Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate

6 Responses to Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate

1. Noquitter says:

   December 21, 2008 at 7:14 pm  Noquitter(Quote)

   Is this site started to defend BHO, or look for the truth?
   Your replys to posters have been condesending as well as this picture you’ve posted of Obama and his birth certificate.
2. admin says:

   December 21, 2008 at 8:30 pm  admin(Quote)

   Noquitter,

   Fair question.

   No one could spend much time here on obamaconspiracy.org and not get the sense that I don’t believe the conspiracies I have reported here are true, but the purpose of the site is definitely not to defend Barack Obama. I voted for him, and I hope the guy does well, for the country’s sake, but I’m not his apologist.

   My real job is related to vital statistics and electronic birth/death registration systems. It really bothers me all the really dumb stuff I was reading about Hawaiian birth certificates. For example, there are over 2,000 web pages that say that block 7c on a Hawaiian birth registration form is the “place of birth”, when anyone who looked at the form could see it’s the mother’s usual residence. Am I supposed to comment on, log into, or email 2,000 web sites for each of these stupid mistakes?

   I was very lucky to get an excellent domain name and I developed this site to correct the misinformation I found. I am only targeting false information, or claims of fact that have no evidence for them. If I ever find a fact that supports an Obama conspiracy theory, I will highlight it here for completeness.

   The rule I set for myself and for this web site is that evidence trumps opinion. As for “truth”, that depends on what you mean. Conspiracy theorists define “truth” as agreement with the theory. If that’s the definition, then I am not looking for “truth”. I prefer to talk about evidence and facts rather than “truth”.
3. Noquitter says:

   December 21, 2008 at 9:36 pm  Noquitter(Quote)

   Thanks for the quick reply. Do you defend BHO releasing his COLB only on the internet?
   And would you be in favor of a forensic document team to analysis the original?
4. Noquitter says:

   December 21, 2008 at 10:05 pm  Noquitter(Quote)

   we are also discussing this at an msnbc site:

   George Orwell IIIMessage #2681
   12/21/08 06:56 PM Do you defend BHO releasing his COLB only on the internet?

   No. It was a poor attempt to alleviate the “problem” going on at the time. They did not thing the action through and paid for it dearly.

   First off, the fact that they “scanned” it and converted to a JPEG image format only opened the door to all the conspiracy geeks and their pixel math – going on about how the document was altered and a fake etc. etc. ANybody who knows anything about image formats knows the “anomalies” they cited are normal for the typical software most folks use to convert documents or photos into a format that can be used by HTML.

   Second the dopes actually “blacked out” the Certificate No. field when it clearly states “any alteration invalidates this certificate” at the bottom. While an unaltered but conversion software deficient image would “fit” the legal definition of a certified document in the possession of authorized person or parties (the campaign), the fact they didn’t go with an unaltered doc only shot themselves in the foot. Oh well, live and learn – this was uncharted territory I think everyone would agree.

   This was later rectified when photos that showed a person holding the document, raised seal, Cert. No etc. etc and all instead of a scanned copy did this matter come to satisfactory end (when you apply the Hawaiian law and its history to obtain such a re-issued certificate).

   Again, all that can move me to think otherwise is ONE Example where a foreign born individual produces such a copy and it doesn’t state that he/she wasn’t born anywhere under Hawaiian state territory but the nation where were actually born.

   And would you be in favor of a forensic document team to analysis the original?
   The original “vault” copy or the one that eventually was held be reporters/was scanned and placed online?

   http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=857568&BoardsParam=page%3d224%26HIPDelay%3d1%26PostID%3d25217696
5. Dr. Conspiracy says:

   December 21, 2008 at 11:29 pm  Dr. Conspiracy(Quote)

   Noquitter said … Do you defend BHO releasing his COLB only on the internet?
   And would you be in favor of a forensic document team to analysis the original?

   OK, I will defend a bit, just for you.

   I had this conversation with someone on another forum. My question was exactly where could Obama have released it that would have been appropriate. If someone had officially asked to see it, then we could have had an official inspection of it and some kind of official pronouncement that might have satisfied somebody. (I thought the Hawaiian official’s comments would have satisfied everybody too. Silly me.) But nobody in any official position has asked to look at it.

   I personally think that statements such as “if Obama had just _________ then this thing would have gone away a long time ago” are false. If we are truly talking about a conspiracy theory, then we know that no evidence cannot be doubted in some way — “your document examiner was paid a billion by George Soros, what do you think he would say?” If Birth Certificate Mark I flopped, I would expect the same from Birth Certificate Mark II.

   As for a forensic document examiner, I think that’s silly, both because the attestation from Hawaii is solid, and no hardcore doubter would believe the forensic team if they declared it genuine. “Before the team arrived, Obama switched the document for a real one provided by bribed Hawaiian officials who were in his pocket all along — think of the tourist dollars lost if Obama turned out to be not from Hawaii…”
6. Dr. Conspiracy says:

   December 21, 2008 at 11:38 pm  Dr. Conspiracy(Quote)

   Noquitter, I wrote the response above before reading your second note.

   I generally agree with what George Orwell III said except for his paragraph about blanking out the certificate number. Only the paper document is a certification; the image is not a certification and therefore altering doesn’t mean anything.

   The certificate image is genuine because Obama would be crazy to try a stunt like forging a birth certificate when the State of Hawaii could have yelled FOUL at any moment. It would be too easy to disprove and the consequences would have meant him losing the election. And it is genuine because Hawaiian officials have confirmed his registration in Hawaii (and through official spokespersons said they meant he was born in Hawaii).

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