5 application for Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425, which Mr. Obama is using according to his Selective Service certificate, but which was never assigned to him according to the Social Security administration (Exhibits 4, 5). This order was held by the clerks of the court and not posted on the electronic docket until June 3, 2011.

17. On June 2, 2011, as the above order was issued, but not docketed yet, the
White House counsel , Robert Bauer resigned and a new White House counsel, Kathy Ruemmler was appointed.

8. Next day, on June 3rd, Taitz forwarded to Ms. Ruemmler request for inspection of the two “certified copies” of the original long form birth certificate for Mr. Obama, which allegedly were hand carried to the White House by Perkins Coie attorney, Ms. Judith Corley and provided to the public and reporters by the former White House counsel, another Perkins Coie attorney, Mr. Robert Bauer. Taitz requested inspection of those allegedly “certified copies”, that are now in Ruemmler’s custody.

9. Ruemmler did not respond.

10. Taitz forwarded to Ruemmler a second request under 5 USC 552 Freedom of Information act.

11.Ruemmler did not respond.

12. In light of lack of response, overwhelming evidence of forgery and general campaign of cover up and stone walling, further requests are futile.

13. FOIA provides disclosure of the public documents held by the agencies of the federal government.

14. 5 USC 552 (6) private records exception does not apply in this case, as Barack Obama already made the document in question public by posting it on WhiteHouse.gov. At this point privacy is no longer at issue. The only issue is forgery, which can be ascertained by the inspection of the hard copies of the document.

15. Public interest in ascertaining, whether the person occupying the position of the U.S. President, is doing so based on a forged U.S. birth certificate, outweighs any possible privacy concerns. Multi Ag, 515 F.3d at 1229-30; see, e.g., Barnard v. DHS, 598 F. Supp. 2d 1, 11 (D.D.C. 2009); Schoenman v. FBI, 576 F. Supp. 2d 3, 9 (D.D.C. 2008); Unidad Latina En Accion v. DHS, 253 F.R.D. 44, 48 (D. Conn. 2008); Schoenman v. FBI, 573 F. Supp. 2d 119, 148 (D.D.C. 2008); Schoenman v. FBI, 575 F. Supp. 2d 136, 160 (D.D.C. 2008). as the D.C. Circuit has held, “a privacy interest may be substantial — more than de minimis — and yet be insufficient to overcome the public interest in disclosure.”

16. While 5 USC 552 excludes “central offices of the White House”, this exclusion will not apply in this case, as term “central offices of the White House” relates to the documentation obtained and generated by the President as part of his duties. A copy of a birth certificate from 1961, 50 years ago, does not relate to the duties of the President, which commenced only two and a half years ago, this document relates to legitimacy of Mr. Obama and his right to be in those “central offices of the White House” in the first place. If he was never eligible to be there in the first place, he is not eligible to claim the privilege.

17. This is the case of first impression, as there was never a case in the U.S. history, when a person occupying the position of the U.S. President, did so, while using a forged birth certificate and attempting to defraud the public by posting on line, on White House.gov, an alleged computer generated, forged birth certificate.

18. The closest case in the U.S. history is United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) , which originated in the DC court, when Hon. John Sirica granted the motion to compel subpoena by Leon Jaworski. Judge Sirica’s decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. Just as the Watergate tapes showed high probability of the criminal wrongdoing, which later indeed led to multiple criminal convictions, there is a high probability of criminal wrongdoing by Mr. Obama, former White House counsel Robert Bauer, Mr. Obama’s personal attorney Judith Corley of Perkins Coie, State Registrar, Hawaii Department of Health Alvin T. Onaka and a number of other individuals. Such wrongdoing can be shown by examining hard copies of the alleged long form 1961 birth certificate of Mr. Obama, posted by Mr. Obama on the official White House website WhiteHouse.gov.

Wherefore Plaintiff respectfully requests this court to

1. Order the defendant to provide the plaintiff access for inspection of the two certified copies of the original long form birth certificate of Barack Obama, which are currently in possession of the White House counsel Mr. Kathy Ruemmler

2. Attorneys fees incurred by the Plaintiff, as counsel for the “Defend Our Freedoms Foundation” in attempting to obtain such documents under 5USC 552 FOIA

3. In light of the overwhelming public interest Plaintiff requests expedient processing of this complaint, as well as open court oral argument.

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Orly Taitz v. Kathy Ruemmler/White House counsel - FOIA - US District Court for the District of Columbia - ...

TeaParty.org: Obama's Eligibility and Fraudulent Birth Certificate Should Be Addressed

TeaParty.org: Obama's eligibility and fraudulent birth certificate should be addressed --- 7-28-2011 --- VIDEO HERE



Irrefutable Proof that Obama is Not Eligible to be President of the United States, the Facts Don't Lie!

