- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

How does Obama's document stack up against genuine BC?

Posted By Jerome R. Corsi On 09/11/2011 @ 8:48 pm In Front Page | Comments Disabled

A professional typographer with 50 years experience in the business has confirmed that the typeface in an authentic Hawaii Department of Health long-form birth certificate issued in 1961 is consistent, and concludes the document released by the White House as Barack Obama’s 1961 birth certificate – with its typeface anomalies – is anything but genuine.

“From the beginning, when I saw that some of the typed letters on the Obama long-form birth certificate did not match for size or style, I found evidence the document was a forgery,” retired New York City typographer Paul Irey told WND. “Still, I wanted to see other birth certificates from the same era and from the same office in the state of Hawaii.”

The difficulty with that, however, has been that the Hawaii Department of Health in Honolulu has refused to answer requests from various researchers, including WND staff, who have requested permission to see authentic birth certificates immediately preceding and immediately succeeding Obama’s for comparative analysis.

Autographed copies of Jerome Corsi’s “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” are available only from the WND Superstore

And as WND has reported, the Hawaii Department of Health has gone so far as to issue regulations making it difficult for people born in Hawaii and their immediate family members to obtain anything but the short-form Certifications of Live Birth, which are computer-generated and contain no original images.

“Obtaining an authentic Obama-era birth certificate from Hawaii was also difficult because most people do not want to publicize their birth certificate on line for all to see,” Irey acknowledged.

WND previously has reported on Irey’s studies that demonstrated that different sized and shaped images appear on Obama’s document for the exact same letter.

Irey concluded the different size and shape typefaces meant the Obama birth certificate had been composed on different typewriters – a finding that led Irey to conclude the Obama birth certificate is a forgery assembled by using more than one birth certificate as templates. He said it appears images of words and letters were taken and copied onto the forged Obama birth certificate.

“Steel-stamped letters typed by a manual typewriter do not expand to larger sizes and morph into different styles and shapes,” Irey said. “They are irrefutable proofs of forgery.”

For the analysis to be conclusive, however, Irey wanted to see a known-to-be-authentic birth certificate issued by the Hawaii Department of Health from the Obama era to see if the typeface on this comparison birth certificate was consistent in size and shape – a result Irey felt would demonstrate that an authentic Hawaii Department of Health document was typed by the same typewriter.

A comparison birth certificate appears

The breakthrough making comparative analysis possible came only after a WND reader born in Kapiolani Hospital in Hawaii within about two weeks of Barack Obama’s birth voluntarily submitted to WND her own known-to-be-authentic birth certificate for analysis.

As seen in Exhibit 1, the known-to-be-authentic birth certificate, shown here in redacted form so as to eliminate all personally identifying information, was issued for a baby born in Kapiolani Hospital on Aug. 23, 1961, exactly 19 days after Barack Obama was born at the same hospital, on Aug. 4, 1961.


Exhibit 1. Authentic 1961 comparison Hawaii Birth Certificate, Kapiolani Hospital, Aug. 23, 1961, redacted to conceal private identifying information, front side

Exhibit 2 is the reverse side of the birth certificate seen in Exhibit 1, the authentic comparison birth certificate that is a copy of the original that the Hawaii Department of Health issued on Aug. 8, 1995, in response to the person named in the certificate.


Exhibit 2, Authentic 1961 comparison Hawaii Birth Certificate, Kapiolani Hospital, Aug. 23, 1961, reverse side, showing registrar’s date stamp, registrar’s name/authentication stamp, and embossed state seal

The 1961 comparison birth certificate shown in Exhibits 1 and 2 was issued in 1995 by the Hawaii Department of Health at approximately half the size of the Obama birth certificate released by the White House on April 27, as evidenced in the PDF file and as Xerox copies handed to the press.

The 1961 comparison birth certificate has the registrar’s name stamp and the registrar’s authentication/name stamp on the reverse side of the document, while the registrar stamps on the Obama birth certificate appear on the front side of the document.

The state seal is obvious in the 1961 comparison birth certificate, while the state seal is virtually invisible to the naked eye in the Obama long-form birth certificate PDF and Xerox copies released by the White House on April 27.

Note also, that the 1961 comparison birth certificate shows no smiley face in the “A” of “Alvin” in the registrar’s authentication/name stamp, nor is the “THE” in “THE RECORD” misspelled as “TXE RECORD,” as WND has documented regarding the Obama birth certificate.

Irey’s methodology

As seen in Exhibit 3, Irey has arranged the letters and characters from the two birth certificates into three groups to facilitate comparison.


Exhibit 3, Letters and characters for comparison, 1961 comparison birth certificate versus Obama birth certificate

Irey worked from a non-redacted copy of the 1961 comparison birth certificate on which all information originally typed on the certificate was available for analysis.

