Sunday, August 03, 2008

Document Expert Discovers Another Person's COLB Used To Forge Obama COLB

The evidence that the certificate of live birth (COLB) produced to prove the date and place of Sen. Barack Obama's birth is a forged document just keeps getting more damning. A board-certified computer forensics examiner with more than 20 years experience, including clearance by the U.S. Department of Justice for sensitive work, has determined that the Obama COLB is a digitally modified forgery based on a COLB belonging to another person. The expert, using the pseudo name "Techdude", intends to disclose the identity of the person to whom the COLB belongs if the responsible person does not come forward and accept responsibility for the forgery. Techdude writes at the Texas Darlin blog, a pro Clinton blog, as follows:

For a quick preview – the original COLB used to create the KOS COLB image belongs to a female and does not belong to Obama. Another follow up report will reveal exactly who the original underlying COLB did belong to. Trust me when I tell you it is going to be one hell of a major twist that no one would have seen coming. I had to quadruple check my results because I did not even believe it and I currently have a few other people double and triple checking my results as well just to be 100% sure.

That said, and in the interest of fairness, if the people responsible for forging the COLB come forward and admit their liability the name of the original COLB owner will not be released publicly. It is only fair to give the guilty parties a chance to take responsibility for their actions before it embarrasses a lot of people and ruins some people’s reputations.

As a heads up to the guilty parties – the names and dates have already been restored – as has the fact the owner is a female born in the 70’s. That is all that will be revealed publicly for now. Besides if I turn up in a ditch someplace the information is already in a few 3rd party hands and they will just release it in my place.

If anyone still believes the KOS COLB is legitimate after reading this article they should seriously think about seeking professional help.

Techdude, since surfacing on the Texas Darlin blog in recent weeks to question the authenticity of the Obama COLB, has been criticized by pro-Obama supporters for refusing to identify himself. "My full name and contact information will be released shortly once the entire set of facts has been released to the public," Techdude writes. "This way if I end up at the bottom of a construction site someplace in NJ the world will still have all the information I was going to provide." Earlier, Techdude reported that pro Obama supporters had tracked down his home address, vandalized his car and hung a dead rabbit over his doorway.


Concerned Taxpayer said...

Anyone with a high school education could see that the "Birth Certificate" was a fake and/or forgery.

For Obama and his allies in the MSM to continue to ignore it only improves the odds that Obama is not legally eligible to run for president, or it reveals the fact that he is only 6% black and mostly Arab and white.

Yet, sadly, thousands of people continue to drink the kool-aide.

IndyPaul said...

And what are you drinking?

Obama's father was a black of the Luo tribe from Kenya. His grandfather was born Christian and converted to Islam. The family spoke Swahili, and probably English and Luo as well. Not Arab. Of course there are many who speak Arabian that are not ethnically Arab. Obama's father makes Obama 50% black.

His mother was white, born in Kansas to parents of Irish and English ancestry. Thus Obama is 50% white.

For those making the ludicrous claims to then question the soundness of mind of Obama supporters is hillarious.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

"Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side.

While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya, his father's family was mainly Arabs.

Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro).

Further, at only 6.25% African Negro, would he even be the first President who was part black? Not at all! Our 3rd President, Thomas Jefferson was our first part black President. And he's not alone, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge were also part black.

Many Americans are influenced by the press, TV and other media. Here are some facts about Obama that can be verified if a person wishes to take the time to do so.

1.) Selma Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965.(Google 'Obama Selma' for his full March 4, 2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.)

2.) Father was a Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.

3.) Father was a Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to over turn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya . It is the first widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone.

Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia Muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took shelter.

Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here started."

And just recently, we found out that Obama never followed through on his promise to his grandmother's impoverished village in Africa.


Jon E. Easter said...

I've come to the realization that this blog and many of its readers will, with apologies to John F. Kennedy, "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe" to torpedo the campaign of Barack Obama.

AI blames the mainstream media for not bringing up this information as if there is some love affair for Obama. A non-partisan study showed that Obama is far more the victim of negative press than McCain (72%-58%). Plus, if there were truth to this story, it would be on every major network.

Instead, there are either two options...there's not ENOUGH truth to the story or this is flat out false and reporting it might trigger lawsuits, etc.

I applaud you all for your vigor in keeping this story alive, but, in my opinion, it's ridiculous to suggest that a story this big would be kept out of the light of day by the mainstream press or by Obama's chief primary opponent, the Clintons.

Gary R. Welsh said...

jon, Techdude has laid out his analysis in great detail which leads him to this conclusion. I wish people would focus on the analysis instead of attacking a person's motive. Techdude devotes great attention to this at the end of his post. Everyone wants to slime him every which way for conducting a professional analysis of a document which Obama's own website presented as his COLB. Show me whats wrong with his analysis, please.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

David Gergen: McCain's "Moses" ad is code for calling Obama "uppity"

In which the single dumbest, most paranoid racial charge of the campaign is recycled on national television by a former presidential advisor and current Harvard professor. I said it before but it bears repeating: If you take this logic to its conclusion, there's literally no non-racist way to accuse a member of a minority group of having an outsized ego. Any synonym you can conjure -- elitist, arrogant, "megalomaniac narcissist" (to quote Hitchens) -- can all happily be dismissed as "code," regardless of whether the subject might in fact (a) display his very own presidential seal, (b) be known to describe rural voters in terms that call to mind Cletus the slackjawed yokel on "The Simpsons," and (c) oh, by the way, lead his very own cult with himself as godhead.

Remember when Obama was going to be the anti-Jesse Jackson who helped America put race in the rear view mirror?

Well now, the post-racial candidate is the post-Jeremiah Wright candidate, and it's hard to miss the fact that instead moving us beyond race, Obama and his supporters are actually ramping up the hyper-sensitivity.