Obama’s Rape of the 14th Amendment—From Defining Natural Born Citizen to Authorizing His Threatened Dictatorial Raising of the Debt Ceiling

Obama’s Rape of the Fourteenth Amendment—From Defining a Natural Born Citizen to Authorizing His Threatened Dictatorial Raising of the Debt Ceiling

By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

July 30, 2011

For putative President, Barack Obama, and his enablers, the Fourteenth Amendment is the gift that just keeps on giving. He has used it to impose legitimacy upon himself concerning the question of whether he is a “natural born Citizen.” Now we see that he may again need the Fourteenth Amendment to carry out his plans. While White House spokesman, Jay Carney, has reportedly ruled out such use, Obama may in the end seek to use it to impose a higher debt ceiling on the American people without any Congressional say.

The Natural Born Citizen Clause

We have seen the argument put forth by Obama’s camp that the Fourteenth Amendment makes him an Article II “natural born Citizen.” They maintain that the definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen” was confirmed or changed by the Fourteenth Amendment and the U.S. Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. 169 U.S. 649 (1898), a U.S. Supreme Court case that interpreted that amendment. They maintain that this amendment and Wong Kim Ark confirmed or established that the definition of a “natural born Citizen” is based on the English common law and that it means any child born in the United States, even if born to one or two alien parents, and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” They add that for children born in the United States, the citizenship of the parents is not relevant, unless the parents are ambassadors or members of invading armies. They proclaim that this territorial birthright citizenship is what a “natural born Citizen” is and that there is not need to satisfy any parental citizenship component. But the historical record and case law show that a reading of the Constitution to produce this definition of a “natural born Citizen” is not correct.

The Founders and Framers in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 and other parts of the Constitution gave us both a "natural born Citizen" and "Citizen of the United States." These are separate and distinct terms which must be given a meaning of their own. For births after the adoption of the Constitution, one must be a "natural born Citizen" to be eligible to be President. Hence, the issue with Obama is whether he is a "natural born Citizen," not a "Citizen of the United States."

The U.S. Supreme Court has always defined a "natural born Citizen," an idiom and a term of art, as a child born in the country to citizen parents. This is still the only definition of the term ever provided to us by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has never given us any other definition. This American common law definition was confirmed in the precedential case of Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 167 (1875), which dealt with the citizenship issue head on in order to determine whether Virginia Minor had the privilege to vote as a “citizen of the United States” under the Constitution, a privilege which she argued could not be denied to her by the State of Missouri under the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court did ultimately hold that based on the history of voting in America, voting was not part of the privileges and immunities granted to citizens. It therefore held that Minor did not have a constitutional right under the Constitution to vote and that the Missouri constitution and statute granting that right only to male citizens were not unconstitutional. The Court did add that women probably should have the right to vote but that only Congress could rectify the matter, not the courts. This part of the Minor case was later overruled by the Nineteenth Amendment which guaranteed women the right to vote.

But the part of the Minor case that is more important and which still has precedential value has to do with citizenship. Minor said:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.

Id. at 167-68. Under Minor’s definition of a “natural-born citizen,” which it borrowed from Emer de Vattel’s The Law of Nations, at the time of birth, the child must be born in the United States to a father and mother who are both U.S. citizens either by birth or naturalization after birth. See also The Law of Nations, Secs. 212-217 (London 1797) (1st ed. Neuchatel 1758) (“The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”).

Also, Minor did not resolve the question of whether a child born in the United States to alien parents is a “citizen of the United States.” But the Minor Court explained that it knew what a “natural-born citizen” was. The Court had no doubts about that definition. It defined the term under natural law and the law of nations as codified by Vattel in Sec. 212 of The Law of Nations. In fact, the Court took Vattel’s definition almost word for word. Including in the definition of a “natural-born citizen” a reference to the citizenship of the child’s parents, the Court clearly did not rely upon the English common law. What it did not decide and did not need to decide was the question of what is a “citizen of the United States.” Since Virginia Minor was a “native” or “natural-born citizen,” there was no need for Minor to address that issue and left it open to another day. This question of what is a “citizen of the United States” was addressed and answered in Wong Kim Ark in 1898.

A careful reading of Wong Kim Ark shows that neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor that Court’s decision amended the definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen” which the Founders and Framers relied upon when drafting that clause. Rather, the Court’s decision shows that under our Constitution, there are two different types of birthright citizenships. There is no indication in its text or in the history of its debates that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to or that it did in fact define or amend the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Hence, the Constitution makes a distinction between an Article II "natural born" "Citizen of the United States" and a Fourteenth Amendment "born" "citizen of the United States." The Constitution provides for different birth circumstances for these two different classes of citizens upon whom it bestows birthright citizenship. These are therefore two different types of birthright citizenships.

In Article II, the Constitution demands the status of "natural born." In the Fourteenth Amendment, it demands "born" in the United States and "subject to its jurisdiction" at the time of birth. Only a child born in the country (or its jurisdictional equivalent) to citizen parents can be an Article II "natural born" "Citizen of the United States." Minor v. Happersett (1875). In contradistinction, a child born in the United States (or its jurisdictional equivalent) to one or two alien parents can under the Fourteenth Amendment be a "born" "citizen of the United States." U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1989).

