The occasional open thread: long-form edition

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Dr. Conspiracy

What’s on your Obama conspiratorial mind?

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in Open Mike. Bookmark the permalink.

125 Responses to The occasional open thread: long-form edition

  1. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 12, 2011 at 7:18 pm  (Quote)

    Pew Research poll on political alignment. Taken before long-form birth certificate release.

    Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology

    http://people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/

    This is a large study (web pages worth of analysis). Notable is that among “Staunch Conservatives”: most (72%) agree with the Tea Party, 54% regularly watch Fox News, and nearly half (47%) believe that President Obama was born outside the U.S.

  2. obsolete says:
    May 12, 2011 at 7:24 pm  (Quote)

    Good MediaMatters article:

    Everything You Need To Know About Being A “Natural-Born Citizen”

    “Were you born within the territorial boundaries of the United States? Were your parents not in the service of a foreign government at the time of your birth? If so, then congratulations! You’re a natural-born citizen of the United States of America. If you’re over 35 and have been a resident of the U.S. for 14 years, then you also meet the basic requirements to run for the presidency, as laid out in Article II of the Constitution. What’s more, you share these qualities with the current President of the United States, Barack Obama (update your resume).

    However, there is a small segment of America that would seek to deny you the rights you have as a natural-born American citizen. They are the remnants of the birther movement whose determination to the cause has not wavered even after President Obama released his birth certificate and proved beyond any doubt that he was, in fact, born in the United States. They are the post-birthers.

    They will deploy a variety of arguments endeavoring to explain why you and the president are a second-class citizens undeserving of your birthright. But rest assured: those arguments are all complete garbage.”

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201105120013

  3. y_p_w says:
    May 12, 2011 at 7:26 pm  (Quote)

    Posted it in another thread, but I don’t recall if anyone else brought this up (and comments here aren’t searchable). I saw a reference on Nativeborncitizen today about the NBC White House correspondent claiming that she actually got to touch and photograph one of the certified long form copies. I found the link to the video on a search of her name.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42779923/ns/politics-white_house/
    http://lockerz.com/s/96540937
    http://lockerz.com/s/96540721

    There didn’t seem to be a lot of buzz about this, and the video is over two weeks old. So many people are arguing over the PDF, but I would think someone who claims to have touched the real thing (and felt the embossed seal) would have made for a bigger story. I’m wondering if perhaps other members of the WH press corps were given the same opportunity to check out the actual document.

  4. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 12, 2011 at 8:50 pm  (Quote)

    y_p_w: comments here aren’t searchable

    Comments are indexed by the search engines.

  5. gorefan says:
    May 12, 2011 at 9:05 pm  (Quote)

    y_p_w: she actually got to touch and photograph one of the certified long form copies.

    If you copy the photo she took of the BC and open it in any imaging software (I used MS Paint and Photoshop), and then zoom in. The seal is readily visible and you can even tell how it caused a wrinkle in the paper.

  6. gorefan says:
    May 12, 2011 at 9:10 pm  (Quote)

    Doc C. – over at the Freerepublic they had an article about copyright infringement.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2718676/posts

    i remembered you had a similar article recently, is that coincidence or is there a crackdown going on?

  7. Majority Will says:
    May 12, 2011 at 9:31 pm  (Quote)

    obsolete:
    Good MediaMatters article:

    Everything You Need To Know About Being A “Natural-Born Citizen”

    “Were you born within the territorial boundaries of the United States? Were your parents not in the service of a foreign government at the time of your birth? If so, then congratulations! You’re a natural-born citizen of the United States of America. If you’re over 35 and have been a resident of the U.S. for 14 years, then you also meet the basic requirements to run for the presidency, as laid out in Article II of the Constitution. What’s more, you share these qualities with the current President of the United States, Barack Obama (update your resume).

    However, there is a small segment of America that would seek to deny you the rights you have as a natural-born American citizen. They are the remnants of the birther movement whose determination to the cause has not wavered even after President Obama released his birth certificate and proved beyond any doubt that he was, in fact, born in the United States. They are the post-birthers.

    They will deploy a variety of arguments endeavoring to explain why you and the president are a second-class citizens undeserving of your birthright. But rest assured: those arguments are all complete garbage.”

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201105120013

    EXCELLENT!

    Thanks for posting that.

  8. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 12, 2011 at 9:31 pm  (Quote)

    y_p_w: There didn’t seem to be a lot of buzz about this, and the video is over two weeks old. So many people are arguing over the PDF, but I would think someone who claims to have touched the real thing (and felt the embossed seal) would have made for a bigger story.

    THANKS!

  9. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 12, 2011 at 9:33 pm  (Quote)

    gorefan: i remembered you had a similar article recently, is that coincidence or is there a crackdown going on?

    My crackdown was solely prompted by a dump of a Washington Times article, and my checking their terms of use. Pure coincidence.

  10. G says:
    May 12, 2011 at 10:45 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Pew Research poll on political alignment. Taken before long-form birth certificate release.Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology http://people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/This is a large study (web pages worth of analysis). Notable is that among “Staunch Conservatives”: most (72%) agree with the Tea Party, 54% regularly watch Fox News, and nearly half (47%) believe that President Obama was born outside the U.S.

    That was an absolutely FASCINATING study!!! I enjoyed reading and pouring through all 13 pages of the online report.

    I took the quiz and found out that I’m a “Post-Modern”

  12. Arthur says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:13 am  (Quote)

    Rickey:
    In other news, Orly was smacked down again in Federal court.

    From the Scribd document, I can’t really tell what this case was about, but I did understand this part: “Orly Taitz . . . under the mistaken impression that a live hearing would be conducted . . .” Good ol’ Orly, still operating under mistaken impressions. Some things never change.

  13. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:28 am  (Quote)

    Arthur: From the Scribd document, I can’t really tell what this case was about

    The case was a challenge to the federal moratorium on off-shore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. The reasons for the challenge are unrelated to Obama’s eligibility.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornbeck_Offshore_Services_LLC_v._Salazar

  14. Majority Will says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:37 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: The reasons for the challenge are unrelated to Obama’s eligibility.

    Excerpts: “While the intervenor – like the original plaintiffs – asserts the invalidity of the moratorium action taken by defendants, the legal and factual basis of intervenor’s claim – i.e., the President’s place of birth or citizenship – is entirely different from the legal and factual assertions of the original claimants.”

    “Finally, the “unusual circumstances” of the timing of the assertion of intervenor’s claims and the President’s recent public postings contesting those claims,which the proposed intervenor and her experts assert in the reply papers are forgeries,weigh against any exercise of this court’s discretion to permit this intervention in adifferent existing case.”

    ?

  15. Daniel says:
    May 13, 2011 at 1:50 am  (Quote)

    Arthur: I can’t really tell what this case was about,

    Strangely enough…. neither did Orly.

  17. Bovril says:
    May 13, 2011 at 6:01 am  (Quote)

    In further proof pf the total insanity of the RWNJ and seditious mind over at the Pest and Offal.

    Sharon (Give me my military coup NOW) Rondeau has posted a long fact free rant about how a High School has “investigated” the Presidents LFBC and declared it a fake.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/12/even-high-school-students-declare-obamas-birth-certificate-a-forgery/

    Trouble is……it’s a satirical piece poling fun at the pseudo-science idiocy of Birfoons.

    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

    Samll matters like….it’s in the section marked “Stories SD on the QT – Almost Factual News”

    Other stories include….

    “strong>Killer Whale!

    SDQT Exclusive! SeaWorld Releases Special Preview Images from Its Upcoming “Red, White & Shamu” Extravaganza, “Osama Bin Eaten”

    Yes Shazza you brain dead muppet, you and your ilk are seen as fodder for HS students punking.

  18. J. Edward Tremlett says:
    May 13, 2011 at 9:06 am  (Quote)

    one of the farah-bots at WND decided to email me over facebook because his reply post was wayyyyyy too long. Most of it’s denialist crap, but he brought up some points about the layering (now irrelevant, thanks to NBC, hopefully) that Epectitus didn’t cover.

    “How civil, J… You might want to hedge your bets next time though. I went to school for Math & Computer Science, and I took Image Analysis & Pattern Recognition, which helps me to sift through all the crap the left is trying to throw up to cover for Obama. HOWEVER, the author of that article is CORRECT about the layering. I fell for it at first after merely hearing about the layering, because Obama has done a horrible job so far at covering his ineligibility, but after I paid attention to what was being said and checked the “Birth Certificate” out for myself, I felt bad for my fellow intelligent, intuitive patriots because I knew they would lose some credibility by arguing the layers are indicative of a forgery. I did not think about the text extraction (pattern recognition of letters) aspect that could have been involved, as it takes an extra step and does not normally happen directly from the scan of a document. However, being that we are talking about the White House here, they probably have text extraction set as a default operation on their computers so they can copy & paste what they see and archive the text on documents that come in. I can actually explain what is going on with the actual text extraction itself, which would be even more convincing to people that the layers are nothing to shout about. It is apparent to me, and I’ll get in to that more if you request it. …”

  19. J. Edward Tremlett says:
    May 13, 2011 at 9:08 am  (Quote)

    more:

    “So, because I know you really aren’t stupid and probably just don’t know the other arguments, let me list some of them for you. First, the author of that article was wrong to assert that the color variations of the black text and “color” text is normal. It is not normal at all. I don’t know of any process – compression or text extraction – that would create that anomaly. Second, scanned text always has a ‘hot’ side and a ‘cold’ side, where on one side of the letters the edge of the black text seems to have a reddish highlight, and on the opposite side, a blue highlight. Most of the letters in the document have no highlights – they are solid. Some do. Strange. If the letters were blackened or a color threshold was set for compression to reduce the number of ‘black’ colors by assigning the solid black color to the similarly colored pixels, it would have caught the ‘color’ text that appears as well, or at least obvious portions of it. Plus, if any compression or text extraction modifying of the document was used, the document still HAD BEEN digitally modified. If that isn’t a valid argument for you, I don’t know what is. Obama needs to release a flattened, uncompressed, raw scanned image of his birth certificate.”

