Obama’s “Birth Announcement” Microfilm Reels Are Very Different
November 8, 2012 by 81 Comments
This article was produced as the result of research presented in the newly released Amazon e-book Obama Never Vetted: Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America, and poses two important issues:
• Barack Obama’s “birth announcement” Microfilm has been tampered with, according to photographic evidence.
• Original Obama “birth announcement” newspapers sold for a
high price. If Obama’s name was in those papers, why hasn’t someone come
forward with the newspapers?
First of all, if you haven’t already looked at Obama’s birth certificate at whitehouse.gov, you need to see with your own eyes that it is a forgery. The easiest way to tell this is to zoom to at least 800% into the alleged signature of his mother “Stanley Ann Dunham”. You can clearly see the difference in the different sections of the signature. For example, you can see what was a photocopy of a hand-drawn section connected to a computer-drawn solid black graphic section. The “State Registrar Stamp” is also a giveaway that it is a forgery, just look for the “X” instead of the “H” in the word “THE”. This anomaly did not exist until Obama’s alleged birth certificate was posted at whitehouse.gov.
Also, because this “Obama birth document” is allegedly typed in 1961, all of the typefaces should be the same for each typed letter. Look at the word “Student”; the lowercase “t’s” are completely different shapes. And in the name “Hussein” under the father’s name, the “U,I,N” are larger than the other letters. Someone working for Obama has lessened the quality and the sharpness from the original, so these differences are harder to see than in the original. The below snapshots are from the “birth document” posted at whitehouse.gov as of 11/4/12.
The “t’s” ARE DIFFERENT IN THE SAME WORD
THE “U, I, N” ARE ALL LARGER THAN THE REST OF THE LETTERS. IT’S
HARDER TO SEE ON THE UPDATED WHITEHOUSE.GOV VERSION THAN IT WAS WITH THE
ORIGINAL THAT’S IN MY BOOK.
The PDF file at Whitehouse.gov was changed from the original one that was uploaded. The original file had multiple layers because it was a created document – it was created in layers. Currently, only a single layer pdf file of the birth certificate exists at whitehouse.gov, so you cannot see numbers and letters disappearing and reappearing while zooming in and out anymore. However, the above signs of forgery still remain. You can read what the experts have to say on Obama’s birth certificate forgery in my book.
THE ALLEGED OBAMA BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT MICROFILMS
Regarding the microfilms, it has to be established that even if the Obama birth announcements were actually in the newspapers, it does not prove a Hawaii birth. Hawaii parents are/were able to file birth documents in Hawaii as long as they were residents, regardless of the actual birth place of the child. Additionally, no proof was required of the birth; only a written statement had to be made. Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961, and other subsequent Hawaii birth laws that allow registration with no proof, or allow Foreign Birth registration, leaves an opening to claim Hawaii “birth” without it being true. In 1961, once a birth document was filed with the Hawaii Department of Health (including those situations mentioned above as well as from the hospitals), the HDOH automatically issued birth announcements to the Hononlulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin.
People that believe Obama was born in Hawaii typically rely on the microfilm printouts of the “alleged” Obama birth announcements from The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Star Bulletin. Talking heads like Bill O’Reilly pose foolish, illogical questions like “Are we supposed to believe that Obama’s mother planted the birth certificate in 1961 in Hawaii because she wanted Obama to be President?” Maybe a better question would be “How many people from other countries come here illegally to specifically have their children born here so they can obtain U.S. citizenship?
However, none of the alleged more prominent journalists/talking heads, like O’Reilly and Chris Matthews (being the most prominent and most arrogant on the subject), have ever tried to find the original newspapers to confirm whether the microfilms are authentic. They just accepted what was fed to them by the Obama administration.
See this clip of O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly show how foolish they are:
And how foolish CNN is (about 7:40):
And how foolish MSNBC Chris Matthews is (about 3:11):
“HAWAII BIRHT ANNOUNCEMENT” HONOLULU ADVERTISER 8/13/61
Microfilms are easy to crop; paste and replace a new forged reel with the old authentic original reel. I have been to several different libraries and have evaluated this possibility of switching out a reel. It would be very easy as security is minimal.
Unlike producing a forgery of a 1961 newspaper, which would be extremely difficult if not impossible, producing a microfilm forgery would be relatively easy. Knowing this, I tried to track down in Hawaii the newspapers that allegedly had Obama’s birth announcements within them and found that some papers still existed in the 2007/2008 presidential campaign cycle. They were sold to a person unnamed by my contact for a high price according to him. He did not possess them; another antique dealer did. My contact did not know if Obama’s “birth announcements” actually appeared in the newspapers that were sold.