If Obama were born in Hawaii, a fact that he has yet to conclusively prove given the questionable authenticity of his long-form Certificate of Live Birth that he released on the internet on April 27, 2011, and if his parents are Barack H. Hussein and Stanley Ann Dunham, who are reported to be his parents, he can be a Fourteenth Amendment and 8 U.S.C. Section 1401(a) born “citizen of the United States,” but he cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” which is the constitutional standard that he must meet to be eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was a “citizen of the United States” at the time of Obama’s birth. But his father, being born in 1934 or 1936 in what was then the British colony of Kenya, was under the British Nationality Act of 1948, a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (“CUKC”). Obama himself by right of decent from his father under the same Act was also born a CUKC. Hence, because Obama was not born in the United States to United States citizen parents, he was not born under the sole and undivided allegiance and jurisdiction of the United States. Obama was not born with sole citizenship in the United States. Consequently, he was not born with unity of allegiance to and citizenship in the United States. Obama, therefore, cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” and is not eligible under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

The Debt Ceiling

Our nation is currently faced with a budgetary desperate situation. Simply put, our federal government over the last decade has spent greatly more money than it took in. Our federal government must continue its business. But it must reduce its spending and increase its revenue. Whether its spending reduction or revenue raising, both sides of the equation are tied to taxes. By reducing the mammoth size of our federal and state governments and their programs, we would be able to reduce our public expenditures and need for more tax revenues. Unfortunately, such choices probably will impact on the American way of life. An alternative that makes much more sense is to help our nation to get richer by putting into place forces which will increase the amount of money the nation makes and therefore allow the government to collect more taxes from current and new income sources without increasing taxes on any one segment of the population which in the end may just be counterproductive.

But Obama’s enablers and maybe even Obama himself want to take the fast and easy way out. Now we see Obama’s enablers and maybe even Obama himself in the future suggesting that he resort to the Fourteenth Amendment to impose his will upon the American people regarding raising their debt ceiling above the current 14 Trillion Dollars without the input or control of Congress.

In a news story entitled, Senate Quickly Kills Boehner Debt Bill, it is reported:

The White House spokesman, Jay Carney, ruled out more definitively than he had before the possibility that Mr. Obama would cite the Fourteenth Amendment to disregard the debt-limit law and order government borrowing to proceed if no deal was reached. House Democratic leaders, former President Bill Clinton and some constitutional lawyers have said that Mr. Obama should, if necessary, invoke the amendment, which holds that “the validity of the public debt ... shall not be questioned.”

“This administration does not believe that the Fourteenth Amendment gives the president the power to ignore the debt ceiling. Congress has the authorities necessary to ensure that we meet our obligations,” Mr. Carney said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/30/us/politics/30fiscal.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2.

The Fourteenth Amendment was passed during Reconstruction following the Civil War. Its purpose was to address the social, political, and economic problems that led up to and that resulted from that war. The debt clause was only to assure that debts incurred by the United States, including those resulting from that war, would be honored. The amendment sanctified the “public debt,” provided that it was “authorized by law.” It also made sure that neither the United States nor any State would pay any debt incurred by anyone in their effort to overthrow the government of the United States or suffered by anyone from his or her slaves being emancipated. It declared such debts, obligations, and claims illegal and void.

How would Obama expect to unilaterally raise the People’s debt ceiling without that debt being “authorized by law” (meaning Congressional approval) and consider it to be constitutionally valid under the Fourteenth Amendment? Note that the debt belongs to the People and not to their government. Only if our political and legal institutions were to again turn a blind eye to the Constitution could Obama get away with such unconstitutional behavior.

It is only expected that Obama and his handlers would again rape the Fourteenth Amendment for their purpose of maintaining political power and satisfying their self-ambitions. Here we see that he would dare override the authority and will of a co-equal branch of government, the legislature. Doing such an act would show that he has no respect for and attachment to Article I, Sections 7, 8, and 9 of the Constitution, separation of powers, and the republican form of our government under which the People act through their elected representatives for the purpose of achieving the greater good.

Concerned Americans who questioned Obama’s eligibility to be President said early on that if Obama and his enablers were ready, willing, and able to turn a blind eye to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 regarding his eligibility to be President, they would do the same when it came to other important issues with which our nation may be faced in the future. Here, we again see how desperate people will get for the sake of maintaining power and showing the world that they are right.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 30, 2011
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
#### 

Copyright © 2011
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved

American Thinker: Confessions of a Birther Evangelist

Confessions of a Birther Evangelist 
By William Lolli

I am an information technologist by trade and a Birther evangelist by proclivity.