    What ya’ll think? he on to something or faking computerspeak?

  20. Critical Thinker says:
    May 13, 2011 at 9:17 am  (Quote)

    Bovril:
    In further proof pf the total insanity of the RWNJ and seditious mind over at the Pest and Offal.

    Sharon (Give me my military coup NOW) Rondeau has posted a long fact free rant about how a High School has “investigated” the Presidents LFBC and declared it a fake.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/12/even-high-school-students-declare-obamas-birth-certificate-a-forgery/

    Trouble is……it’s a satirical piece poling fun at the pseudo-science idiocy of Birfoons.

    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

    Samll matters like….it’s in the section marked “Stories SD on the QT – Almost Factual News”

    Other stories include….

    “strong>Killer Whale!

    SDQT Exclusive! SeaWorld Releases Special Preview Images from Its Upcoming “Red, White & Shamu” Extravaganza, “Osama Bin Eaten”

    Yes Shazza you brain dead muppet, you and your ilk are seen as fodder for HS students punking.

    I’m not too surprised that the P&E people are buying this story since its premise—that Obama co-opted the birth certificate of a dead baby—was cooked up by Freepers a couple of weeks ago. There actually was a baby who was born on the same day as Obama and died the next day. Freepers “discovered” Obama’s trickery on this when trying to figure out why the birth certificate numbers are not in chronological order. They figured that since the baby that Obama “replaced” died the day after she was born, her birth certificate was not processed until after she died, which happened to be after the Nordyke twins were born, thus explaining how it is that Obama could claim to be born before the Nordyke twins yet have a BC serial number after theirs.

    Pathetic. This demonstrates the tragic downside of social networking.

  21. Critical Thinker says:
    May 13, 2011 at 9:37 am  (Quote)

    Daniel: Strangely enough…. neither did Orly.

    Orly knew exactly what this case was about—Orly. Seriously…she tried to tie herself into the case by making the argument that Obama was out to deliberately destroy the U.S. oil industry because he is an illegitimate president, hates America, yada, yada, yada, standard birther BS. And, she posited that she belonged in this case because he is also personally and deliberately trying to destroy her by calling her a carnival barker, corrupting otherwise patriotic judges, siccing the CA bar association on her, getting his thugs to hack into her web site, yada, yada, yada, standard Orly paranoia crap.
    The judge did not buy the argument.

  22. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 13, 2011 at 9:58 am  (Quote)

    I’ll be at the National Zoo today visiting the birthers.

  23. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 10:14 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I’ll be at the National Zoo today visiting the birthers.

    Don’t feed the trolls!

  24. Bovril says:
    May 13, 2011 at 10:23 am  (Quote)

    Careful Doc, they fling poo…..!

  25. The Magic M says:
    May 13, 2011 at 10:34 am  (Quote)

    > he on to something or faking computerspeak?

    Well, he has no idea what CA is (see below), to begin with.

    > scanned text always has a ‘hot’ side and a cold’ side, where on one side of the letters the edge of the black text seems to have a reddish highlight, and on the opposite side, a blue highlight

    Here he’s obviously talking about chromatic aberration (something you also see in photography unless your lens is very very expensive). AFAIK this has nothing to do with temperature (but I could be wrong, so don’t scold me on this).

    I am not quite competent to give a definitive answer here, but to claim CA *always* occurs when scanning text seems too generalized to me. Not with an expensive scanner with high resolution on a good template, I would think.

    > I took Image Analysis & Pattern Recognition

    And he calls chromatic aberration “hot and cold side”? Hmmmm…

    > If the letters were blackened or a color threshold was set for compression to reduce the number of black’ colors by assigning the solid black color to the similarly colored pixels, it would have caught the color’ text that appears as well, or at least obvious portions of it.

    I think he’s basically saying “in my limited knowledge that is not possible” without actually knowing how all OCR and scanning programs work internally. Once you’ve seen the magic of some products, it becomes hard to state “no software processing is going to result in X”.

    > Plus, if any compression or text extraction modifying of the document was used, the document still HAD BEEN digitally modified.

    I don’t see how that would help him. Nobody claims there was absolutely no modification (such as sharpening or other methods to increase readability – after all, scanning itself already is a “modification”). This effectively boils down to the straw man argument “the scan is X” when all that matters is the original the scan was made from – which is, as far as the data on it are concerned, identical to what the scan shows as Hawaii has confirmed.

    > Obama needs to release a flattened, uncompressed, raw scanned image of his birth certificate

    Now that’s laughable. He basically says, from a birther perspective, “he needs to release a document where forgery detection is even more impossible”.

  26. The Magic M says:
    May 13, 2011 at 10:37 am  (Quote)

    > “Orly Taitz . . . under the mistaken impression that a live hearing would be conducted . . .”

    At least she can’t say the judge did not give her every opportunity to state her looney case. After all, he could just have said “this is not a hearing, get the hell out of my courtroom”.

  27. Critical Thinker says:
    May 13, 2011 at 10:38 am  (Quote)

    J. Edward Tremlett:
    more:

    Obama needs to release a flattened, uncompressed, raw scanned image of his birth certificate.”

    What are the chances that your birther pen pal would be satisfied if Obama released a flattened, uncompressed, raw scanned image of his birth certificate? Ha!

  28. Paul Pieniezny says:
    May 13, 2011 at 11:57 am  (Quote)

    Bovril: Trouble is……it’s a satirical piece poling fun at the pseudo-science idiocy of Birfoons.

    You nee d new law of logic here. I propose:

    “It is impossible to produce a satirical imitation of a birther argument that is so fact-free and lunacy-driven that it will NOT be mistaken for the real thing.” (NOT to be underlined in Berg fashion)

  29. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:06 pm  (Quote)

    BTW Lakin gets out of jail tomorrow.

  30. G says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:14 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: I really enjoyed this:http://www.galacticempiretimes.com/2011/05/09/galaxy/outer-rim/obi-wan-kenobi-is-killed.html

    ROTFLMAO!!!

    That was just awesome! Truly one of the best pieces of parody satire I’ve seen in a long time.

    A definite must read! Not only is the article very well done, but the comments too are priceless and perfect parody on nearly all aspects of the types of comments we’ve seen on the bin Laden articles…

    🙂

  31. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:14 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    BTW Lakin gets out of jail tomorrow.

    I’m sure there will be a holiday in birtherstan to honor the coward…

    By the way, did you get my reply to your email earlier this week? No hurry – I just wanted to make sure that it didn’t end up in your spam file or something…

  32. G says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:15 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril: In further proof pf the total insanity of the RWNJ and seditious mind over at the Pest and Offal.Sharon (Give me my military coup NOW) Rondeau has posted a long fact free rant about how a High School has “investigated” the Presidents LFBC and declared it a fake.http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/12/even-high-school-students-declare-obamas-birth-certificate-a-forgery/Trouble is……it’s a satirical piece poling fun at the pseudo-science idiocy of Birfoons.http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/Samll matters like….it’s in the section marked “Stories SD on the QT – Almost Factual News”Other stories include….“strong>Killer Whale!SDQT Exclusive! SeaWorld Releases Special Preview Images from Its Upcoming “Red, White & Shamu” Extravaganza, “Osama Bin Eaten” Yes Shazza you brain dead muppet, you and your ilk are seen as fodder for HS students punking.

    ROTFL! Too funny!

  33. G says:
    May 13, 2011 at 12:18 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: I’ll be at the National Zoo today visiting the birthers.

    Slartibartfast: Don’t feed the trolls!

    Bovril: Careful Doc, they fling poo…..!

    LMAO! Wow… kudos to everyone today with all the hilarious posts! You folks are on a roll!

    Ow…my sides hurt from laughing so much. Thanks! 🙂

  34. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 1:26 pm  (Quote)

    I found this link over at dr k(H)ate’s…

    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

    This is pathetic if it’s real…

  35. Daniel says:
    May 13, 2011 at 1:54 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast:
    I found this link over at dr k(H)ate’s…

    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

    This is pathetic if it’s real…

    WEll the high school in question was one of the finalists in the competition to have the POTUS speak at grad, but that’s about as far as the truth goes.

    (Dr) Kate’s story implies that Obama was definately coming, but after the kids looked at the LFBC has rescinded the appointment.

    The fact is that HTHI was one of the finalists in the competition for Obama to speak at ONE High School. Another High School was chosen and HTHI was simply not the winning finalist.

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/may/10/memphis-school-beats-out-sd-charter-for-obama-visi/

    This is just another example of how birthers will create conspiracies out of mundane thin air.

  36. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:06 pm  (Quote)

    Daniel: WEll the high school in question was one of the finalists in the competition to have the POTUS speak at grad, but that’s about as far as the truth goes.

    (Dr) Kate’s story implies that Obama was definately coming, but after the kids looked at the LFBC has rescinded the appointment.