I was able to obtain two original 1961 Hawaii newspapers which include birth announcements from my antique dealer contact. I received five 1961 newspapers all in good to fair shape. Two of the papers obtained contained birth announcements that were completely intact. The existence of these two papers lends credibility to my antique dealer contact’s story of the Obama “birth announcement” newspapers having existed and having been sold.. After all, I just bought 5 newspapers from 1961. See below the photos of the newspaper birth announcements. One is from the Honolulu Star Bulletin dated January 27, 1961, and the other is from the Honolulu Advertiser dated May 5, 1961, just 3 months before Obama’s alleged birth announcements would have been printed.
Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Front Page.
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Birth Announcements
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President,The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Honolulu Advertiser, May 5, 1961, Birth Announcements
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Why has no one come forward to help Obama by revealing the original newspapers with the announcement? Obama and his friends are millionaires; if Obama’s name was actually in those newspapers, Obama or David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett or George Soros would have found them at any cost and plastered them everywhere. There is no advantage of not showing these original newspapers unless the person is getting paid off not to show them if Obama’s announcement isn’t there.
My theory is that Obama operatives could have created fake microfilms with Obama’s announcement added. There is a small finite number of microfilms to replace around the country (a search from awhile ago on worldcat.org came up with about 70-100 locations for the microfilms, but weren’t confirmed so there could actually be less), so replacing existing microfilms wouldn’t take too long. A microfilm printout with “Obama’s birth announcement” would have been more than enough “information” for Hawaii to say Obama was born there, especially with their extremely lax policies of handing out birth certificates.
Given the fact that Obama and his operatives produced a forged Hawaii birth certificate for display at the taxpayer-funded whitehouse.gov website, is it really not so hard to imagine that Obama and his operatives may have altered microfilms from 1961 and then took the forged reels of film and replaced them with the originals? Look for yourself at the photos below. Just another Obama coincidence from his background?
See below the tampered with microfilm from the California State Library. The California State Library Honolulu Advertiser microfilm for Obama’s alleged birth date was completely out of the ordinary. All of the microfilms were the same except two for 1961 the reel the contained Obama’s alleged birth announcement was a completely different color (dark brown when the rest were light gray) and texture (the reel was smooth and all of the rest had a textured finish). The other one was the same color, style, and texture and confirmed to be of the same era as the others by a reel manufacturer. Nothing was known about the Obama brown reel.
OBAMA’S ALLEGED BIRTH MONTH MICROFILM REEL IS VERY DIFFERENT
Photo by Pamela Barnett from book Obama Never Vetted: The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America. Showing 5 consecutive months of Honolulu Advertiser 1961 reels. There are 2 reels per month.
OBAMA “BIRTH MONTH” REEL
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Note from Author:
This story contains some photos never seen by the public which will be added to the 2nd edition of the book Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America.
• Barack Obama’s “birth announcement” Microfilm has been tampered with, according to photographic evidence.
First of all, if you haven’t already looked at Obama’s birth certificate at whitehouse.gov, you need to see with your own eyes that it is a forgery. The easiest way to tell this is to zoom to at least 800% into the alleged signature of his mother “Stanley Ann Dunham”. You can clearly see the difference in the different sections of the signature. For example, you can see what was a photocopy of a hand-drawn section connected to a computer-drawn solid black graphic section. The “State Registrar Stamp” is also a giveaway that it is a forgery, just look for the “X” instead of the “H” in the word “THE”. This anomaly did not exist until Obama’s alleged birth certificate was posted at whitehouse.gov.
Also, because this “Obama birth document” is allegedly typed in 1961, all of the typefaces should be the same for each typed letter. Look at the word “Student”; the lowercase “t’s” are completely different shapes. And in the name “Hussein” under the father’s name, the “U,I,N” are larger than the other letters. Someone working for Obama has lessened the quality and the sharpness from the original, so these differences are harder to see than in the original. The below snapshots are from the “birth document” posted at whitehouse.gov as of 11/4/12.
The “t’s” ARE DIFFERENT IN THE SAME WORD
The PDF file at Whitehouse.gov was changed from the original one that was uploaded. The original file had multiple layers because it was a created document – it was created in layers. Currently, only a single layer pdf file of the birth certificate exists at whitehouse.gov, so you cannot see numbers and letters disappearing and reappearing while zooming in and out anymore. However, the above signs of forgery still remain. You can read what the experts have to say on Obama’s birth certificate forgery in my book.