When discussing or debating the Birther issues with a newbie, in addition to a transfer education in law, the Constitution, the jurisprudencial system, and history, I frequently am a witness to the real-time acting out of the Kübler-Ross behavioral model of denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

For the duration of the discussion, the political spectrum orientation of the listener doesn't seem to matter, since the topical reactions and counter-bullet points are always the same.

The debates are never linear, but desultory. And the satisfaction is in the observation of dominant human nature as it dictates the repetition of behavioral responses to Birther political stimuli.

Discussions with actual politicos, such as direct talks with Congressman Brian Bilbray, are particularly revealing, in that one presupposes that once the facts are discussed, there is a presumption that the revelation of truths will result in a commensurately engaged moral action. But this is not so.

Most people mildly exposed to Birther issues are stuck in the denial stage. However, anger erupts once the message sinks in that Barack Obama's April 27, 2011 LFBC (long-form birth certificate) is forged, that multiple criminal acts have been perpetuated, and that both political parties and all branches of government are culpable.

Many politically active Birthers are stuck in the anger stage. You can see that by reading their blogs, letters to editors, emails to congressman, and their use of invectives like "long legged Mac Daddy," "Usurper," "Traitor," and the like. The ad hominem attacks do little to persuade, but they do provide emotional relief to the mass of frustrated Birthers, who find it difficult to understand why the legal and moral clarity of their arguments are systematically ignored.

Anger yields itself to the "But what about..." bargaining arguments -- which after thorough vetting fail to yield any other conclusion than the moral imperatives of the preservation of the integrity of the Constitution's framework.

The results of the intellectual and moral inculcation of bargaining yields the epiphanal state of depression, as the destructive costs of the nullification of an illegitimate presidency set in:

The nullification of Obama would instantly remove two Supreme Court justices; reverse all court appointments of judges and federal posts made by Obama and the decisions heretofore made, creating instant chaos in all matters decided or presided over by those justices or czars; reverse ObamaCare and its funding; nullify the GM bond buy-outs; reverse the Wall Street GM stock sale to the Unions; make internationally illegal the orders to soldiers in 3 Islamic theaters of war; wreck EPA rulings; throw the SEC under the bus; drag BLM decisions back into court; reverse executive sanctions placed on BP after the spill; confuse Treasury-induced Federal Employee Pension fund account borrowing deals; force the return of bailout money made to the states; dump Bernanke's 2009 second-term appointment -- potentially nullifying all of the Bernake's decisions; and the list goes on.

And then finally, acceptance: the perception that the entire system of government is corrupt, there is no regard for the law or the Constitution, and any illegal alien or naturalized citizen can argue that he can be president without regard to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5.

Yet despite the blessings of Kübler-Ross, converts to Birtherism continuously ask the question "why?" as it pertains to the existence of systematic efforts to suppress Birther evidence and debate. Although they acknowledge that evil exists in the world, they can't seem to comprehend why opponents to Birtherism, particularly the Republican Party, the Tea Party leadership, and prominent members of the conservative movement, attack them with more vigor and vitriol than the left.

The answer lies in information cascade and Wilfred Trotter's herd-instinct theories.

Information cascade and social human-herd theory are related, if observed in the context of the systematic suppression of Constitutional-Birther debates. Indeed, now that the president's long-form birth certificate has a lengthy line of forgery experts willing to testify that the April 27th White House PDF is a complete digital fabrication, the amount of force to kill the Birther Movement is politically palpable.

In Trotter's herd theories the assertion is made that the instinct to be part of the herd is stronger than self-preservation. Further, if a member of the herd is perceived to be a threat to the herd, the herd will react to destroy that herd member faster than the herd would respond to a threat from the outside.

Information cascade "occurs when people observe the actions of others and then make the same choice that the others have made, independently of their own private information signals. Because it is usually sensible to do what other people are doing, the phenomenon is assumed to be the result of rational choice. Nevertheless, information cascades can sometimes lead to arbitrary or even erroneous decisions."

When combined, these two social theories explain why Dr. Jerome Corsi's book is pooh-poohed by the MSM, why Donald Trump was a falling star after he went "Birther" and is now New York's persona non grata, and why Bill O'Reilly had lies-stated-as-fact upon which he bet his reputation concerning Obama's fraudulent Connecticut social security number disappear from Fox News' website (they can still be seen on YouTube).

It also explains why no member of Congress will address -- factually or morally -- any of the Birther legal, criminal forgery, and SSAN matters. MORE HERE http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/confessions_of_a_birther_evangelist.html





We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

From A to Z: What's wrong with Obama's birth certificate? Examine for yourself...

After years of stonewalling and fighting in court to keep his long-form birth certificate under wraps, President Barack Obama has publicized an image of the document he claims should resolve his birthplace once and for all.
But is it the real deal?