    The fact is that HTHI was one of the finalists in the competition for Obama to speak at ONE High School. Another High School was chosen and HTHI was simply not the winning finalist.

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/may/10/memphis-school-beats-out-sd-charter-for-obama-visi/

    This is just another example of how birthers will create conspiracies out of mundane thin air.

    Thanks for the additional info – I looked at the youTube videos that one of the commenters posted and it was pathetic – another textbook example of the tendency of ignorant people to overrate their expertise from the birthers.

  37. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:16 pm  (Quote)

    Didn’t see email, Slartibartfast.

  38. bjphysics says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:17 pm  (Quote)

    obsolete: Good MediaMatters article:Everything You Need To Know About Being A “Natural-Born Citizen”“Were you born within the territorial boundaries of the United States? Were your parents not in the service of a foreign government at the time of your birth? If so, then congratulations! You’re a natural-born citizen of the United States of America. If you’re over 35 and have been a resident of the U.S. for 14 years, then you also meet the basic requirements to run for the presidency, as laid out in Article II of the Constitution. What’s more, you share these qualities with the current President of the United States, Barack Obama (update your resume).However, there is a small segment of America that would seek to deny you the rights you have as a natural-born American citizen. They are the remnants of the birther movement whose determination to the cause has not wavered even after President Obama released his birth certificate and proved beyond any doubt that he was, in fact, born in the United States. They are the post-birthers.They will deploy a variety of arguments endeavoring to explain why you and the president are a second-class citizens undeserving of your birthright. But rest assured: those arguments are all complete garbage.”http://mediamatters.org/blog/201105120013

    Is this Media Matters article stating there are three forms of citizenship?

    1) Natural Born Citizen:

    “Were you born within the territorial boundaries of the United States? Were your parents not in the service of a foreign government at the time of your birth? If so, then congratulations! You’re a natural-born citizen of the United States of America.”

    2) Citizen at birth but born outside the territorial boundaries of the United States and by 1 above, not NBC?

    3) Not a citizen at birth, i.e., Naturalized.

    ??????????????????

  39. Bovril says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:33 pm  (Quote)

    According to Reuters who are generally regarded as trustworthy, yes in amongst the rest of the electronic “stuff seized in the OBL raid was a substantial amount of high quality porn.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/13/us-binladen-porn-idUSTRE74C4RK20110513

  40. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:37 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Didn’t see email, Slartibartfast.

    I just re-sent it (to the site admin address).

  41. Critical Thinker says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:38 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast:
    I found this link over at dr k(H)ate’s…

    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

    This is pathetic if it’s real…

    This is a spoof but I’m not too surprised that the birfers are buying it since the story’s premise—that Obama co-opted the birth certificate of a dead baby—was cooked up by Freepers a couple of weeks ago. There actually was a baby who was born on the same day as Obama who died the next day. Freepers discovered Obama’s “trickery” on this when trying to figure out why the birth certificate numbers are not in chronological order. They figured that since the baby that Obama “replaced” died the day after she was born, her birth certificate was not processed until after she died. This happened to be after the Nordyke twins were born, thus explaining how it is that Obama could claim to be born before the Nordyke twins yet have a BC serial number after theirs.

    At the risk of polluting your soul, you can find this pathetic Freeper brain trust at work here http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?q=1&;page=1601

  42. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 2:40 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril:
    According to Reuters who are generally regarded as trustworthy, yes in amongst the rest of the electronic “stuff seized in the OBL raid was a substantial amount of high quality porn.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/13/us-binladen-porn-idUSTRE74C4RK20110513

    Isn’t that a no-no according to Islam? I guess it’s okay as long as it’s high-quality… 😉 I wish there was a hell that these perverts (and their two friends that just joined them) were burning in.

  43. Slartibartfast says:
    May 13, 2011 at 3:11 pm  (Quote)

    Critical Thinker: This is a spoof but I’m not too surprised that the birfers are buying it since the story’s premise—that Obama co-opted the birth certificate of a dead baby—was cooked up by Freepers a couple of weeks ago. There actually was a baby who was born on the same day as Obama who died the next day. Freepers discovered Obama’s “trickery” on this when trying to figure out why the birth certificate numbers are not in chronological order. They figured that since the baby that Obama “replaced” died the day after she was born, her birth certificate was not processed until after she died. This happened to be after the Nordyke twins were born, thus explaining how it is that Obama could claim to be born before the Nordyke twins yet have a BC serial number after theirs.

    At the risk of polluting your soul, you can find this pathetic Freeper brain trust at work here http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?q=1&;page=1601

    I’m sure we’ll find out what the freeper brain trust come up with when they start spewing it all over the intertubes in the next couple of days…

    I posted this on the San Diego Reader article’s comments section:

    Stevinski,

    You can find an actual judge’s opinion about why President Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen in the decision of the Indiana court of appeals in Ankeny v. Daniels here:

    http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

    I trust Judge Brown more than I do you.

    Also, given the numerous lies and factually incorrect statements that birthers have been responsible for to date (including the egregiously naive analysis discussed in this article), I think that the credibility of the State of Hawai’i (which links to the pdf as an image of President Obama’s birth certificate on their website) far exceeds that of a bunch of couch-potato pseudo-experts that don’t even know the first thing about the suite of techniques used to compress images into pdfs who are decrying artifacts that are clearly the result of a computer algorithm as some sort of evidence of (presumably malevolent) human tampering. A good discussion of the ‘layers’ can be found here:

    http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=17334

    Further debunking of most (if not all) birther lies can be found here:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/bookmarks/fact-checking-and-debunking/the-debunkers-guide-to-obama-conspiracy-theories/

    By the way, it seems that the president wasn’t disinvited – he simply chose another of the finalist high schools (a decision justified by this article).

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/may/10/memphis-school-beats-out-sd-charter-for-obama-visi/

    By Slartibartfast 11:33 a.m., May 13, 2011 > Reply > Report it

    Hopefully any intellectually honest person will follow these links and be inoculated…

  44. richCares says:
    May 13, 2011 at 5:27 pm  (Quote)

    Lakin was released today, the call to have supporters to greet him was very succesful. At least 300,000 cheering soldiers showed up to honor our hero, and as is the case of all birther gatherings, they all came in One MiniVan.
    .
    Lakins sacrifice plus the reliabull efforts of WND, we can rest assured that Obama will not be president in 2017. Though given blue superhero tights fitting for a Blue Falcon, Lakin chose to wear standard civilian clothes.
    .
    What a wonderful release day.

  45. Gregory says:
    May 13, 2011 at 5:46 pm  (Quote)

    Corsi’s book “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” (turns out it’s in Hawaii) has already fallen to #186 on Amazon’s list (and seems to fall lower and lower each day). I guess a Harry Potter book it’s not.

  46. Gregory says:
    May 13, 2011 at 5:58 pm  (Quote)

    “The tragic, pathetic demise of a birther”

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/birthers/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/13/terry_lakin_birther_comes_home

    Pathetic? Yes. Tragic? Not so much.

  47. Majority Will says:
    May 13, 2011 at 7:13 pm  (Quote)

    Gregory: I guess a Harry Potter book it’s not.

    Except for also being fantasy based.

  48. Judge Mental says:
    May 13, 2011 at 7:19 pm  (Quote)

    Meanwhile over at WND we have the latest attempt by that paragon of truth Bob Unruh to pretend that “another” case questioning the President’s eligibility is about to be heard by The Supreme Court.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=298105

  49. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 15, 2011 at 6:15 pm  (Quote)

    I am in the process of deleting a number of comments that include personal attacks by one commenter against another. Please avoid such comments in future.

  50. charo says:
    May 15, 2011 at 7:59 pm  (Quote)

    Doc,

    I don’t believe you have covered any of the so-called DC Insider (Ulsterman Reports). I came across them months ago and myself, found them to be canned. I read somewhere that someone found similarities between the DC insider releases and Any Martin statements. I never followed up and read them myself, but that seemed like it was a good possibility. Then, on April 28, this popped up:

    This was in the April 28 communication:

    She [Valerie Jarrett] pushed out Rahm, she’s alienated many of the most influential Congressional Democrats, she’s pissed off the military – oh that’s another story I’ll have to share with you soon. That one is still playing out right before our eyes though, so we gotta let that one turn out first. She’s gonna get burned on that too.

    Read more: http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/white-house-insider-obamas-west-wing-civil-war/#ixzz1LEleRqVv

    Please get this out ASAP. Want specific people to know we know.

    RE Osama Bin Laden. Significant push to take him out months ago. Senior WH staff resisted. This was cause of much strain between HC and Obama/Jarrett. HC and LP were in constant communication over matter – both attempted to convince administration to act. Administration feared failure and resulting negative impact on president. Intel disgusted over politics over national security. Staff resigned/left. Check timeline to corroborate

    Now Intel already leaking to media facts surrounding how info obtained. Namely from enhanced interrogation efforts via GITMO prisoners. Obama administration placed in corner on this. Some media aware of danger to president RE this and attempting protection. Others looking for further investigation. We are pushing for them to follow through and already meeting with some access.

    Point of determination made FOR Obama not BY Obama. Will clarify as details become more clear. Very clear divide between Military and WH. Jarrett marginalized 100% on decision to take out OBL. She played no part. BD worked with LP and HC to form coalition to force CoC to engage.