THE ALLEGED OBAMA BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT MICROFILMS
Regarding the microfilms, it has to be established that even if the Obama birth announcements were actually in the newspapers, it does not prove a Hawaii birth. Hawaii parents are/were able to file birth documents in Hawaii as long as they were residents, regardless of the actual birth place of the child. Additionally, no proof was required of the birth; only a written statement had to be made. Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961, and other subsequent Hawaii birth laws that allow registration with no proof, or allow Foreign Birth registration, leaves an opening to claim Hawaii “birth” without it being true. In 1961, once a birth document was filed with the Hawaii Department of Health (including those situations mentioned above as well as from the hospitals), the HDOH automatically issued birth announcements to the Hononlulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin.
People that believe Obama was born in Hawaii typically rely on the microfilm printouts of the “alleged” Obama birth announcements from The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Star Bulletin. Talking heads like Bill O’Reilly pose foolish, illogical questions like “Are we supposed to believe that Obama’s mother planted the birth certificate in 1961 in Hawaii because she wanted Obama to be President?” Maybe a better question would be “How many people from other countries come here illegally to specifically have their children born here so they can obtain U.S. citizenship?
However, none of the alleged more prominent journalists/talking heads, like O’Reilly and Chris Matthews (being the most prominent and most arrogant on the subject), have ever tried to find the original newspapers to confirm whether the microfilms are authentic. They just accepted what was fed to them by the Obama administration.
See this clip of O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly show how foolish they are:
And how foolish CNN is (about 7:40):
And how foolish MSNBC Chris Matthews is (about 3:11):
“HAWAII BIRHT ANNOUNCEMENT” HONOLULU ADVERTISER 8/13/61
Microfilms are easy to crop; paste and replace a new forged reel with the old authentic original reel. I have been to several different libraries and have evaluated this possibility of switching out a reel. It would be very easy as security is minimal.
Unlike producing a forgery of a 1961 newspaper, which would be extremely difficult if not impossible, producing a microfilm forgery would be relatively easy. Knowing this, I tried to track down in Hawaii the newspapers that allegedly had Obama’s birth announcements within them and found that some papers still existed in the 2007/2008 presidential campaign cycle. They were sold to a person unnamed by my contact for a high price according to him. He did not possess them; another antique dealer did. My contact did not know if Obama’s “birth announcements” actually appeared in the newspapers that were sold.
I was able to obtain two original 1961 Hawaii newspapers which include birth announcements from my antique dealer contact. I received five 1961 newspapers all in good to fair shape. Two of the papers obtained contained birth announcements that were completely intact. The existence of these two papers lends credibility to my antique dealer contact’s story of the Obama “birth announcement” newspapers having existed and having been sold.. After all, I just bought 5 newspapers from 1961. See below the photos of the newspaper birth announcements. One is from the Honolulu Star Bulletin dated January 27, 1961, and the other is from the Honolulu Advertiser dated May 5, 1961, just 3 months before Obama’s alleged birth announcements would have been printed.
Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Front Page.
Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Birth Announcements
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President,The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Honolulu Advertiser, May 5, 1961, Birth Announcements
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Why has no one come forward to help Obama by revealing the original newspapers with the announcement? Obama and his friends are millionaires; if Obama’s name was actually in those newspapers, Obama or David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett or George Soros would have found them at any cost and plastered them everywhere. There is no advantage of not showing these original newspapers unless the person is getting paid off not to show them if Obama’s announcement isn’t there.
My theory is that Obama operatives could have created fake microfilms with Obama’s announcement added. There is a small finite number of microfilms to replace around the country (a search from awhile ago on worldcat.org came up with about 70-100 locations for the microfilms, but weren’t confirmed so there could actually be less), so replacing existing microfilms wouldn’t take too long. A microfilm printout with “Obama’s birth announcement” would have been more than enough “information” for Hawaii to say Obama was born there, especially with their extremely lax policies of handing out birth certificates.
Given the fact that Obama and his operatives produced a forged Hawaii birth certificate for display at the taxpayer-funded whitehouse.gov website, is it really not so hard to imagine that Obama and his operatives may have altered microfilms from 1961 and then took the forged reels of film and replaced them with the originals? Look for yourself at the photos below. Just another Obama coincidence from his background?