In his speech announcing the birth certificate's release, Obama quickly tried to silence critical analysis of document:
"I know that there's going to be a segment of people for which, no matter what we put out, this issue will not be put to rest, but I'm speaking to the vast majority of the American people," Obama said. "We do not have time for this kind of silliness."
But Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, the only news agency that has waged a relentless investigative campaign on questions swirling around Obama's constitutional eligibility, warns those questions shouldn't be dismissed so quickly.
"The news media and the political establishment were quick to rush to judgment regarding Obama's eligibility in 2008, without any basis," Farah said. "It would be a big mistake for everyone to jump to a conclusion now based on the release of this document, which raises as many questions as it answers."
Jerome Corsi's new book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?," is now available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore.
Some of those questions have already been resolved – such as rumors WND debunked claiming the name of the hospital on the document was fictitious – while others present significant challenges to accepting the birth certificate's validity.

Read more:

Attorney and document experts headed to Hawaii with subpoena demanding Obama's birth records

The birth certificate please! Subpoena to be delivered
Attorney, doc experts to show up at Hawaii Department of Health with court document
Jerome Corsi

Computer scanning expert Doug Vogt and typesetting expert Paul Irey say they will accompany attorney Orly Taitz when she presents to the Hawaii Department of Health a subpoena that should allow her to examine Barack Obama's original 1961 typewritten birth certificate.

Vogt and Irey both told WND they are making travel plans to join Taitz in Honolulu when she goes to the state agency at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 8, to present the subpoena in person.

"We will plan to hold a press conference late in the day of Aug. 8," Vogt said, "and if the document we see varies from the birth certificate documents the White House released, we plan to file criminal charges in Hawaii immediately." 

Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," by Jerome Corsi.

Vogt shared with WND a copy of a letter he has written to Hawaii Attorney General David Louie, putting Louie on notice regarding the reasons he believes the birth certificate released by the White House is fraudulent.

WND previously reported on Vogt's decision to file a 22-page criminal complaint with the FBI.

Irey says it won't take long to evaluate the original birth record, if it exists.

"Over the years of my career, I've seen everything that can be put on paper," he said. "Now that I'm thoroughly familiar with what the White House released, I will be able to tell you within a few minutes, if what the Hawaii DOH has matches what the White House has released, or not.

"I will expect to see the same differences in typeface that are on the White House version, otherwise I will know immediately that what the Hawaii DOH is showing us is a forgery."

Vogt and Irey plan to bring a laptop computer and a portable scanner to the Hawaii DOH for the inspection.

"We will scan the document to compare it to the White House electronic version and the Xerox copies they handed out in the press room," he said. "We will immediately make our scan available to the public over the Internet, so the American public can see for themselves."

Irey told WND he expects the Hawaii DOH at the last minute will do everything possible to prevent Taitz from getting access to the 1961 original Obama birth certificate, if it exists.

"Quite frankly, I doubt the Hawaii DOH has anything to show us," Irey said skeptically, "and if we do see a document, my guess is that it will have been forged for the purpose of showing us something."

Vogt and Irey repeatedly have told WND that if the Hawaii DOH had an original 1961 Obama birth certificate, the most credible thing to have done on April 27 would have been to release that document to the public for professional forensic examination by qualified independent professionals.

As displayed on her website, the July 5 subpoena granted Taitz by the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii allows her to examine the original 1961 Obama birth certificate on Aug. 8 at 10 a.m.:
Taitz v. Asrtue - Subpoena Issued to Loretta Fuddy of HDOH - Obama's Original Vital Records on File

Taitz's subpoena was served upon Loretta Fuddy, directory of the Hawaii Department of Health. Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine is representing Fuddy.

Because Fuddy neglected to file opposition to the court-issued subpoena within the 14 days specified, the Hawaii DOH appears to have little recourse but to comply with the subpoena by producing the Obama original birth certificate for Taitz's examination.

Taitz is planning to travel to the state agency, despite receiving no answer from Fuddy as to whether or not she intends to comply with the subpoena. Taitz put the question to Fuddy in a July 27 letter. MORE HERE http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=327373
We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

Press Core Poll: 75% say Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii

Press Core Poll 28 Jul 2011: 75% say Obama born in Kenya, not Hawaii

Poll Question and Results as of about 9 PM EDT 28 Jul 2011: http://www.scribd.com/doc/61171134/Press-Core-Poll-28-Jul-2011-Was-Obama-Born-in-Kenya-or-Hawaii-75-percent-say-Kenya

Also read this: http://www.scribd.com/doc/53259902/What-U-S-President-in-History-Has-Multiple-Sources-in-a-Foreign-Country-Saying-He-Was-Born-There

And this: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-concerned-americans.html

Participate in the poll here while it is active: http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=3279

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com





What U.S. President in History Has Multiple Sources in a Foreign Country Saying He Was Born There?