    Independent military contacts have confirmed. Stories corroborate one another. This is legit.

    http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/did-senior-militaryintelligence-officials-overrule-president-obama-regarding-mission-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/

    There was a follow-up Q&A somewhere with more. The point here is that someone knew something was going on April 28 and that it concerned the military. Prior to now, I thought DC Insider was all fantasy, but I believe there is a Hillary operative involved here stirring up trouble. The Insider is pro-Hillary and is being fed information. On April 28, this “Insider” knew something was going on, that it was being played out, and it concerned the military. I don’t sign onto what is alleged by the Insider, but it does seem this person is privy to information.

  51. Scientist says:
    May 15, 2011 at 8:13 pm  (Quote)

    charo: I don’t sign onto what is alleged by the Insider, but it does seem this person is privy to information.

    I think you have to evaluate such sources on the totality of their output. The horoscopes in the newspaper will predict 50 things and 2 or 3 will likely come true (more or less). Occasionally, Jim Cramer says to buy a stock and it actually goes up.

  52. charo says:
    May 15, 2011 at 8:23 pm  (Quote)

    Scientist: I think you have to evaluate such sources on the totality of their output.The horoscopes in the newspaper will predict 50 things and 2 or 3 will likely come true (more or less).Occasionally, Jim Cramer says to buy a stock and it actually goes up.

    Some of the things predicted by “Insider” follow your analysis, for instance, Gibbs leaving and some other kids of events. It could be that it was just a lucky shot, like winning the lottery. The date of the communication, though, is so close to the event, to make Insider seem more credible. That doesn’t mean that the spin is accurate, just that someone is promoting Hillary. We’ll see if she sticks to her resolution to stay out of the political arena after this term.

  53. gorefan says:
    May 15, 2011 at 10:05 pm  (Quote)

    charo: The point here is that someone knew something was going on April 28 and that it concerned the military.

    You mean like General Petraus leaving the Central Command and going to the CIA?

  54. Black Lion says:
    May 15, 2011 at 10:41 pm  (Quote)

    I believe Loren over at his blog sometime last year had debunked the so called Ulsterman reports….The so called Ulsterman has made many so called claims that has never come close to being true….

  55. Rickey says:
    May 15, 2011 at 11:11 pm  (Quote)

    The hilarious part is that Ulsterman claims to have been interviewing a “longtime political operative within the Democratic Party” who goes on to repeat the oft-debunked lie that Obama has spent “millions” in birther court cases. Ulsterman takes birther talking points and then attributes them to unnamed White House insiders.

    I don’t attach any significance to Ulsterman posting on April 28 that Valerie Jarrett had “pissed off the military.” There is no reason to believe that this “White House insider” – if he or she exists- had any information about the plan to get bin Laden, since we know that only a handful of Obama’s aides knew anything about it.

  56. G says:
    May 15, 2011 at 11:21 pm  (Quote)

    charo: Doc,
    I don’t believe you have covered any of the so-called DC Insider (Ulsterman Reports). I came across them months ago and myself, found them to be canned. I read somewhere that someone found similarities between the DC insider releases and Any Martin statements. I never followed up and read them myself, but that seemed like it was a good possibility. Then, on April 28, this popped up:

    Patrick has done quite a bit of coverage on the BS nonsene of Ultserman over at his site over the past year or so:

    badfiction.typepad.com/

    The Ulsterman Reports are nothing but tabloid pablum made up fantasy fiction.

  57. Expelliarmus says:
    May 15, 2011 at 11:39 pm  (Quote)

    Gorefan is correct, the press was told that Gates would retire, that Panetta was going to defense & Patreus to CIA on the morning of April 27th — immediately before the press was given copies of the long form birth certificate. After that the press went all gaga over the b.c. — but anyone who had been paying attention would have known on April 28th that there was a reshuffling of staff.

    Here’s a sample article with the AP report that went out on the 27th:http://www.abc3340.com/story/14522220/ap-sources-panetta-to-pentagon-petraeus-to-cia (You can find the same story all over the internet — I just chose to link to one example).

    Here’s the White House schedule for April 28th:
    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/04/27/obama-schedule-thursday-april-28-2011/‘

    In any case, the one line in the April 28th story about Valerie Jarrett probably simply referred to a well-publicized faux pas going to back to February — see http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/02/valerie-jarrett-mistakes-vice-chief-of-staff-of-army-for-waiter.html — obviously anyone who follows the news closely would have been aware of that screwup. (And the story just illustrates how far out of the loop Jarrett is when it comes to military issues –that is definitely not within her zone of responsibility as a White House advisor – her job is with the Office of Public Engagement – basically a p.r. position)

  58. G says:
    May 16, 2011 at 12:57 pm  (Quote)

    BREAKING NEWS – TRUMP ISSUES OFFICIAL STATEMENT that he is NOT RUNNING for PRESIDENT.

    Just heard it on CNN and they read his statement out loud. I do not have a link for a transcript as of yet.

    The “great white hope” of the Birthers has thrown in the towel.

  59. Majority Will says:
    May 16, 2011 at 1:13 pm  (Quote)

    G:
    BREAKING NEWS – TRUMP ISSUES OFFICIAL STATEMENT that he is NOT RUNNING for PRESIDENT.

    Just heard it on CNN and they read his statement out loud.I do not have a link for a transcript as of yet.

    The “great white hope” of the Birthers has thrown in the towel.

    The hypocritical bigot’s combover is still in the running however.

    It just hasn’t set up its own Twitter account yet.

  60. Daniel says:
    May 16, 2011 at 1:38 pm  (Quote)

    G: BREAKING NEWS – TRUMP ISSUES OFFICIAL STATEMENT that he is NOT RUNNING for PRESIDENT.

    Geee… there’s a surprise

  61. G says:
    May 16, 2011 at 1:59 pm  (Quote)

    Daniel: Geee… there’s a surprise

    LOL!

    What is somewhat of a surprise is that he made this announcement TODAY, instead of his planned hype of saying something at the end of his final live Celebrity Apprentice show, which takes place this coming Sunday, 5/22.

    That he openly completely folded in the towel today (when the NBC schedule for Fall is being announced) and did it ONLY in a written submitted statement is quite telling.

    It shows that the blowback for him on this whole stunt has been really severe and much more than he was prepared and equipped for. He obviously just wants to try to wash his hands and duck away from the whole thing as soon as possible, instead of milk further speculation to boost his finale ratings…

    The great unknown will always be what “might have been” if Obama had not “trumped” him by releasing the LFBC, followed by capturing OBL.

    I truly think that Trump was doing this as nothing but a publicity and ratings stunt from the get-go. However, when he actually was gaining traction in the polls…I truly wonder if his super-ego started to consider running for real….

  62. Majority Will says:
    May 16, 2011 at 2:31 pm  (Quote)

    G: LOL!

    What is somewhat of a surprise is that he made this announcement TODAY, instead of his planned hype of saying something at the end of his final live Celebrity Apprentice show, which takes place this coming Sunday, 5/22.

    That he openly completely folded in the towel today (when the NBC schedule for Fall is being announced) and did it ONLY in a written submitted statement is quite telling.

    It shows that the blowback for him on this whole stunt has been really severe and much more than he was prepared and equipped for.He obviously just wants to try to wash his hands and duck away from the whole thing as soon as possible, instead of milk further speculation to boost his finale ratings…

    The great unknown will always be what “might have been” if Obama had not “trumped” him by releasing the LFBC, followed by capturing OBL.

    I truly think that Trump was doing this as nothing but a publicity and ratings stunt from the get-go.However, when he actually was gaining traction in the polls…I truly wonder if his super-ego started to consider running for real….

    I imagine he ticked off more that a few of his “celebrity” friends with his sudden, complete and bizarre plunge into birtherism.

  63. charo says:
    May 16, 2011 at 4:19 pm  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: In any case, the one line in the April 28th story about Valerie Jarrett probably simply referred to a well-publicized faux pas going to back to February — see

    I am not going into the whole Jarrett saga that was presented in the Ulsterman Report prior to. There is a whole theme running through the “communications” concerning Valerie Jarrett and her alleged control of the WH. I have read the reports but can’t recount specifics. The Insider seems to be a HRC operative, IMO. Also, Jarrett is the Senior Advisor (whatever that means) to President Obama as well as the PR person.

  64. Expelliarmus says:
    May 16, 2011 at 5:08 pm  (Quote)

    Charo, Jarrett was not “the” senior advisor –she was one of three that Obama named when he came into office, currently one of 2. The others were Pete Rouse (subsequently serving as intrerim chief of staff and now as counsel to the President), and David Axelrod (left in January to work on 2012 campaign) When David Axelrod left, his position of Senior Advisor was taken over by David Plouffe.

    I doubt that there is any real “insider” because the Ulsterman reports you cited are so far off base in terms of the roles and purported actions of the individuals. It does not sound like something generated from an insider who is in the know, but rather from an outsider who has a fantasy-based view of the relationships. I think there is some misogyny combined with racism with this imagined domineering role of Valerie Jarrett — in other words, I think that it the idea resonates with people who are disturbed by the the idea of a black woman in a position of so much power.

    But anyone who knows the actual people involved and their respective roles and responsibilities would know that these claims are pure fantasy.

  65. Majority Will says:
    May 16, 2011 at 5:20 pm  (Quote)

    I’m having a difficult time understanding how so suddenly and pervasively an isolated, contextually twisted part of Emer de Vattel’s political philosophy is supposed to be the foundation behind the concept of natural born citizen by the Founding Fathers and the eligibility clause in the Constitution (according to the birther community) when there is no evidence I can find of these discussions or much of anything on dual citizenship and eligibility (other than a long ago argument over President Arthur) prior to 2008.

