- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Editor’s note: Jerome Corsi’s “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to Be President” is available today for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, exclusively by the WND Superstore.
HONOLULU, Hawaii – Could it be that the document released by the White House as President Obama’s “Certificate of Live Birth” from the state of Hawaii is linked with a well-known forgery that states Obama was born in Kenya and his Hawaiian birth was registered by his grandmother?
An analysis posted on Facebook by GoodTryBarry shows that markings on the Kenya document appear to be the same as markings on the White House release.
The image below, for example, shows a “2” penciled in on the green White House document on the left, just below the word “Plantation.” The same marking appears in nearly the same location on the Kenya document on the right.
The difference in backgrounds was explained earlier by Department of Health spokeswoman Janice Okubo, who said safety paper was used to make the copy of the original birth certificate requested by Obama. The original documents in state records apparently do not have the background that appears on the copy.
Similarly, on the Kenya document, there is a mark that the birth was reported by “Other,” meaning not a parent. On the White House document is a series of scribblings that appear to be centered on the reference to an “M.D.” reporting the birth. But they also would cover any X’s that might be in the “Other” category.
And for the race of father, an undetermined marking appears on the Kenya document in the same place where there is a “9” on the White House document. There also is a fuzzy remnant on the White House document in the corresponding place on the Kenya document where the father’s race is stated as “Negro-African”:
The much-discussed X’s that are above the boxes to mark a “Twin” or “Triplet” birth on the White House image also
are in evidence on the Kenya document.
The White House released its document April 27 as “proof positive” that Obama was born in Hawaii in an announcement accompanied by a rare presidential statement on the issue:
Image released by the White House April 27, 2011
The Kenya document was published March 18, 2010, on a website called the Aloha Reporter. It accompanies a story about how the state’s House Judiciary Committee was considering a plan to allow government officials to ignore requests for state records regarding Obama. There is no explanation of the image, which can be seen here:
A closeup of the document is here:
Among other things, the “Certificate of Live Birth” on the Reporter page says, “Birthplace: Kenya; Registered Honolulu HRS 338-17.8 per
The purported signature by Obama’s grandmother misspells her name, and it lists the race for the father “Barack Hussein Obama Sr.” as “Negro-African.”
Honolulu private investigator Takeyuki Irei and two retired police officers in the city who asked not to be named have told WND the White House document appears to be a forgery, and they are trying to identify who created it.
A WND request to Department of Health spokeswoman Okubo on whether the White House image is an accurate representation of what the state has in its files was forwarded to the office of Gov. Neil Abercrombie, whose spokeswoman declined to respond.
A WND staff analysis concluded some of the markings also appear on the birth documents released earlier by the Nordyke twins, born at Kapiolani one day after Obama’s reported birth at the same hospital.
One suggestion is that when Hawaii moved to computerized records, a worker performing the data entry made similar markings on all original birth documents.
Other explanations also are possible, including that either of the documents could have been copied from the other or even based on a third document.
But it appears unlikely a random computer operator could have created the documents without inside information, because the chance of guessing the placement of the markings appears low.
John J. Bulten, a tech services expert, WND editor and database analyst for several high-tech firms, noted several other anomalies:
- The Obama documents both contain typing with irregularly aligned text. Consistent left alignment appears in only three lines of the White House document and no lines of the Aloha Reporter document. If typed, this lack of alignment would suggest a mostly random carriage-return repositioning. On both Nordyke certificates, the same six primary lines are left-aligned, as if tabbed back each time to the typewriter’s carriage-return stop, and all other lines contain significant consistent inward tabbing.
- In the Obama documents, the repositioning in boxes 10, 13 and 15 is identical, in the midst of otherwise apparent random alignment. Box 13’s “Stanley” is exactly one character to the left of the other two entries.
- In the Nordyke documents, the capital letters have a constant slightly higher baseline than the lowercase letters, consistent with a slightly weakened shifting mechanism on a well-used ’60s typewriter. In both Obama documents all characters have the same baseline, consistent with a newer typewriter.
- The Obama documents both contain type misalignments not present in the Nordyke certificates. In the Kenya Obama document, for example, “Student” in box 12b is more than half a character right of “Negro,” and “Caucasian,” below it, is almost a full character right of “Student.” This is consistent with typing on a loose paper freely repositioned after every entry. Unexplained vertical misalignments such as “Barack II” and “Honolulu 1” are also prevalent. In the Obama document released by the White House, the “X” in box 3 is at least half a character right of “BARACK,” and the “K” in “Kansas” is vertically misaligned and misstruck. In the Nordyke certificates, all text is granularly positioned, absent of vertical misstrikes or irrational horizontal character alignments.