We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

Gary v. Fox News' John Gibson: Obama's Social Security Number and Forged Birth Certificate

Video: Gary v. Fox News' John Gibson: Obama's Forged Records --- 7-28-2011 --- VIDEO HERE



Rules for Radicals By Saul Alinsky - 1971 --- http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
Private Investigator: Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number & Selective Service Registration

Rules for Radicals

Barack Obama's Rules for Revolution - the Alinsky Model - by David Horowitz - pub 2009

We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

Interview: Adobe Expert Mara Zebest Explains Obama's Forged Birth Certificate

Adobe expert Mara Zebest explains Obama's forged birth certificate on TruNewsRadio --- 7-27-2011 --- VIDEO HERE





Mara Zebest Adobe Analysis: Obama Long-Form Birth Certificate Report; Final Draft

We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

Senator Sessions provides different explanations why he thinks Obama is eligible to be president

Just why is Obama constitutionally eligible?
Meeting State Department demands updated to being born on American soil --- By Bob Unruh

Explanations from members of Congress about just exactly why Barack Obama is eligible to be president have ranged from the "independent and official investigations" cited by Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., to the online Factcheck.org affirmation of the validity of his birth documentation cited by Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa.

But you'll apparently have to check again later, as the explanations now are changing even from the same congressional office:

WND reported earlier that Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said, "I believe that President Obama has met all the requirements of citizenship as set forth by the U.S. State Department, and therefore is eligible for the office of the presidency." 

Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," autographed by Jerome Corsi, Ph.D.

His newest explanation, however, says Obama is eligible because he was born on American soil.

Here's the first explanation. It clearly shows he's qualified by meeting the citizenship demands "as set forth by the U.S. State Department."

But a subsequent letter was changed, to reflect that Obama has met the requirements of the Constitution and in addition, the U.S. Supreme Court "held that an individual born on American soil is a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution to be elected president. President Obama's birth in Hawaii satisfies that requirement."

The second letter, dated just weeks ago:

"I feel that folks ought to know what their so-called representatives are doing to cover for Obama," the woman who got the letters told WND.

WND previously posted a Congressional Research Service memo on Scribd.com for download that advises members of Congress how to make statements regarding questions about Obama's eligibility

Attached to the memo was an attack-piece published by FactCheck.org to dismiss claims that Obama's short-form Certification of Live Birth, originally published during the 2008 presidential campaign by DailyKos.com, was a forgery.

MORE HERE http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=326737

Degree Verify Certificate: Where was Obama in all of 1981? He wasn't at Columbia like he said he was. Attendance dates 1982 - 1983

Factcheck.org: Barack Obama was a transfer student from California’s Occidental College when he came to Columbia University in 1981 as a 20-year-old junior. LINK

Snopes.com: If he wasn't attending Columbia from 1981-83, he would have had to complete two full years' worth of coursework at (and graduate from) some other accredited college — yet his time between the end of his Columbia days in 1983 and his entering Harvard Law in 1988 is accounted for (working at the Business International Corporation and the New York Public Interest Research Group, then serving as director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago), and no other school claims him as an alumnus, nor does anyone purport to have encountered him as a classmate or student at any other college or university during that period. LINK

ABC News: According to the Obama campaign, In 1981 -- the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University -- Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia. After that visit, Obama traveled to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from there. The Obama campaign says Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks, staying with his friend's family in Karachi and also visiting Hyderabad in Southern India. LINK

Cpt. Pamela Barnett: Obama said that he visited Pakistan in 1981 in trying to boast his "international" experience. However, according to school records Obama was not attending Columbia University as he has said.

SO WHERE WAS OBAMA IN 1981????

Obama was most likely on an Indonesian passport when he visited Pakistan as the DHS and DOJ redact all records that point to him being adopted by Lo Lo Soetoro. Obama was in Pakistan when a murderous muslim ruler was in control of Pakistan and warring with the Soviet communists.

There is nothing that proves obama was in the U.S. in 1981 so was he supporting muslim or communist factions in Pakistan in all of 1981????

Did Saudi nationals also buy obama's Columbia degree so that he could get into Harvard. Percy Sutton, Malcolm X's attorney said Saudi nationals paid for his Harvard degree. Did they also buy him his Columbia degree without him finishing his required courses?

4 year degree in 3 years at a prestigious school like Columbia after a transfer? highly unlikely. did a Saudi Prince make a huge donation to pay for their operative obama to get his degree?

Liberals.. when are you going to start to get worried about this man Obama aka Soebarkah aka Barry Soetoro? LINK
Degree Verify Certificate: Barack Obama, Columbia University 9/1/1982 - 5/31/1983

Arizona Tea Party Groups Overwhelmingly Pass Motion for Rep. Franks to Open Congressional Investigation into Obama's Eligibility

Jeff Lichter: On Monday and Tuesday evenings, July 25th and 26th, the South Peoria Tea Party by a vote of 8-0 and then the Sun City West Tea Party by a vote of 56 - 5 voted to pass the motion below. One week ago, the Surprise Arizona Tea Party passed the same motion by 45 - 4. All of these votes occurred in districts served by Congressman Trent Franks and he is being informed of the results.

This same motion is forecast to spread to other Tea Party groups around the nation. 