    Are there any public school textbook mentions of de Vattel other than perhaps something about international diplomacy?

    Why are other political essays of de Vattel’s political philosophy ignored with regards to the decisions of the Founding Fathers? It’s inconvenient?

  66. ballantine says:
    May 16, 2011 at 5:43 pm  (Quote)

    The Vattel theory is not new and does not have a happy history. Honestly, there was no legal authority of any significance in the first half century of our republic questioning the application of English birthright citizenship in the US. However, the issue of the status of freed slaves would change that. Kent’s view was that slaves were natural born citizens due to their native birth but were under the disability of slavery and hence only became natural born citizens when they were freed. This was the dominant pre-Dred Scott view at least in the North but obviously was not well received in certain quarters and we saw for the first time people putting forth jus sanguinis arguments challenging the English common law rule. This would continue after the 14th Amendment where there was great resistance in making citizens of the Chinese and Indians. During this period, there were thus a hand full of people making the Vattel or the dual allegiance argument to exclude undesirable races from citizenship until Wong Kim Ark settled the issue. Today, there are a hand full of people that have tried to revive such theory in the anchor baby debate to little avail. So until the birthers, the theory had been a fringe theory used to try to exclude undesirable races from citizenship that has never been accepted by the mainstream legal community.

  67. ballantine says:
    May 16, 2011 at 5:54 pm  (Quote)

    “Although the government of one country may grant to persons owing allegiance to that of another, the rights and privileges of citizenship, it is not intended to intimate that the government making such grant would thereby, and without their consent or change of domicil, become entitled to their allegiance in respect to any of their political duties or relations.” Calais v Marshfield 30 Maine Rep 520.

    Great quote, Doc. Never saw that one.

  68. Keith says:
    May 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm  (Quote)

    sheesh

    I go away for 3 weeks (Lake Eyre in flood is beautiful) and the proverbial hits the fan.

    thanks for your hard work, Doc.

    hope you aren’t getting too frustrated keeping the place clean.

    See you folks when I get back from Timor-Leste.

  69. Keith says:
    May 16, 2011 at 6:20 pm  (Quote)

    This is probably old news to you folks, but I see on HuffPo that the Donald is not running for Pres.

    No sh*t Sherlock.

    Now can somebody convince him to stop running his mouth?

  70. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 16, 2011 at 6:44 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will:
    I’m having a difficult time understanding how so suddenly and pervasively an isolated, contextually twisted part of Emer de Vattel’s political philosophy is supposed to be the foundation behind the concept of natural born citizen by the Founding Fathers and the eligibility clause in the Constitution (according to the birther community) when there is no evidence I can find of these discussions or much of anything on dual citizenship and eligibility (other than a long ago argument over President Arthur) prior to 2008.

    Vattel was much better known in the 18th century than in the 20th century, but Blackstone so much more influential.

    The issue about President Arthur was the false claim that he was born in Canada, not that his father was Irish.

  71. Majority Will says:
    May 16, 2011 at 9:13 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: The issue about President Arthur was the false claim that he was born in Canada, not that his father was Irish.

    I was referring to what Apuzzo is explaining to birthers about dual citizenship. He’s being quoted more now as birthers shift from the LFBC to de Vattel.

    Excerpt:

    Chester Arthur (1881-1885), was born on October 5, 1829 in Fairfield, Vermont. His father, William Arthur, when eighteen years of age, emigrated from Co. Antrim, Ireland. His father did not become a naturalized U.S. citizen until 14 years after Chester Arthur’s birth. Chester Arthur’s mother, Malvina Stone, was born April 29, 1802 in Berkshire, Franklin, Vermont. Hence, Chester Arthur was born to a father who was not a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth. Because the citizenship of the wife merged into that of the husband, this made Arthur born to an alien mother and father. He was therefore born with dual citizenship of the United Kingdom and the United States. It is believed that Chester Arthur lied numerous times about his past to hide the fact that when he was born his father was not a U.S. citizen and to therefore obfuscate his ineligibility to hold Vice-Presidential and Presidential office. What is most telling is that Chester Arthur also burned all personal records just prior to his death. Chester Arthur was challenged during his Vice Presidential bid on the ground that he was not born in the United States. No one challenged Chester Arthur on the ground that even if he were born in the United States, he was still not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because of his father’s foreign citizenship at the time of his birth which also made his mother an alien. Hence, the Chester Arthur example is not and cannot be treated as any precedent since the nation was not aware of the truth about his father’s and mother’s non-U.S. citizenship status at the time of his birth.

    – Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/02/attorney-mario-apuzzo-all-presidents.html

  72. charo says:
    May 16, 2011 at 9:38 pm  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus:
    Charo, Jarrett was not “the” senior advisor –she was one of three that Obama named when he came into office, currently one of 2. The others were Pete Rouse (subsequently serving as intrerim chief of staff and now as counsel to the President), and David Axelrod (left in January to work on 2012 campaign)When David Axelrod left, his position of Senior Advisor was taken over by David Plouffe.

    I doubt that there is any real “insider” because the Ulsterman reports you cited are so far off base in terms of the roles and purported actions of the individuals. It does not sound like something generated from an insider who is in the know, but rather from an outsider who has a fantasy-based view of the relationships. I think there is some misogyny combined with racism with this imagined domineering role of Valerie Jarrett — in other words, I think that it the idea resonates with people who are disturbed by the the idea of a black woman in a position of so much power.

    But anyone who knows the actual people involved and their respective roles and responsibilities would know that these claims are pure fantasy.

    Whether “the” Senior advisor or “a” Senior advisor, her responsibilities include more than PR work. She is a close confidant.

    Source: CBS

    Valerie Jarrett, a long-time adviser campaign adviser to President-elect Barack Obama, will be joining Obama’s senior team in the White House.

    The Obama team named Jarrett as a senior White House adviser. Jarrett has been one of the president-elect’s closest confidants during the long run for the White House. She also has been serving on Obama’s transition team.

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×3602005

    My first impression was that the Insider was too much to be true. I’ll continue to read any communications and see what transpires.

    A blogger who is surprisingly not listed on Doc’s Ugly list concluded that Rahm was the Insider and referred to him as “Deep Tutu.” I just thought the pseudonym was funny, not that it is true.

    Regarding “… in other words, I think that it the idea resonates with people who are disturbed by the the idea of a black woman in a position of so much power,” do you think these same people have difficulty with Condi Rice?

  73. Expelliarmus says:
    May 16, 2011 at 9:50 pm  (Quote)

    , her responsibilities include more than PR work. She is a close confidant.

    That doesn’t put her in the loop for national security / defense stuff. Obama clearly stated when he was interviewed that the Bin Laden decision was difficult for him particularly because it could not be discussed with some of his closest advisors.

    And so very few people in the White House knew. The vast majority of my most senior aides did not know that we were doing this. And you know, there were times where you wanted to go around and talk this through with some more folks. And that just wasn’t an option.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-on-60-minutes-discussing-bin-laden-killing-2011-5#ixzz1MZPAlzBb

    I think “vast majority of my most senior aides” is a pretty clear reference to Jarrett, among others.

  74. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 16, 2011 at 10:02 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will (quoting Apuzzo):
    He was therefore born with dual citizenship of the United Kingdom and the United States. It is believed that Chester Arthur lied numerous times about his past to hide the fact that when he was born his father was not a U.S. citizen and to therefore obfuscate his ineligibility to hold Vice-Presidential and Presidential office. What is most telling is that Chester Arthur also burned all personal records just prior to his death. Chester Arthur was challenged during his Vice Presidential bid on the ground that he was not born in the United States. No one challenged Chester Arthur on the ground that even if he were born in the United States, he was still not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because of his father’s foreign citizenship at the time of his birth which also made his mother an alien. Hence, the Chester Arthur example is not and cannot be treated as any precedent since the nation was not aware of the truth about his father’s and mother’s non-U.S. citizenship status at the time of his birth.

    Neither Apuzzo, nor Donofrio who invented this smear, has ever given any credible scenario explaining what Chester lied about that would have any effect whatever on public perception of his father’s naturalization status. The best Donofrio could do was to suggest that Chester lied so much that it confused people so they wouldn’t look into the other area — which is absurd. Second neither Apuzzo, nor Donofrio who invented the smear, has ever explained what Arthur burned AFTER he was President that could have affected public perception of his father’s naturalization status BEFORE the election.

    The best evidence is that the father’s naturalization status was known to Arthur’s political opponents (based on Hinman’s letter from Senator Bayard), who never raised the issue, presumably because they didn’t think it was an issue.

  75. charo says:
    May 16, 2011 at 10:04 pm  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: That doesn’t put her in the loop for national security / defense stuff.Obama clearly stated when he was interviewed that the Bin Laden decision was difficult for him particularly because it could not be discussed with some of his closest advisors.

    And so very few people in the White House knew. The vast majority of my most senior aides did not know that we were doing this. And you know, there were times where you wanted to go around and talk this through with some more folks. And that just wasn’t an option.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-on-60-minutes-discussing-bin-laden-killing-2011-5#ixzz1MZPAlzBb

    I think “vast majority of my most senior aides”is a pretty clear reference to Jarrett, among others.

    Vast majority doesn’t mean that NONE of his Senior aides knew. We really don’t know, nor will we likely ever or at least for a long time, to whom the President confided.