Still, he was careful not to reveal the identity of the person to whom the birth certificate had been issued in 1961.

“When I finally did get an authentic 1961 birth certificate to compare with the Obama birth certificate, I had to promise to mix up the letters and do my comparisons only after that, to prevent anyone from using the letters in my analysis to reconstruct information that had been redacted to protect privacy,” he explained.

Irey explained how the three letter/character sections seen in Exhibit 3 were constructed:

  1. The top section includes all the letters seen in the Obama birth certificate, assembled together for simplicity of viewing, such that line-over-line reflects exactly how the letters/characters appear on the Obama birth certificate.

  2. The second section involves the same letters as the first section, all drawn from the Obama birth certificate, but now arranged alphabetically. First the capital letters appear, then the numbers, followed finally by the lower case letters. The last line lists letters/characters that only are shown on the Obama birth certificate once. Their value for being included here is to permit a comparison with characters/letters shown in the third section.
  3. The third section is all of the type taken from the 1961 comparison birth certificate that is a compilation of the letters/characters arranged as in the second group.

Irey explained that the letters/characters in the third section are slightly bolder due to the half-size reduction of the 1961 comparison birth certificate compared to the Obama birth certificate Xerox copies from which Irey extracted the letters.

He further noted that the Obama White House to date has refused to give permission to the Hawaii Department of Health to release for independent professional forensic examination or to the public at large the original paper copies still held secretly in the agency’s vault.

Thus, it is not possible at this time to determine the size of the original 1961 paper birth documents or to extract letters/characters from the original document itself.

Another necessary consequence of the Hawaii DOH refusing to allow independent forensic access to original birth certificate documents immediately preceding and following the Obama birth certificate is that letters/character comparisons are necessarily done on scans of document copies, both in the case of the 1961 comparison birth certificate and the Obama birth certificate itself.

“Working from a scanned copy does not invalidate the analysis,” Irey insisted. “Anything that is done to a document in reproducing it will be done to the entire document equally at the time the document is copied or scanned.”

He further pointed out that in no case can the process of duplication – even if it involves copying an original document and then scanning that document – take one letter or character on a page and selectively enlarge it, or take the next letter or character on the page and make it smaller.

Letter matching

In Exhibit 4, Irey arranged in the left column 12 sets of letters/characters his previous analyses published by WND have shown to vary in shape and size, indicating the letters came from different typewriters.

“Steel-stamped letters typed by manual typewriters do not expand to larger sizes and morph into different styles of type,” he said.



Exhibit 4, Letter/Character comparison, Obama birth certificate versus 1961 comparison birth certificate

“The left column shows 12 examples of typed letters found on the Obama birth certificate that do not match either for size or style,” he explained. 

All the letters in the right column were judged to be consistent in size and style, strongly suggesting the 1961 comparison birth certificate had been typed on one typewriter.

“I feel Exhibit 4 provides convincing proof the Obama birth certificate was mistakenly composed by typed letters borrowed from other birth certificates,” he said. “I believe the forger did not notice that some of the typed letters came from different typewriters and sometimes did not match the others.”

WND asked Irey why a forger would not simply scan one letter – for example, one “t” – and use that “t” over and over again, rather than go looking for a different “t” every time the forger needed a “t.”

“The forger probably scanned a lot of documents and just used letters conveniently, rather than worrying that the same ‘t’ should be used each time,” he answered.

“The forger may not have realized that each typewriter has its own particular variances that make typeface from that typewriter recognizable. Someone expert only in using computer software like Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator might not realize that all typewritten type is not the same.”

‘There’s no doubt the Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery’

After analyzing the typeface on the two documents Irey felt the results of the study were conclusive: “Obama’s birth certificate was typed on more than one typewriter – just what we would expect if the document was forged. The authentic 1961 birth certificate was typed on only one typewriter – just what we would expect if the document was legitimate.”

To make it clear, he said, “This comparison study done with another birth certificate that authentically came from a person born at Kapiolani Hospital shortly after Obama alleges he was born there has proven to me that we have one birth certificate with many mismatching typed letters – Obama’s birth certificate – and then we have another from the same hospital without any mismatched letters.”

He continued: “Common sense tells us that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, precisely because the letters typed on the document don’t match.”

Irey was willing to stake his professional reputation on this result.

“My 50 years in typography, my 25 years composing pages with Macintosh computers, and owning and using nearly every type of reproduction equipment leave me no doubt: the Obama birth certificate is a forgery.”

Irey said not only is the Obama birth certificate a forgery, but it is “a poorly done forgery that only an inexperienced [person] would ever dare claim was authentic.”


Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.