Obama birth certificate is fake: created from multiple documents with Adobe software

Today Barack Obama held a press conference to announce the release of his birth certificate. It’s caused so much controversy since before he was even elected. Attorney Phil Berg has been investigating this for years, Jerome Corsi has a book coming out next month on the topic and investigative reporter Wayne Madsen has been digging deep about Obama’s backgrounds including his many connections to the CIA and inconsistencies about his college enrollments and travels in the middle east.

I had a feeling that something was about to happen since the news networks have been covering this heavily lately. Many others have been covering this issue, yet the networks didn’t pay it any mind until Donald Trump started up on his soap box. I personally feel there is enough other serious problems with Obama’s background that are easier to prove. The fact that Obama’s name was changed when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and moved to Indonesia is a serious issue on its own. There is no record of Obama’s name being changed back to Obama. His social security number is supposed to have originated from Connecticut for mysterious reasons. And in case those weren’t strange enough there are serious problems with his selective service card.

Today we’re going to focus on the document just released. My background is in photography and graphic design and I’ve worked at a rather high level in the industry for many years. I’ve worked on international ads for some of the most recognizable brands in the world. I’m pretty humble so I don’t like to claim expertise in anything because there’s always someone smarter, but I do feel that my analysis is worthy on this topic or I wouldn’t offer it. Please look at the images below for a detailed walkthrough of the problems. I’ll try my best to explain them in simplistic terms.

TECHNICAL INTRO: The long form document released today was in the .PDF format. That is a format created by the Adobe corporation for the sophisticated sharing of certain types of documents. The PDF format is special because it preserves text and compressed graphics. In more technical terms it preserves vector and raster graphics. It is also special because it can preserve the editing abilities for users who have Adobe applications like Illustrator, InDesign and Photoshop. You could export your whole document as a .JPG which will compress everything uniformly and place the same level of compression on everything, making it all blocky and pixelated when you zoom into it, this would have been my choice if I was going to make a fake. You can also export your document directly into a .PDF which will preserve all text as a vector graphic and compress all other raster graphics to make them very small in size to make it easy to send over the internet. A vector graphic is infinitely zoomable because it uses boundaries to describe fields of color instead of pixels which is used by raster graphics. An example of raster graphics would be a photo; when you zoom into it very tightly it becomes pixelated and blocky.

First, if you haven’t seen it, here is the “birth certificate“. Next, when I opened the program in photoshop I noticed that I could zoom in really tightly and I saw many flaws. So many in fact that I didn’t know where to begin. First, you can see that the level of compression on the background green hatching is different than the text.

The text on this portion is clearly strange, including the name Barack. All the letters in that portion are vectorized graphics except for the R which looks pixelated. I don’t know why. Secondly, there is a white faded ghost around all the text and black lines of this document, again I don’t know why. It would appear that this document was pieced together from multiple sources to get it to say what they needed. To show how simple it is to create a fake, I went through my library to find a typewriter style font that has a similar appearance to this one. I don’t have the exact match but I have a pretty close one.

Next, I used a filter on a duplicate to show a similar effect to the pixelated R.

Next I took issue with the background of the document. It is a green and white cross hatching water mark to prevent forgery. I went through my families birth certificates and found my son’s who was born in 1996. As it turns out, his has the exact same watermark background. Here is a small version of the whole document so you can see what it looks like and a close up to show the background.

You can see in the example below that I’ve cropped in to a handwriting sample in the Registrar box. This shows both a sample of the watermark and what a real printing of the form and signature would look like. The properties of the scanned form are completely different from what the White House has provided.

Here is a crop of the city of Boston’s seal. Keep this in mind, you’ll need to compare it to the seal on the Obama document.

As a comparison, I looked at another birth certificate from 1968 to see the differences. You’ll see how simple it is in comparison.

Next I took a second look at the certificate of live birth that was released a couple years ago. The first thing I noticed was that the green background watermark was exactly the same.

I’m confused by this document for a number of reasons. First, it has similar graphical problems on the document that show that the compression of the text is different from the watermark and it also contains a white glow around the text. There seems to be either a noise filter applied to the text, or it was transferred from another low resolution source file.

Let’s look at the seal from the certificate of live birth. You can see that it doesn’t look normal right away. It has white ghosting around all the text and graphics. This is called fringing and it happens when you silhouette an image and transpose it onto another. A skilled graphic artist can remove it, but it’s not easy for someone less experienced. This is clearly done by an amateur.

In addition, the font is Arial, which is a computer font created in 1981. How could that font be used on this form? It does indicate in the lower left that it is a revision from November of 2001, but why? Don’t they have an original?

Here’s an example I created to show how easy it is to transfer someone’s signature from one document to another. First I took a sticky note with a sample on it and used a quick, and incorrect, way to transfer it. I then cleaned up the edges leaving some of the fringing in place and then took out the color saturation. It still came out looking better then the White House’s version.