  76. Suranis says:
    May 16, 2011 at 10:18 pm  (Quote)

    charo: Regarding “… in other words, I think that it the idea resonates with people who are disturbed by the the idea of a black woman in a position of so much power,” do you think these same people have difficulty with Condi Rice?

    Of course not. She is a Republican. It does show that Obama’s real sin is presidenting while being a democrat AND black.

    Condi Rice does show one interesting thing. I despise Bush Jr but one good thing I will say about him, the man was not a racist. The speech he gave when Obama won the election was the best he ever gave.

  77. Expelliarmus says:
    May 16, 2011 at 11:53 pm  (Quote)

    charo: Vast majority doesn’t mean that NONE of his Senior aides knew.

    Given the secrecy that surrounded the operation, it is absolutely idiotic for anyone to believe that he would have discussed it with anyone outside the ambit of “need to know”.

  78. katahdin says:
    May 17, 2011 at 1:16 am  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: Given the secrecy that surrounded the operation, it is absolutely idiotic for anyone to believe that he would have discussed it with anyone outside the ambit of “need to know”.

    What’s really fascinating is how publicly active the president was in the week before the raid. He released the long form, spoke at a commencement, comforted flood victims, went to Florida for the shuttle launch, and spoke at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, all the while being intently engaged in the planning for the Bin Laden raid.
    And he gave absolutely no outward sign to anyone that something big was being planned. The press certainly had no idea and they’re on the premises all the time. It’s really remarkable that the president was able to maintain such a cool public face and give nothing away, while this incredibly high stakes operation was underway.
    He must have icewater in his veins.

  79. Expelliarmus says:
    May 17, 2011 at 1:36 am  (Quote)

    katahdin: The press certainly had no idea and they’re on the premises all the time.

    That’s because the White House deliberately created a huge distraction guaranteed to send the media off into a frenzy over nothing. (i.e., the release of the birth certificate).

  80. The Magic M says:
    May 17, 2011 at 4:54 am  (Quote)

    > It’s really remarkable that the president was able to maintain such a cool public face and give nothing away, while this incredibly high stakes operation was underway.
    He must have icewater in his veins.

    I think it’s a prerequisite for the presidency. Just remember GWB’s reaction when he was informed about the first plane hitting the WTC.

  81. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 17, 2011 at 11:41 pm  (Quote)

    Interesting article: Do other countries have “birther” controversies?

    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/politics/110516/barack-obama-donald-trump-birthers-foreign-countries?page=full

    They talk about leadership qualifications in other countries, and even some foreign presidents who had to show a birth certificate!

  82. Scientist says:
    May 18, 2011 at 7:57 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Interesting article: Do other countries have “birther” controversies?http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/politics/110516/barack-obama-donald-trump-birthers-foreign-countries?page=fullThey talk about leadership qualifications in other countries, and even some foreign presidents who had to show a birth certificate!

    Yes very interesting. Every time I hear one of these interminable discussions regarding the meaning of “natural born citizen” it reminds me of Talmudic scholars or medieval monks discussing some microscopic theological point. All of them are missing the forest for the trees. The real question is: “Why have such a foolish, antiquated restriction at all?” Either one should be able to justify it as applicable to the 21st century and write some unambiguous modern language that really provides the supposed protection sought or one should eliminate it.

    In the real world, the voters have proven to be a better protection than any legal language. The article mentioned Canada in regards to the former Governor General, which is only a figurehead position. What it didn’t mention is the recent Canadian election in which the Liberal candidate, Michael Ignatieff, had spent most of his adult life in Britain and the US. While that wasn’t the sole reason, the Liberals were reduced to the smallest number of seats in Canadian history. So, really, one doesn’t need Constitutions and laws to stop people with weak ties to the country from being elected. The voters are quite happy to do it.

    I have never gotten this whole “originalism” thing. How long does one have to continue pretending it’s still 1788? If the US is still around in 2511 or 3011 will people still be running around in tri-cornered hats arguing arcane points of 18th century law and philosophy? It’s really quite absurd.

  83. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 18, 2011 at 8:41 am  (Quote)

    Scientist: I have never gotten this whole “originalism” thing. How long does one have to continue pretending it’s still 1788? If the US is still around in 2511 or 3011 will people still be running around in tri-cornered hats arguing arcane points of 18th century law and philosophy? It’s really quite absurd.

    While I agree that we shouldn’t be stuck in the 18th century, I also think that the law is something that we must be able to rely on. Someone might spend enormous amounts of time and money running for President, and they should be able to rely on their eligibility when deciding to run. Things work better when the law is settled, and its interpretation should only change when there is a compelling reason. For other changes, we have the legislature.

  84. Scientist says:
    May 18, 2011 at 9:22 am  (Quote)

    l

    Dr. Conspiracy: I also think that the law is something that we must be able to rely on. Someone might spend enormous amounts of time and money running for President, and they should be able to rely on their eligibility when deciding to run.

    Then the best answer is simple: Allow all citizens to run for all offices (you could have a minimum age if it was truly necessary). No wondering about 19th century court cases, birth vs moments after birth, common law vs statute, whether residency must be consecutive or cumulative, etc. You can look at your passport and know you are eligible.

    Clean, simple and logical and then you can shut down the site, It’s not only time for that, but about 150 years past time.

  85. The Magic M says:
    May 18, 2011 at 10:09 am  (Quote)

    > So, really, one doesn’t need Constitutions and laws to stop people with weak ties to the country from being elected.

    Sane people don’t. But you know the birthers are still living in the 1776 world where one individual might have been able to pull off an instance of “ha, I fooled you all, none of you knew I was … at some point in my life and have never been … at all and also did not … before I became 18”.
    After all, it was this thought (one man by himself sneaking through all the safeguards) that started the birther movement’s pseudo-arguments.

    I think that the base of every birther movement, anywhere in the world, is always made up of two key points:

    1. “We don’t want someone who’s foreign” – either by “race”, “nationality” or “religion”.
    While never having had a true birther movement, Germany had its share of right-wing people who claimed multi-culturalism would lead to a “Turkish chancellor” one day (by which they meant someone who was legally doubtlessly a German, but still had allegiance mainly to the country of his ancestors).

    2. “We don’t want someone sneaking into office” – e.g. someone who pretends to love the country and be a true democrat while really supporting the country’s enemies and being a wannabe dictator.

    That is why people come up with contrived ideas how to “protect” everybody else. And also because they don’t have faith in the judgment of their fellow countrymen. The “I know better than you” is much stronger among the political extremes.
    (I, having a degree in maths, also often think “I would know better than the uneducated masses”, but I would never, neither openly nor secretly, try to force my opinion on others. That is the difference – these people *want* to control what’s going on because they believe they have a “right to know better”.)

  86. bjphysics says:
    May 18, 2011 at 11:45 am  (Quote)

    Scientist: lThen the best answer is simple: Allow all citizens to run for all offices (you could have a minimum age if it was truly necessary). No wondering about 19th century court cases, birth vs moments after birth, common law vs statute, whether residency must be consecutive or cumulative, etc. You can look at your passport and know you are eligible.Clean, simple and logical and then you can shut down the site, It’s not only time for that, but about 150 years past time.

    The age requirements to hold political office are a wise idea as demonstrated by this highly acclaimed 1968 documentary.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRLwV2xafpk

  88. Marshal says:
    May 24, 2011 at 10:57 am  (Quote)

    So now Im [sic] banned?

    [Nope. You’re just been rounded up as a suspected troll and subject to moderator approval. I deleted two of your comments this morning, one a rant about George Bush, a topic which is always off topic for the blog, and another one which was off topic for where it was posted. Click the “Open Mike” (right sidebar) link to find the current open thread where you may post comments about Barack Obama conspiracy theories outside the active articles in a way so as not to hijack discussion of the articles. Doc.]

  89. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    May 24, 2011 at 11:13 am  (Quote)

    This Marshal kid is really ruining my opinion of Marshall Mann the awesome Witsec Inspector on In Plain Sight.

  90. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 24, 2011 at 11:37 am  (Quote)

    I call your attention to this article from the Foreign Policy magazine editors blog:

    Birthers turn on GOP rising stars

    Somehow I have a feeling this ends with only landholding, Mayflower-descended Freemasons being eligible to run for president.

  91. Thrifty says:
    May 24, 2011 at 12:36 pm  (Quote)

    Are any of you guys familiar with scam baiting? You know those scam E-Mails where somebody asks for your help smuggling millions of dollars out of the country, and you get a percentage? Well, scam baiting is when you respond to these E-Mails (using a false name and false E-Mail address), and taunt the scammer and waste his time.

    I was just re-reading some of my old baits and what struck me as interesting was how some of the same tactics I used to stall were what Birthers use to deny the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth documents. I demand documents, the scammers provide forged documents, I demand unreasonable verifications of those documents. I ignore any evidence that the scammers present to try and look legit. I hurl insults and swear when cornered. Basically anything I can to avoid saying “I believe you”. Only difference is that I am doing it to con-artists and Birthers do it to honest civil servants.

  92. Reality Check says:
    May 24, 2011 at 2:54 pm  (Quote)

    There is a posting in the Lucas Smith thread at TFB that a Lucas Daniel Smith has been arrested in arrested in Pima County, AZ and is being held on $10,000 bond for extradition to another state. This Smith has the same birth date as the one who posts here. http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2289&p=245924#p245856

  93. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    May 24, 2011 at 5:18 pm  (Quote)

    Reality Check: There is a posting in the Lucas Smith thread at TFB that a Lucas Daniel Smith has been arrested in arrested in Pima County, AZ and is being held on $10,000 bond for extradition to another state. This Smith has the same birth date as the one who posts here. http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2289&p=245924#p245856

    RC the guy is Lucas Andrew Smith unfortunately not our lucas.