See below the tampered with microfilm from the California State Library. The California State Library Honolulu Advertiser microfilm for Obama’s alleged birth date was completely out of the ordinary. All of the microfilms were the same except two for 1961 the reel the contained Obama’s alleged birth announcement was a completely different color (dark brown when the rest were light gray) and texture (the reel was smooth and all of the rest had a textured finish). The other one was the same color, style, and texture and confirmed to be of the same era as the others by a reel manufacturer. Nothing was known about the Obama brown reel.
OBAMA’S ALLEGED BIRTH MONTH MICROFILM REEL IS VERY DIFFERENT
Photo by Pamela Barnett from book Obama Never Vetted: The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America. Showing 5 consecutive months of Honolulu Advertiser 1961 reels. There are 2 reels per month.
OBAMA “BIRTH MONTH” REEL
Note from Author:
This story contains some photos never seen by the public which will be added to the 2nd edition of the book Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America.
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas-birth-announcement-microfilm-reels-are-very-different/#2iDsKyMtOIZJxeUV.99
Obama’s “Birth
Announcement” Microfilm Reels Are Very Different
This article was produced
as the result of research presented in the newly released Amazon e-book Obama
Never Vetted: Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing
Conspiracy That Endanger America, and poses two important issues:
• Barack Obama’s
“birth announcement” Microfilm has been tampered with, according to
photographic evidence.
First of all, if you
haven’t already looked at Obama’s birth certificate at whitehouse.gov, you need
to see with your own eyes that it is a forgery. The easiest way to tell this is
to zoom to at least 800% into the alleged signature of his mother “Stanley Ann
Dunham”. You can clearly see the difference in the different sections of the
signature. For example, you can see what was a photocopy of a hand-drawn
section connected to a computer-drawn solid black graphic section. The “State
Registrar Stamp” is also a giveaway that it is a forgery, just look for the “X”
instead of the “H” in the word “THE”. This anomaly did not exist until Obama’s
alleged birth certificate was posted at whitehouse.gov.
Also, because this “Obama
birth document” is allegedly typed in 1961, all of the typefaces should be the
same for each typed letter. Look at the word “Student”; the lowercase “t’s” are
completely different shapes. And in the name “Hussein” under the father’s name,
the “U,I,N” are larger than the other letters. Someone working for Obama has
lessened the quality and the sharpness from the original, so these differences
are harder to see than in the original. The below snapshots are from the “birth
document” posted at whitehouse.gov as of 11/4/12.
The “t’s” ARE DIFFERENT
IN THE SAME WORD
The PDF file at
Whitehouse.gov was changed from the original one that was uploaded. The
original file had multiple layers because it was a created document – it was
created in layers. Currently, only a single layer pdf file of the birth
certificate exists at whitehouse.gov, so you cannot see numbers and letters
disappearing and reappearing while zooming in and out anymore. However, the
above signs of forgery still remain. You can read what the experts have to say
on Obama’s birth certificate forgery in my book.
THE ALLEGED OBAMA
BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT MICROFILMS
Regarding the microfilms,
it has to be established that even if the Obama birth announcements were
actually in the newspapers, it does not prove a Hawaii birth. Hawaii parents
are/were able to file birth documents in Hawaii as long as they were residents,
regardless of the actual birth place of the child. Additionally, no proof was
required of the birth; only a written statement had to be made. Section 57-40
of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of
Hawaii which was in effect in 1961, and other subsequent Hawaii birth laws that
allow registration with no proof, or allow Foreign Birth registration, leaves
an opening to claim Hawaii “birth” without it being true. In 1961, once a birth
document was filed with the Hawaii Department of Health (including those
situations mentioned above as well as from the hospitals), the HDOH
automatically issued birth announcements to the Hononlulu Advertiser and Star
Bulletin.
People that believe Obama
was born in Hawaii typically rely on the microfilm printouts of the “alleged”
Obama birth announcements from The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Star Bulletin.
Talking heads like Bill O’Reilly pose foolish, illogical questions like “Are we
supposed to believe that Obama’s mother planted the birth certificate in 1961
in Hawaii because she wanted Obama to be President?” Maybe a better question
would be “How many people from other countries come here illegally to
specifically have their children born here so they can obtain U.S. citizenship?
However, none of the
alleged more prominent journalists/talking heads, like O’Reilly and Chris
Matthews (being the most prominent and most arrogant on the subject), have ever
tried to find the original newspapers to confirm whether the microfilms are
authentic. They just accepted what was fed to them by the Obama administration.