THE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION MOTION:

We, the members of the [[ Surprise* ]] Tea Party, hereby with urgent demand, formally summon our Congressman Trent Franks to within the next 30 days publicly call for a full and open Congressional investigation to include discovery and public testimony into the following questions relating to Barack Obama. First, is Barack Obama a natural born citizen eligible to hold the office of President per the terms and historical meaning of Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution as stated in the Supreme Court case of Minor vs. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1875 )and why was Barack Obama not held to the same standard as was John McCain in April of 2008 when the US Senate via Senate Res. 511 declared McCain to be a qualified natural born citizen by virtue of “being born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 ? “ Secondly, is Barack Obama holding a legitimate Social Security number issued by the Social Security Administration only to him or is he employing a number (042-68-4425), or numbers also issued previously to a different citizen or citizens and where is a copy of the SS-5 application form in the SSA records needed to obtain that number? And third, is the recently released long form birth certificate which he personally endorsed on April 27, 2011 from the White House Press Room legitimate and identical to an original held by the Department of Health in Hawaii or was it a forged document and therefore a felony under U.S. Criminal codes?

* South Peoria
* Sun City West

http://www.franks.house.gov/pages/contact

We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5

30-year Software and Graphic Designer Provides More Proof Obama's Birth Document is a Forgery

Layered colors 'simple proof' of Obama document forgery 
Software designer explains: 'No scanner has X-ray vision' --- Jerome Corsi

Why are there white dots on the Obama birth certificate, and how did they get there?

These are questions asked by Tom Harrison, a software designer with more than 30 years experience in graphic design. Harrison – a 58 year-old Dartmouth graduate with a background in mathematics, physics and computer science – believes the dots prove the document is a forgery.

The Oregon-based computer software business he manages, TS4, has done general computer consulting, embedded design, software and web design, and integration and networking since 1980.

He has used Adobe Illustrator since 1989. 

Jerome Corsi's book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?" is available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore

Harrison's expertise is demonstrated in his report to WND, which includes detailed instructions that allow the reader to duplicate his results using Adobe software.

Read Harrison's full report

"I've read a lot about the purported Obama birth certificate, but I have not seen anywhere the simplest proof that it is a forgery: the overwhelming evidence provided by the presence of two 'white dot' groups in the image," he explained to WND.

"While many apologists have claimed the layering of the document is a natural outcome of optimized scanning, there is one thing that the scanning process cannot do, even if it is separating layers: it cannot create two separate colors for any given pixel," he said.

In other words, if you lift an item out of an image, what is left is nothing: transparent space. In fact, all the apologists claiming validity of the document point out that the "white" (actually, transparent) space behind the lifted images is expected. In this case, however, there are two colors associated with the pixels in those two subgroups – green underneath and opaque (not transparent) white on top, and – if anyone is confused by the difference between transparent (rendered white by convention) and opaque white – the "white is not underneath the subgroup, visible when the subgroup is made not visible, but is actually the pixel color when the subgroup is visible – exactly the opposite of claimed "normal" effects.

Put simply, the white dots, he contends, are evidence of two different colors occupying the same pixel, a result that is not possible if the Obama birth certificate were simply a scan.

Two separate colors occupying the same pixel result when one color is in one layer and the second color is in another layer, demonstrating that the document was created electronically, with the layers being used to transplant manipulated information into the final product.

"If the document were indeed scanned, there could not be varied green hues behind the white dots," Harrison insisted. "No scanner has X-ray vision. Nothing really complicated: No pixel can have two colors from a scanner."

What is Harrison's explanation for why the white dots were left in the final Obama birth certificate?

"I suspect it was an early attempt at visually editing out some inconvenient spots, somewhere else in the document," he answered. "That method wouldn't work too well, so I think the composer simply dragged them off to the side to try something different, then forgot about them.

"Once de-selected, they would be practically invisible when placed as they were, over the mottled safety paper background."

As evidence of this, Harrison cites the two blue boxes that pop up to surround the dots when image groups 1 and 2 are selected in the Adobe Illustrator's pop-up box, as demonstrated in the next section of this article.

To the untrained eye, the blue boxes appear to contain nothing of importance, and it is difficult to understand why the boxes are on the document, unless the person who assembled the electronic birth certificate file placed the boxes there for some reason.

Harrison believes the creator of the document made the error because of a "tight schedule, difficult job, guilty conscience" and "didn't double-check the removal of 'junk.'"

White dots in the Obama birth certificate

When the Obama birth certificate is viewed in Adobe Illustrator, two groups of white dots are identifiable in two separate layers in the document.

As seen in Exhibit 1, Harrison says the top group of white dots – identified when a blue rectangle pops onto the document when the first image group in the layers pop-up box is clicked on – was placed into the document as an outside link that was scaled 24 percent and rotated -90 degrees.