As WND reported, a computer document expert who analyzed the online image of Barack Obama’s purported Certificate of Live Birth for WND concluded there are anomalies inconsistent with a simple scanning process, and there is evidence it has been manipulated, but there’s no way to determine exactly what may have been modified.
The White House declined to comment.
While the White House was expressing confidence the document would answer all of the questions about his presidential eligibility, those who contend the country’s founders excluded dual citizens from qualifying as a “natural born Citizen,” as the Constitution requires, say the document actually proves Obama’s ineligibility.
Barack Obama Sr., who is listed as the father, was never was a U.S. citizen.
The president himself even seemed to acknowledge the relevance of parental citizenship when he co-sponsored a resolution to address Sen. John McCain’s presidential eligibility that implied a “natural born Citizen” must be born to “American citizen” parents.
Hawaii officials say they have Obama’s original birth certificate and made copies for the president. One of the copies then was scanned and posted on the White House website.
The image posted online was analyzed by Ivan Zatkovich of Tampa-based eComp Consultants, which consults on intellectual property for telecommunications, Web publishing and ecommerce and has provided services for corporations such as McGraw-Hill, Houghton-Mifflin, Citicorp and Amazon.com. Zatkovich has 28 years experience in computer science and document management. For more than 10 years, he has provided expert testimony in federal court in both criminal and civil litigation.
He concluded that the multiple layers of the PDF document are anomalous.
“When a paper document is scanned on a scanner and saved as a PDF file it normally contains only a single layer of graphical information. The PDF that appears on the White House website however, contains multiple layers of graphic information. Multiple layers usually appear in a document like this when it is being edited or modified in some fashion,” he said.
“It is possible to take a single layer PDF and inadvertently create multiple layers, without changing the image in any fashion. But that does not appear to be the case here. The multiple layers in the PDF document are a result of changes made to the image,” his report said. Operations that were done to the image cannot be determined at this point.”
Among the various items that were separated into different layers include the main text, the mother’s occupation, the dates accepted, the stamp and signature of the state registrar and the time stamp of the state registrar:
The document is broken into layers.
The background layer – with all of the additional layers removed – has only random portions of signatures and a white outline in places where the text appears on other layers:
The background, without layers of information added on top
The main layer of text shows most of the wording on the document, with exceptions such as the first part of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama’s signature.
The layer with the main parts of the text
In field 17a, under “Type of Occupation Outside Home During Pregnancy,” the typed answer “None” is separated into two layers, with “Non” in one layer and “e” in another. Box 20, indicating the date the document was accepted, shows a similar separation of words.
Unusual division of characters of information on different layers
The report said there are two groups of overlays, the first including the main page of text and another including the mother’s occupation. The second group includes the stamps of the local registrar, the registrar general, the state registrar and the time stamp of the state registrar.
“All of the overlays were of a higher resolution than the background layer,” the report said. “This suggests that the overlays [were] created to enhance that content (i.e. make the text darker and/or the edges sharper). The only two plausible explanations for this pattern of layers is: 1. Someone was changing the content of both the text and the stamps. 2. Someone was systematically enhancing the black text layers for legibility, and then enhancing the stamp overlays separately for legibility.”
Zatkovich told WND that the White House image “has specific content extracted from that base layer and enhanced.”
He said, “This was done through an explicit operation to edit and/or enhance the printing in the document. There is no ambiguity here. There was an explicit action by a person to modify the document. … Mostly like to enhance the legibility, but still an explicit action none the less.”
He explained the analysis he did was similar to the analysis that routinely is done on evidentiary documents for cell phones and computers in cases involving child porn, fraud and murder cases.
“The content clearly indicates that the document was knowingly and explicitly edited and modified before it was placed on the Web,” he said.
A video probing the new revelations has been posted online at YouTube and is embedded here:
Note: Media interested in interviewing Jerome Corsi beginning next Tuesday when his book is officially released should email firstname.lastname@example.org.
WND Editor Joseph Farah is available to discuss today’s breaking stories on eligibility. Contact email@example.com.