Lastly, and this is most startling, I opened the document in Adobe Illustrator and it revealed that person who exported the document did so directly from Illustrator and maintained the layers in tact! This is a shocking revelation that needs to be explained by the White House. You can see in the screenshots below that the layers palette on the right shows many active layers and I display how the elements can be turned on and off at will and even moved around the page!

This image shows how I could select the letters from the word “Non”. The E was part of a different group. I think they tried to make the “Non” faded to appear like an improperly inked letter grouping from a typewriter.

In this image I just turned off the layer that contains the signature of the State Registrar. It reveals a layer of white ghosting beneath it. I do not understand this or know the purpose of it.I am very confused by this but I can say with certainty that there are major problems with this document. It’s almost as if someone from inside the White House is trying to send a message to tell everyone that this is a fake. Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem.

In closing, I am ashamed of our president for getting on the podium today and say that “he has better things to do with his time” than answer our questions. Mr. President, you work for us, and you will answer all of our questions because it’s your responsibility and it’s the decent thing to do.

I heard a commentator say that she felt the seal and held the document today at the White House. If that’s true, why was this fake put online? Once again, more questions than answers.

This entry was posted in CIA, Democracy, Propaganda, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Obama birth certificate is fake: created from multiple documents with Adobe software

  1. chris says:

    Hi Gus,

    Quite an analysis… You may want to change in the intro the description though, from: “I’ll try my best to explain them in simplistic terms” to:
    “I’ll try my best to explain them in ‘simple’ terms”.
    That is, of course, if you didn’t try to minimize either your own work or the issue which do not really seem like valid reasons. Especially when one further considers terms you use like ‘raster graphics’, ‘blocky and pixelated’, ‘vectorized graphics’, ‘in tact’, and ‘I display’ which are not simple nor simplistic (maybe a little simplistic, I agree).

    You may also want to clarify your comment “Either that, or they are as stupid as they seem” since ‘they’ could be anybody: ‘someone at the White House’, ‘everyone’, ‘you and I and the next guy’, etc.

    Finally, since when is the president’s responsibility to answer ‘all of our’ questions? Moreover, since when is the president ‘working for us’ and what has decency to do with being THE President?

    If by “us” you mean the American people you , dear Gus, are as delusional as they get.
    If, on the other hand, you mean “us, the corporatrocacy, we the selected few, the top 1% of the society, those handpicked by God Himself to rule this planet” – although I do not think your worldly possesions qualify you to belong to this club -then you are dead right!

    In quite a few of your radio shows you (and Ken, and your guests) illustrate how corrupted the leadership of this country is; how corporate interests dictate all policies and the laws and the rules and regulations (or the lack of) that are used to keep the people subordinate and submissive; how big money has corrupted every aspect of the society; and, how greedy and stupid and selfish everyone is (and yes, that includes you, and I and even the next guy and gal)… But we are _strike that _ you are expecting the President to be “decent” and answer questions… That kind of attitude, the ‘politically correct’, the ‘nonviolent protest’, the ‘humble disobedience’, the ‘agreeable disagreement’, all this nonsensical behavior resulting from the highest levels of individual selfishness allows evil to flourish. Until we change ourselves, until we become decent people ourselves, educated, compassionate, less greedy, less wanting, and on and on and on, until then asking THE President to be ‘decent’ is like trying to stop the Earth from spinning… Even if he wanted to -which he obviously does not – he couldn’t.

    • Gus says:

      Hi Chris, do we have an English professor in our midst? I’ll leave the grammar aside since it’s not really the point of the article. I’m not writing poetry.

      As far as the other points, demanding the president to answer the citizen’s questions is the point of the article. It’s not delusional, but instead calling a spade a spade. The president and his main stream media mouth pieces say that they stand for democracy, but are obviously caught in a double standard whenever they accuse dissenters of delusion, bigotry, cowardice or plain old stupidity. Clearly the democratic process is not important to our president or government.

  2. I have heard 2 things. 1. They replaced the layered version with a flattened version, unannounced of course and 2. there is data you can get from Adobe Bridge that seems to imply that this document has been worked on since October 2010, metadata of some sort, a record of each TIME it was altered in some fashion. If true, this would end the “OCR” excuses and prove fraud. So do you have Adobe Bridge and can you verify this? Regardless, by his own admission now on this form, Obama is NOT a US President as his father is listed as Obama Sr., who was a British Subject living temporarily in the US, making Obama Jr. a British Subject at birth, not a natural born citizen.

    • Gus says:

      I can’t confirm the metadata issue because as far as I know Bridge doesn’t record every time a file’s been edited. It only contains the creation date and date last modified. Since this document is a pdf it’s not the source. It was outputted from the source file which was probably a .ai file and exported as a .pdf. SO the metadata of the .pdf would only show the date that it was exported which would be the date created.

