WND warned Obama would release forged birth doc

Kapi'olani hospital in Honolulu

Nearly two months before Barack Obama released what he claims is his valid Hawaii long-form birth certificate, a document met with accusations of fraud by experts, WND was warned by an intelligence source in contact with Hawaii officials that a forged version would be released.

No story was published in WND, because the unnamed confidential source's story could not be corroborated.

"I think it's important for the public to know that we were warned by a source who had provided reliable information in the past about the controversy over Obama's eligibility that something was about to be released," said Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND. "It was my decision not to go with the story then. And it's my decision to make this warning public now in light of the unanswered questions about the document released by the White House."

The source warned in February that the long-form birth certificates issued to the Nordyke twins one day after Obama was born create a barrier for anyone attempting to create a fraudulent long-form, Kapi'olani-generated birth certificate for Obama.

Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in modern history, in "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President."

The Hawaiian source pointed out to WND the key to understanding why forging a Kapi'olani birth certificate posed problems for Obama lies in an analysis of the certificate numbers the Hawaii Department of Health issued to twin daughters born to Eleanor Nordyke at the Kapi'olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on Aug. 5, 1961, one day after Obama was supposedly born at the facility.

The source warned that Obama supporters in Hawaii were contemplating the release of fraudulent Obama birth records in the run-up to the 2012 presidential elections.

The source further warned that the document fraud being contemplated would be sufficiently expert that it could only be detected by forensic examination of the originals, not digitized copies or photographs circulated out on the Internet. The White House has not released originals for examination.

Here is the crux of the problem any forger attempting to produce false Obama birth records faces:

As WND reported in July 2009, a close examination of the long-form birth certificates issued by Kapi'olani to the Nordyke twins further confirms that the number sequence precedes the registration number given President Obama, even though President Obama was born supposedly at the same hospital a day earlier than the Nordyke Twins.
Susan Nordyke, the first twin, was born at 2:12 p.m. local time and was given File No. 151 – 61 – 10637, which was filed with the Hawaii Registrar on Aug. 11, 1961.
Gretchen Nordyke, the second twin, was born at 2:17 p.m. and was given File No. 151 – 61 – 10638, which was also filed with the Hawaii Registrar on Aug. 11, 1961.
Yet, according to the short-form birth record released by FactCheck.org during the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama was given a higher number than the Nordyke twins, File Number 151 – 1961 – 10641, even though he was born on Aug. 4, 1961, the day before the Nordyke twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii Department of Health registrar three days earlier, on Aug. 8, 1961.

Any long-form, Kapi'olani Hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama carrying the certificate number displayed on the FactCheck.org certification of live birth would be an obvious forgery, the source said, because, if Obama had been born on Aug. 4, 1961, as claimed, the certificate number of his long-form, Kapi'olani Hospital-generated birth certificate would have carried a number preceding the certificate numbers on the authentic Nordyke twin birth certificates.

Yet, if a forger were to release a long-form, Kapi'olani Hospital-generated birth certificate with a number earlier in sequence to the certificate numbers for the Kapi'olani twins, the source contended, that would prove the FactCheck.org certification of live birth was a fraud, as has been widely speculated since the document first appeared on the Internet.

"What I am saying is that WND was not surprised by the release of the document from the White House," said Farah. "We were tipped off. We expected it. We just didn't know when it was coming. But now Obama has released a document he will be forced to live with – one that has all the appearances of being fraudulent and not reflective of Obama's own carefully crafted life story."

The image released by the White House has been challenged by a number of experts, including Ivan Zatkovich of Tampa-based eComp Consultants, who concluded after analyzing the layers in the PDF file released by the White House: "The content clearly indicates that the document was knowingly and explicitly edited and modified before it was placed on the web."

Image released by the White House April 27

Zatkovich, with 28 years experience in computer science and document management and 10 years of providing expert testimony in federal court, said the multiple PDF document layers are unusual.

"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," his report 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."

Among the items that were separated into different layers are the main text, the mother's occupation, the dates accepted and the stamp and signature of the state registrar:

The document is broken into layers.

The background layer – with the additional layers removed – essentially has the text without random portions of signatures and a white border where the text appears on other layers:

The background, without layers of information added on top

Also, the main layer of text contains most of the wording on the document, with strange exceptions such as the first part of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama's signature.

The layer with the main parts of the text

Karl Denninger, the former CEO of MCSNet, a Chicago networking and Internet company, says the presence of "kerning" in the text confirms manipulation.

Kerning is the squeezing of letters into a line so that they intrude into adjacent letter spaces. It has become routine since the advent of word processors and computers but is impossible with a typewriter.

Denninger explains that in the image above, of the name of the hospital, the "a" and the "p" share vertical space on the line.

"This process, of course, requires that you know what the next letter is. With a computer this is pretty easy, since the computer can retroactively go back and adjust, and it also can typeset the current letter with the knowledge of what the previous one was," he reported. "A typewriter, on the other hand, is a mechanical device. It does not know what the next letter is that you will type, nor does it know what the last letter was that you typed. It thus has a typeface that always leaves physical space between the boundary of each character."

His full explanation is on video:

"To refute this point you must come up with a typewriter that contains a flux capacitor and thus is capable of accurately predicting the future," he said. "This document has been assembled by somebody on a computer."

He contends "there's only one way we're going to get the truth – a forensic document examiner is going to have to go look at the certificate and authenticate it. The real one – not a printout."

A YouTube contributor posted a video that claimed the White House either was ignorant in posting the document or was submarined by someone inside its walls who wanted people to suspect the document.

Perhaps the most significant unresolved issues is that two weeks before Obama finally released his "long-form birth certificate," Hawaii's former Health Department chief, Chiyome Fukino – the one official who claimed to have examined Obama's original birth document – told NBC News' national investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff that she had seen the original birth certificate and that it was "half typed and half handwritten."

However, the document released by the White House was entirely typed, except for signatures and two dates. What Fukino described is apparently a different document from what Obama released to the public.

Among other issues that remain about the document:

The objectivity of "experts" cited by the mainstream media to verify the birth certificate is suspect, including that of Fox News Channel's Jean-Claude Tremblay, who assured Americans they "should not be suspicious" of the document. But WND discovered Tremblay had heralded Obama's election victory in an online post.
The birth certificate's reported delivering physician, Dr. David Sinclair, differs from previously published reports and even the myth-busting Snopes.com's original entry, which named Dr. Rodney T. West as the doctor of record.
Obama's purported birth certificate contains over a dozen differences in form from the verified Hawaii copy of the birth certificate issued to the Nordyke twins, born the next day at the same reported hospital.
The local registrar listed in the Nordyke twins' birth certificate is notably different than the local registrar on the Obama birth certificate.
Though Obama was born before the Nordyke twins, and though his birth was filed with the registrar three days before the twins' birth, Obama's purported birth certificate has a higher registration number.
The age of Obama's father, as listed on the document, conflicts with previously discovered documents about Barack Obama Sr.
There are no notations on the document indicating Obama's adoption by his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, as are often made – even replacing the name of the birth parents – when a child in the U.S. is adopted.

There are Obama critics, too, who say that the document released by the White House, if authentic, proves Obama's ineligibility. They cite the indication that Barack Obama Sr. was listed as the father but he never was a U.S. citizen. They contend those who wrote the requirement for presidents to be a "natural born citizen" disqualified dual citizens at birth, such as Obama.

Obama himself even seemed to hold that position, suggesting in a resolution he co-sponsored to address Sen. John McCain's status as a "natural born Citizen" that the status requires "American citizen" parents.