See this clip of O’Reilly
and Megyn Kelly show how foolish they are:
And how foolish CNN is (about 7:40):
“HAWAII BIRHT ANNOUNCEMENT” HONOLULU
ADVERTISER 8/13/61
Microfilms are easy to
crop; paste and replace a new forged reel with the old authentic original reel.
I have been to several different libraries and have evaluated this possibility
of switching out a reel. It would be very easy as security is minimal.
Unlike producing a
forgery of a 1961 newspaper, which would be extremely difficult if not
impossible, producing a microfilm forgery would be relatively easy. Knowing
this, I tried to track down in Hawaii the newspapers that allegedly had Obama’s
birth announcements within them and found that some papers still existed in the
2007/2008 presidential campaign cycle. They were sold to a person unnamed by my
contact for a high price according to him. He did not possess them; another
antique dealer did. My contact did not know if Obama’s “birth announcements”
actually appeared in the newspapers that were sold.
I was able to obtain two
original 1961 Hawaii newspapers which include birth announcements from my
antique dealer contact. I received five 1961 newspapers all in good to fair
shape. Two of the papers obtained contained birth announcements that were
completely intact. The existence of these two papers lends credibility to my
antique dealer contact’s story of the Obama “birth announcement” newspapers
having existed and having been sold.. After all, I just bought 5 newspapers
from 1961. See below the photos of the newspaper birth announcements. One is
from the Honolulu Star Bulletin dated January 27, 1961, and the other is from
the Honolulu Advertiser dated May 5, 1961, just 3 months before Obama’s alleged
birth announcements would have been printed.
Honolulu Star Bulletin,
January 27, 1961, Front Page.
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama
Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The
Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America
Honolulu Advertiser, May
5, 1961, Birth Announcements
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama
Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing
Conspiracy That Endanger America
Why has no one come
forward to help Obama by revealing the original newspapers with the
announcement? Obama and his friends are millionaires; if Obama’s name was
actually in those newspapers, Obama or David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett or
George Soros would have found them at any cost and plastered them everywhere.
There is no advantage of not showing these original newspapers unless the
person is getting paid off not to show them if Obama’s announcement isn’t there.
My theory is that Obama
operatives could have created fake microfilms with Obama’s announcement added.
There is a small finite number of microfilms to replace around the country (a
search from awhile ago on worldcat.org came up with about 70-100 locations for
the microfilms, but weren’t confirmed so there could actually be less), so
replacing existing microfilms wouldn’t take too long. A microfilm printout with
“Obama’s birth announcement” would have been more than enough “information” for
Hawaii to say Obama was born there, especially with their extremely lax
policies of handing out birth certificates.
Given the fact that Obama
and his operatives produced a forged Hawaii birth certificate for display at
the taxpayer-funded whitehouse.gov website, is it really not so hard to imagine
that Obama and his operatives may have altered microfilms from 1961 and then
took the forged reels of film and replaced them with the originals? Look for
yourself at the photos below. Just another Obama coincidence from his background?
See below the tampered
with microfilm from the California State Library. The California State
Library Honolulu Advertiser microfilm for Obama’s alleged birth date was
completely out of the ordinary. All of the microfilms were the same except
two for 1961 the reel the contained Obama’s alleged birth announcement was
a completely different color (dark brown when the rest were light gray)
and texture (the reel was smooth and all of the rest had a textured
finish). The other one was the same color, style, and texture and
confirmed to be of the same era as the others by a reel
manufacturer. Nothing was known about the Obama brown reel.
OBAMA’S ALLEGED
BIRTH MONTH MICROFILM REEL IS VERY DIFFERENT
Photo by Pamela Barnett
from book Obama Never Vetted: The Unlawful President, The National
Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America.
Showing 5 consecutive months of Honolulu Advertiser 1961 reels. There are
2 reels per month.
OBAMA “BIRTH
MONTH” REEL
Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama
Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing
Conspiracy That Endanger America
Note from Author:
As an expert in Digital Signal Processing, and who worked in imaging and PDF compression, I am telling you that the discrepancies you find are normal scanning and compression artifacts. For example, you claim the "t"'s are different. They do have a different pixel pattern. Scan any document with text with compression, and you will find different letters appear to be different.
ReplyDeleteThe Hawaiian registrar has confirmed his birth certificate. He was born in the U.S.
I'm not the author so I have no right to change her writing.
ReplyDelete