      The OCR debate is a silly excuse. You would have to actually run the command to create the OCR text which doesn’t make sense. If you wanted it to seem real and not appear to be edited you would never run OCR on it, you would just scan it as an image and display it “as is”. Using OCR just opens a whole can of worms that no graphic specialist would want because they’d be accused of fraud immediately. And beside, that doesn’t explain why there is so much white ghosting around the text and mismatching levels of compression.

      As far as the Kenya, I know that period was a transitional period towards Kenyan independence. I do not have a concrete answer on whether that means his alleged father, Obama Sr. was actually a British subject or not. In addition, the name of the country of Kenya had a couple of names, but was commonly referred to as Kenya even before it was finally named as such in 1963.

  3. bob says:

    Can you post the original unflattened file? I tried to duplicate your work and sure enough they’ve replaced the layered image with a flattened one. Thanks.

    • Gus says:

      I just downloaded it again by following the original link and I can still open it in Illustrator and move the elements around. It appears to be the same file.

  4. bob says:

    I’m using photoshop… maybe it’s only with illustrator… anyway somebody should archive the file incase they do change it.

  5. bob says:

    How come nobody is commenting about the way it seems this is a book or some sort of bound volume but the background is larger than the “book” in every dimension? What’s supposed to be going on there? It looks totally ridiculous. How could this come about? Why are there no comments on it?

    • Gus says:

      Yes I know. That’s one of those things that’s just so bizarre I don’t even know what to say about it. It’s obviously taken out of a bound book and placed into a cutout of the background.

      This is so wrong on so many levels I almost feel crazy talking about it. Why isn’t this on every news channel rolling 24 hours a day demanding an answer?

  6. Pingback: Podcast of last night’s show and reports of Bin Laden’s death | In Context

  7. Alan Baker says:

    You simpletons,

    1. The government of hawaii photocopied an original from a bound volume onto a sheet of their security paper. That’s why the image is smaller than the sheet: the original was smaller than 8.5 x 11.

    2. The image on the paper wasn’t very clear, so when it was scanned for posting to the web, it wasn’t very legible.

    3. So they went through a series of steps to enhance contrast. I’ve used these very same steps to enhance poor artwork provided for business forms printing.

    • Gus says:

      As an image specialist, I don’t enhance sensitive documents. It looks like fraud, because it usually is.

      These 3 possible solutions don’t answer any of the questions that I raise in my analysis. They also assume too much and are all unnecessary and still only pretend to answer the one problem of the fading on the left side. If any enhancements were taken I would need to document those steps in order to head off any criticism.

      If this document was photocopied onto security paper then that would be all we needed. There is a major problem with this document being supposedly photocopied onto an 8.5×11.. the signature and date stamp by the registrar are on separate layers, can be moved around at will in Illustrator, have white fringing around them indicating they were taken from samples originally on white paper, and the supposed security paper compression is not consistent across the document from behind the photocopied area to the outer area, it clearly gets more compressed and pixelated behind the typewritten area.

      In addition, using enhancements like OCR would be particularly inappropriate on this document where it was important to see the original. This is not simply using a contrast enhancement or any other type or levels, curves, brightness or saturation adjustment. This is literally lifting signatures, seals and set type from other documents. Photocopying onto other paper wouldn’t leave white fringing around black elements since a photocopier can’t print white.

      Also, try to be a little more mature when addressing people. Nobody likes to be called simple. You’ll never win a debate that way, only make more enemies.

  8. Bryon says:

    Take a look at the corresponding documents as well.

    The weird part is the legal teams website, http://www.perkinscole.com, has been bought out by another domain. I would not expect a legal group to let their domain name lapse. Especially if they have it on their letterhead.

    • Gus says:

      Interesting.. I hadn’t seen that document before. I guess that should settle it! Thanks also for pointing me towards the blank website of perkins-cole. I used a domain who-is lookup to see who owns it. The domain has a private registration and was created in 2003 and updated January 18th, 2011 and isn’t set to expire until 2012. However, the website appears to be parked and is displaying advertising which is incredibly strange considering you’d think they would want a legit website up given all the free advertising they’re getting as Obama’s private representation! Does the firm even exist or is just another fraud in a long line of government hallucinations?

    • nate says:

      the confusion is because its actually http://www.perkinscoie.com not perkinscole.com. Put a little bit of research into that thought and you would have noticed that it isnt some government hallucination or what not. Perkins Coie has been around for over a hundred years.

  9. John Boy says:

    Thanks great information, I saw another guy take the letter “B” from Obamas name and match it perfectly with the “B” in Obamas Fathers name. The pixelation was Exactly the same, something that should not happen with paper abortion ohf the ink and being photographed(Like two snowflakes are never the same idea). Any thought would be helpful

    (Box 1a v box 8. Father and son share LEtter “B” perfect PIXelated copy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s