  94. Reality Check says:
    May 24, 2011 at 6:17 pm  (Quote)

    No, the Pima County arrest was definitely a Lucas Daniel Smith. Someone speculated that the extradition warrant was from Florida and that led to the other Lucas Smith.

  95. gorefan says:
    May 24, 2011 at 8:22 pm  (Quote)

    Reality Check: that led to the other Lucas Smith.

    Maybe Lucas Daniel Smith has six brothers all named Lucas, Ã la George Foreman. Only the middle names are different.

  96. Judge Mental says:
    May 25, 2011 at 1:06 pm  (Quote)

    According to Bsteadman who helps Smith run his website it is definitely ‘the’ Lucas Smith who is in custody at Pima. Wanted as a fugitive from justice in another state….one involves a $10k secured bond and the other involves a $10k cash bond.

  97. Judge Mental says:
    May 25, 2011 at 1:22 pm  (Quote)

    Obviously I meant Bsteadman helps with Smith’s youtube channel and not ‘website’ as such.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/InspectorSmith

  98. chancery says:
    May 25, 2011 at 1:32 pm  (Quote)

    >> You can’t even recognise the former shape of this horse — let it rest in peace!
    >>
    >> –Lee Hunter

    Could someone help me with the reference here? I grok the idea of “beating a dead horse,” but beyond that I’m at a loss.

  99. Rickey says:
    May 25, 2011 at 2:05 pm  (Quote)

    He is saying that the dead horse has been beaten beyond recognition. In other words, it’s time to give it a rest.

  100. chancery says:
    May 25, 2011 at 2:25 pm  (Quote)

    That much I figured out, and it’s a nice turn of phrase.

    But at the risk of criticism for serious cultural ignorance, I don’t know who Lee Hunter is or where he made that comment. Google didn’t help me, although there’s always the chance of user error.

  101. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 25, 2011 at 2:54 pm  (Quote)

    chancery: But at the risk of criticism for serious cultural ignorance, I don’t know who Lee Hunter is or where he made that comment. Google didn’t help me, although there’s always the chance of user error.

    I don’t know who Lee Hunter is either. Quotes of the day are not only from notable people, but people who say notable things. The comment appeared as a reply to a reader letter here:

    http://www.nwfdailynews.com/opinion/born-40412-framers-country.html

    You can’t find that quote on Google, but it is on Bing.

  102. chancery says:
    May 25, 2011 at 3:16 pm  (Quote)

    Thanks for the clarification. I do enjoy reading local news outlets, and that one is pretty intensely local. No wonder I didn’t spot it.

    It’s a tribute to the depth of your research, as well as to your eye for a good phrase.

  103. sfjeff says:
    May 25, 2011 at 4:12 pm  (Quote)

    I just wanted to mention that apparently Corsi announced on- Alex Jones- he had a ‘mole’ in the Hawaiian Department of Health and he would be releasing more info over the next days and weeks….blah blah blah.

    I didn’t watch the video but I assume it is the usual dreck.

    the day a birther announces something that doesn’t include some statement about the proof being presented later will be a shocking day indeed.

    Maybe that is why they don’t believe Obama released his birth certificate? He didnt’ announce a week before that he would be releasing ‘shocking information’ soon.

  104. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 25, 2011 at 7:34 pm  (Quote)

    So I was over on YouTube and this person posting under the name StompingRabbits (who I think is the DancingRabbit/DraggingCanoe we had here) was trying to explain why it was that the Congress certified Obama’s election unanimously if he was unconstitutional. He said they were either duped or afraid of being called racist. I replied:

    So the Supreme Court, the WHOLE Congress, the State of Hawaii, the Executive branch and the News Media are all either in on the conspiracy or afraid of someone calling them names, and so they all turn traitor to the country. Well, I humbly suggest that you get out while you can, preferably somewhere without Internet.

    http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

  105. JJ says:
    May 25, 2011 at 9:47 pm  (Quote)

    What do you all think about the argument against the long-form that some of the letters on the typewritten form are composed of identical pixels (for example, two different B’s)?

  106. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 25, 2011 at 10:09 pm  (Quote)

    JJ: What do you all think about the argument against the long-form that some of the letters on the typewritten form are composed of identical pixels (for example, two different B’s)?

    Well, I haven’t seen the argument, but given the provenance of the document, one must certainly conclude that technical arguments against it are the fakes, not the document itself.

    If they really are identical (and I would have my doubts) it is likely due to the optimization that we see in the document to reduce its size, the process where a lot of the black was separated from the background and gray scale removed.

  107. JJ says:
    May 25, 2011 at 10:20 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Well, I haven’t seen the argument, but given the provenance of the document, one must certainly conclude that technical arguments against it are the fakes, not the document itself.

    Well, I checked it out for myself just by zooming in on the PDF, and the Bs in the “OBAMA” for Jr. and the “OBAMA” for Sr. are clearly composed of identical pixels. Would that be possible in a scan of a photocopy of a 1960s typewritten document?

  108. Expelliarmus says:
    May 25, 2011 at 10:22 pm  (Quote)

    Er, why wouldn’t two identical letters formed with the same typewriter have an identical pattern of pixels on a scanned document?

  109. JJ says:
    May 26, 2011 at 1:03 am  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus:
    Er, why wouldn’t two identical letters formed with the same typewriter have an identical pattern of pixels on a scanned document?

    It’s not just a scan. It’s a scan of a photocopy of the original 1961 typewritten document.

    And no, it’s not possible. Here is a DIRECT scan of a 1950s typewritten document from the University of Hawaii, also in PDF format: http://digicoll.manoa.hawaii.edu/grace/Libraries/medialibrary/15.pdf

    Try it yourself–it’s not possible. I even printed out the Obama BC which already had the identical B’s and scanned it back in in very high res (1200 dpi) in both color and black & white (even though the WH scan had to be a color scan with the green, etc)–and the previously identical B’s are no longer identical in either the color scan or the black & white scan.

    This thing is not a scan. Someone’s lying about it.

  110. Expelliarmus says:
    May 26, 2011 at 1:42 am  (Quote)

    How is “not possible”? It’s the letter B. Depending on the resolution of the scan, there are only going to be minor differences from one B to the next.

    How many attempts did you make at scanning to prove that it is “not possible”? 100? 1000?

    The document you are using for a sample is nothing like the birth certificate. The type looks pretty fuzzy.

    What resolution did you use with your scanner? How many dots per inch (dpi)?

    Did you have your scanner set for OCR?

    Why would you print out the Obama BC and scan it at HIGH resolution? The higher the resolution, obviously the less the chance of an identical pixel configuration. It seems to me that the letters are clearly scanned in at a fairly low resolution — the lower the resolution (DPI), the more likely there will be duplicate patterns — so if you wanted to repilcate the pattern, then obviously you would want to experiment with lower resolution scans.

    I counted roughly 32 pixels, give or take, in terms of the height of the letter B. How many pixels are in the letter B on your 1200 dpi scan? Why don’t you REALLY try to replicate things by making a low resolution scan. Start with 72 dpi, it’s a common setting when documents are being scanned for internet viewing. Then count the pixels in the letter “B” on your 72 dpi scan. If it comes out to around the same as the birth certificate PDF, then you’ve got a basis for comparison.

    But even if you try 10 or 20 or 30 times to replicate the situation and you don’t see identical B’s, that doesn’t make it impossible. It just would give us evidence that it is improbable.

    But I first, you need to at least have the common sense to scan at LOW resolution and not HIGH resolution. The lower the resolution, the less variation you will see among the letters. My guess right now is that the PDF came from a 72 dpi scan, so the first step in trying to replicate the event would be to match the lower resolution.

  111. JJ says:
    May 26, 2011 at 2:38 am  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus:
    How is “not possible”? It’s the letter B. Depending on the resolution of the scan, there are only going to be minor differences from one B to the next.

    How many attempts did you make at scanning to prove that it is “not possible”? 100?1000?

    The document you are using for a sample is nothing like the birth certificate.The type looks pretty fuzzy.

    What resolution did you use with your scanner?How many dots per inch (dpi)?

    Did you have your scanner set for OCR?

    Why would you print out the Obama BC and scan it at HIGH resolution? The higher the resolution, obviously the less the chance of an identical pixel configuration.It seems to me that the letters are clearly scanned in at a fairly low resolution — the lower the resolution (DPI), the more likely there will be duplicate patterns — so if you wanted to repilcate the pattern, then obviously you would want to experiment with lower resolution scans.

    I counted roughly 32 pixels, give or take, in terms of the height of the letter B.How many pixels are in the letter B on your 1200 dpi scan? Why don’t you REALLY try to replicate things by making a low resolution scan.Start with 72 dpi, it’s a common setting when documents are being scanned for internet viewing.Then count the pixels in the letter “B” on your 72 dpi scan.If it comes out to around the same as the birth certificate PDF, then you’ve got a basis for comparison.

    But even if you try 10 or 20 or 30 times to replicate the situation and you don’t see identical B’s, that doesn’t make it impossible. It just would give us evidence that it is improbable.

    But I first, you need to at least have the common sense to scan at LOW resolution and not HIGH resolution. The lower the resolution, the less variation you will see among the letters. My guess right now is that the PDF came from a 72 dpi scan, so the first step in trying to replicate the event would be tomatch the lower resolution.