The second group of white dots is seen when a blue rectangle pops into the document when the second image group in the layers pop-up box is clicked on. Again, the links box identifies that the second group of white dots was placed into the document identically to the first, by being scaled 24 percent and rotated -90 degrees, as seen in Exhibit 2. MORE HERE http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=326565

Full Analysis: 30-Year Software and Graphic Designer Provides More Proof Obama's Birth Document is a Forgery

Ken Allen: Department of State FOIA Response Related to Barry Soetoro and Barack Obama Sr.

Can anyone figure out what this latest document released under the Freedom of Information Act is? Other records released related to this FOIA can be seen below and here.

Ken Allen - DOS FOIA Response Related to Barry Soetoro and Barack Obama Sr. - July 22, 2011

FOIA Release: Records Relating to Barry Soetoro/Stanley Ann Dunham/Barack Obama Sr./Lolo Soetoro - Departme...

Ken Allen Freedom of Information Act Request Relating to Barry Soetoro / Stanley Ann Dunham / Barack Obama ...

Taitz v Astrue - Rules Violations - Scathing Memorandum and Order from Judge Lamberth - Obama's Social Security Number Case

Taitz v Astrue - Rules Violations - Scathing Memorandum and Order from Judge Lamberth - Obama's Connecticut Social Security Number Case - 7-25-2011

Taitz v Astrue - Order to Seal Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment - Possible Sanctions against Taitz - 7-25-2011

update: Things are not what they seem, I have a record of all the phone conversations with the DC court, as well as records of all the faxes and e-mails sent to them

Some employees of the DC court are lying to the judge. I kept record of all the phone calls, faxes and e-mails to the DC court and I have multiple witnesses as well. Some employee or employees of the DC court is/are lying and will be held accountable. On 07.21.2011 a fax was accepted in the DC court and was hand carried to the chambers of the chief judge. Sua sponte decision of the court on 07.21.2011 allowing me to resubmit the opposition was related to the fax received.

I will resubmit the opposition and memorandum in support of the opposition to motion for summary judgment yet again. It will be done today. Seal means, that you cannot see it on the electronic docket, but the documents are there and will be considered. The seal will be removed, hopefully tomorrow.

A lot is going on right now. Currently I am concentrating on doing everything I possibly can to inspect the original BC in HI and the original SSA application for Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425, which Obama is fraudulently using. So far there is no formal opposition from HI and the Department of Justice did not file a reply to my opposition brief. Both Attorney General of HI and the US attorney for the District of Columbia are out of time to file. I am not sure what is the explanation for lack of opposition on their part: maybe, they think that the fix is in or maybe they are afraid to be prosecuted later for the obstruction of Justice and aiding and abetting the SSA fraud or maybe there is some technical glitch. Another legal action will be filed soon.

I will provide more information later. It also will be a part of my book, that will be coming out later. The book is tentatively titled “from the queen of the birthers. Secrets and intrigue behind the crime of the century” http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=24145
Taitz v Astrue - Rules Violations - Memorandum and Order from Judge Lamberth - 7/25/2011
Taitz v Astrue - Order to Seal Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment - 7/25/2011

Army Colonel Lawrence Sellin: Obama’s ineligibility; Prepare to defend America – Death of the Democratic Party

Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – Death of the Democratic Party - Lawrence Sellin

When this episode in the American saga is written, historians will note that Barack Obama did not kill the Democratic Party; he was merely the murder weapon.

He represents the Democrats’ suicide cocktail of hubris and a tyrannical lust for power, the arrogance of thinking themselves above the law.

American politicians and journalists have degenerated so far that it is now possible for a President of the United States to present a clearly forged document on national television and no one blinks an eye.

We have an illegal President, a Congress that tolerates criminal acts, and an intentionally impotent judiciary.

The government has become hopelessly criminal and corrupt, where politicians, once elected, ignore their constituents, placing personal and partisan interests above those of the country.

To protect their personal power and privilege, this government is deliberately closing its eyes to the greatest fraud and cover-up in the history of the United States.

Obama should be indicted on multiple felony counts. All members of Congress should be indicted on a charge of Misprision of felony for actively covering up his ongoing felonies.

When Obama took the Presidential “Oath or Affirmation” of office, knowing that he is not “a natural born Citizen,” he committed the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7).

Obama’s purported “Oath or Affirmation” being perjured from the beginning, makes every subsequent act in the usurped “Office of President” a criminal offense under Title 18, United States Code, Section 242.

There is overwhelming evidence that the Certificate of Live Birth presented by Obama as his own on April 27, 2011 is a forgery.

There is sufficient evidence that Obama has illegally used a Social Security Number and has a forged Selective Service registration.

There is now only the most tenuous of threads, if that at all, connecting the American people to the present government. The people are ready to rebel.

The truth about Obama’s birth certificate will soon be disclosed. That will be followed by a flood of revelations about his past, which will send political shock waves throughout the nation.

The American people will then take out their vengeance on the political establishment and the main stream media. We will demand justice and the truth. MORE HERE http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/38774