    I just tried a low resplution (my scanner does 75 dpi) and the B’s are not at all the same and they are only 7 pixels high. In my previous high resolution (1200) dpi they are close to 30 pixels high. So high res is definitely better.

    However, perhaps Dr. C is right that optimization could produce the effect. These two videos seem to contradict each other on that, however:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW_PWzhgvDs

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqoB7F9-wOM&feature=related

    The first video does OCR then Optimization.

    The second video does Optimization then OCR.

    So do you have to do Optimization first in order for the OCR to change the chromatic abberrations/pixels?? That seems strange…

  112. Expelliarmus says:
    May 26, 2011 at 3:33 am  (Quote)

    I think the PDF that was loaded online was scanned in at 300 dpi at most. I come to that conclusion based on file size — it is a color scan (obviously) and 376 kb. I printed it out and then tried scanning it to PDF on my own system at various resolutions. When I scanned in at 300 dpi, my system rendered a PDF that was larger – 448 kb — but that was the closest and the overall size could be smaller with PDF optimization. The optimization process is also going to impact the appearance of the letters, however — so really there is no way to even begin an experiment to try to “replicate” anything if you don’t have the same type of scanner, the same scanning software, and the same PDF conversion software.

    I think your mistake in looking at pixels is assuming, mistakenly, that scan-to-PDF produces a photographic image, like a TIFF. I also wonder what program you used to blow up the image you scanned to look at it on screen. If you are simply using the magnification options in Adobe, then every time you increase the size, you are seeing the Adobe algorithm in play — and one of the thing that it does is refine the images on screen to preserve display quality. In essence, with a low resolution image, it adds pixels that weren’t there before to smooth out the letters.

    You can see that in action by scanning the same image (with text), at the same resolution, both the PDF and to a BMP file that you open in MS Paint. Once you have done that, use the zoom feature on Paint to increase magnification (say, 800%) and do the same with the PDF image in Adobe. You’ll see that the BMP image looks more jagged, because Adobe is probably using raster graphics to smooth out the the letters with more shades of gray, whereas MS Paint is simply giving you an enlarged view of the same set of bitmaps.

    The bottom line is that neither process is going to tell you a damn thing about the piece of paper from which the image was made. Once you’ve stuck the thing in a scanner you are looking at a digital image produced by software, and you have no idea where along the process any anomalies you see are being injected into the image you end up with.

  113. Majority Will says:
    May 26, 2011 at 7:16 am  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: The bottom line is that neither process is going to tell you a damn thing about the piece of paper from which the image was made. Once you’ve stuck the thing in a scanner you are looking at a digital image produced by software, and you have no idea where along the process any anomalies you see are being injected into the image you end up with.

    I think the bottom line is also that JJ will find what JJ wants to find no matter the circumstances because JJ most likely concluded something will be suspicious (“This thing is not a scan. Someone’s lying about it.”) beforehand.

    And when I rhetorically zoom in real close, my bottom line and your bottom line are identical.

    Two Bs or not two Bs? Given the provenance of the document, that is not a question.

  114. Scientist says:
    May 26, 2011 at 7:31 am  (Quote)

    On a sad note, many here are familiar with Intrade, the Irish-based on-line prediction market which is often the most accurate predictor of elections and other world events. Their founder John Delaney, 42, died this past Saturday, 50 meters from the top of Mount Everest, on his second attempt to climb the peak. His wife had given birth to their third child 3 days previously, a fact of which he was unaware at the time he died.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1390489/Climber-died-summit-Everest-wife-tell-just-father-again.html

    Intrade has the odds of Obama being reelected at 61%, suggesting that he is not likely to be marched out of the White House in handcuffs iin 30 days.

  115. Majority Will says:
    May 26, 2011 at 8:49 am  (Quote)

    Scientist:
    On a sad note, many here are familiar with Intrade, the Irish-based on-line prediction market which is often the most accurate predictor of elections and other world events.Their founder John Delaney, 42, died this past Saturday, 50 meters from the top of Mount Everest, on his second attempt to climb the peak.His wife had given birth to their third child 3 days previously, a fact of which he was unaware at the time he died.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1390489/Climber-died-summit-Everest-wife-tell-just-father-again.html

    Intrade has the odds of Obama being reelected at 61%, suggesting that he is not likely to be marched out of the White House in handcuffs iin 30 days.

    I wonder if Mr. Delaney had calculated his own odds of success.

  116. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 26, 2011 at 9:46 am  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: I think the PDF that was loaded online was scanned in at 300 dpi at most. I come to that conclusion based on file size — it is a color scan (obviously) and 376 kb.

    Here’s what I know.

    Based on published reports, the long form PDF contains both vector and bitmap layers. I used Adobe Acrobat to export the bitmap layers. There are three of them:

    1) Background – resolution 115 DPI
    2) Most of the form lines and text – resolution 239 DPI
    3) Alvin Onaka’s signature stamp – 76 DPI

    There is information on the long form that is not part of the bitmap layers and I am assuming that these are in the vector graphic information.

    It is clear that the PDF creation software broke the document down into pieces and optimized the resolution of the pieces.

  117. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 26, 2011 at 9:52 am  (Quote)

    JJ: Well, I checked it out for myself just by zooming in on the PDF, and the Bs in the “OBAMA” for Jr. and the “OBAMA” for Sr. are clearly composed of identical pixels

    I zoomed in and the B’s weren’t even close.

  118. gorefan says:
    May 26, 2011 at 10:25 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: I zoomed in and the B’s weren’t even close.

    So according to JJ someone copied and pasted the B’s form the Obama name. Why wouldn’t they just copy and paste the entire name?

  119. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 26, 2011 at 10:41 am  (Quote)

    JJ: However, perhaps Dr. C is right that optimization could produce the effect. These two videos seem to contradict each other on that, however

    I should point out that, to my knowledge, none of these YouTube videos scan the document using the same software that the White House used. Unless they do that, they are just stumbling around in the dark.

    If I had a Mac, I would have done the experiment as soon as the layers thing was brought up. Do birthers just not have Macs?

  120. bjphysics says:
    May 26, 2011 at 11:34 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Do birthers just have Macs?

    Did you mean:

    Do birthers just have PCs?

  121. Majority WIll says:
    May 26, 2011 at 12:38 pm  (Quote)

    bjphysics: Did you mean:

    Do birthers just have PCs?

    IMO, the Mac vs. PC argument is mostly so much nonsense (disclaimer: avid, longtime Mac user here with a disdain for Microsoft for many reasons) and anecdotally I’ve known quite a few computer users from both extremes of the political spectrum and everything in between strongly defend either the Mac or PCs. Limbaugh is a Mac user and Apple fan [shudder].

    Partisan preference has been argued tirelessly and fruitlessly over at macdailynews.com and other Mac oriented as well as PC oriented sites for years. The argument usually tries to paint Apple Inc. as a liberal organization based on its origins, history, investments, once dominant user base of artists, educators and creatives (and still so to some extent), location, executives, etc. and the PC side as conservative and business oriented. You’ll find many examples of confirmation biases at work here as well and the same problems with making generalizations about people as well.

  122. Joey says:
    May 26, 2011 at 1:49 pm  (Quote)

    The intrepid “girl reporter” is mad at this site:
    “I really don’t post there anymore. They called me “racist” for spelling Fukino as “Frujinko” on purpose. Even though they spelled Orly Taitz as “Oily Taintz” and Mario Apuzzo as “Aputzo”. Go figure. They were just mad because I was beating them WITH LOGIC like carpets over a clothesline.

    I have put up some Haiku there under my “The Head Researcher” personna, but it is pretty much pointless trying to argue with the Obotski. They don’t even read Internet Articles before criticizing them and it is like you are talking to a bag of groupthinking hammers. They have a lot of confirmation bias going on and haven’t had a new thought in years.

    Dr. C is usually pretty nice, but the other posters there are like complete idiots. They are just now discovering things I told them like 9 months ago.
    321 posted on Thursday, May 26, 2011 7:52:14 AM by Squeeky”

  123. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 26, 2011 at 2:09 pm  (Quote)

    Joey (Quoting Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter):
    I have put up some Haiku there under my “The Head Researcher” personna

    Yeah, I noticed that Squeeks had the same IP address as Head Researcher. My only real problem with Squeeky is her hyperactivity.

  124. Expelliarmus says:
    May 26, 2011 at 5:55 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Here’s what I know.

    Based on published reports, the long form PDF contains both vector and bitmap layers. I used Adobe Acrobat to export the bitmap layers. There are three of them:

    1) Background – resolution 115 DPI
    2) Most of the form lines and text – resolution 239 DPI
    3) Alvin Onaka’s signature stamp – 76 DPI

    239 DPI seems right for the text.

    Dr. Conspiracy: I zoomed in and the B’s weren’t even close.

    I could see what JJ was getting at with the B’s,, but I think that’s because of the “zooming” has very little to do with the actual image scanned and everything to do with the software doing the on-screen rendering. So it may be extremely variable depending on computer screen resolution and the particular software used for viewing the PDF image.

  125. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    May 26, 2011 at 6:16 pm  (Quote)

    Expelliarmus: So it may be extremely variable depending on computer screen resolution and the particular software used for viewing the PDF image.

    I think that’s likely. BTW I am probably wrong about the vector graphic layers. Based on what Krawetz said, it looks like there are only bitmap layers. However, for some reason Adobe Acrobat only exports 3 of them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.