As evidenced by Gergen's bizarre criticism, we've gotten to the point where almost any criticism aimed at Obama for any reason is now being treated as some sort of racial attack.

So, let's see: Obama was a member of an anti-white church for 20 years, talks about "typical white people," only won the Democratic primaries because he is black, and now he and his supporters are trying to rule all criticism off limits because of his race.

Some "post-racial" candidate Obama turned out to be.

Watch the first video on this link. Listen to the words spoken by Obama.

Now tell me he isn't ARROGANT.

Anonymous said...

"I wish people would focus on the analysis instead of attacking a person's motive."

Ok, lets focus on the analysis. Having personally witnessed the examination of a forensic hand writing and document specialist in the U.S. District Court, I can assure you this purported "scientific" analysis lacks even the most basic requirement for a Daubert challenge. See, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993). I find it impossible to believe that any purported "expert" on this type of scientific analysis would arrive at such a conclusion without being able to examine, first hand, the original questioned document. Without this, I think the anaylsis is crap and unreliable.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Josh, You aren't an attorney so don't presume to claim Techdude is not a qualified expert. No, he doesn't have the original document, but he has a scanned document from which much can be surmised as he explains in his analysis. Here are the credentials he presents:

20 years experience in the computer field; performing computer forensic investigations since 1993. Board certified as a forensic computer examiner and for the previous six years also licensed as a private investigator. A certificated legal investigator, served close to 6 years under the direction of a practicing attorney. Testified in numerous trials at the state level…written (winning) briefs and motions that have been presented for state’s Court of Appeals and state’s Supreme Court.

U.S. Department of Justice clearance for access to sensitive but unclassified information and has personally handled the investigation of over 7,000 cases. Previously received training from the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA as well as countless forensics seminars and specialized training events over the years. Five years ago, opened his own computer forensic science lab and often accepts cases pro bono. Active member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, the American College of Forensic Examiners, Computer Forensics Volunteer Project, a Member of Federal Bureau of Investigation’s InfraGard program, International Information Systems Forensics Association, The International Society of Forensic Computer Examiners, and others.

Chris Stephen said...

I have not yet read his analysis, so I won't pass judgment on that, but I can't believe that someone would raise Daubert in this analysis. There are so many facets to that case that one cannot possibly determine applicability of the standard to the findings. I'm glad you know the citation, but with no analysis on your part, you've provided citation with reason. Which prong of Daubert do you think this science fails to meet? Further, how do you address the possibility of a lay witness providing admissible expert opinion, which is permissible in Indiana (look it up). Read the analysis and make your own determination as to the credibility.

Anonymous said...

Gary, thanks for telling me I am not an attorney - a fact I am accutely aware of. By your own admission, he has not reviewed the original questioned document. If this is true, how can he claim a forgery of the original? Seems like common sense to me. My reference to the Daubert challenge is because you would be hard pressed to find scientific experts willing to declare the authenticity of such a document without having even looked at the original. I may not be an attorney, but I am no idiot either.

I will wait to see when the lawsuit is filed and the outcome. I suspect, this will turn out like the "whitey" video you promised during the end of the primaries, the Larry Sinclair bombshell we have all been waiting for since the beginning of this race, or perhaps you claim that we should elect a President based on what is on the candidate's IPOD. I believe this has already been sharply critized by another blogger. See,

Gary R. Welsh said...

If you read his analysis you would know that he had at his hands other authentic COLBs issued by the State of Hawaii for comparison purposes. All COLBs during the time period in question were printed on the same laser printer. He doesn't have to see the original if the COLB posted on Obama's website is in fact a scanned copy of the original as claimed.

Bart Lies said...

While I agree with his conclusion, and arrived at the same one when I compared the KOS document and another sample claimed to be 'real', the writing style hardly sounds like the scholarly professional 'techdude' claims to be. It's filled with childish drivel and the facts being offered are really not well organized - not as I would expect from a legitimate forensic expert.

So even though I agree, the two articles 'smell' funny to me. And I always am left scratching my head by folks with their smoking gun who are going to reveal the final proof at later date.

I don't buy the argument the delay is to give the real person time to come out and fess up. Why is THAT the solitary point on which this mystery person has some tolerance and compassion?

I'm not buying the whole package, not so far.

ruth holladay said...

This sounds like more of the old smear campaign, as has been suggested.
If there was any credibility with techdude et al, McCain and Karl Rove would be wiping Obama across the floor with it; not happening.
As others have suggested, it's a repeat of the Larry Sinclair story. Fringe stuff. Probably not even Rush-worthy.
And anyone who thinks the msm wouldn't go after Obama is just nuts. This is not a monolith, guys. There are plenty of decent Obama critics within the msm. They just happen to deal with facts, not hype. One thing the press loves more than Obama: a scoop.
Oh, and we're all still waiting for Sinclair to bring that limo driver forth...

Gary R. Welsh said...

Ruth, Your memory is too short. The Swiftboating of John Kerry didn't start until the week of the Democratic National Convention four years ago. Interestingly, the author of "Unfit to Command," the book which launched the Swiftboat attack on John Kerry, Dr. Jerome Corsi, has just launched his new book, Obama Nation. Sean Hannity introduced the book on Hannity & Colmes the other night. As written elsewhere: "Corsi appeared on "Hannity and Colmes" and spoke about major themes in the book. He said that Obama hasn't been forthcoming about his father, his formative years, and his association with radical groups."

M Theory said...

Ummm...Ruth I know I don't know you...BUT even little old me without any journalistic background whatsoever except one high school class, can tell that the press is in love with Obama.

They gush and practically swoon.

One thing I find curious is that Oprah backed off. I wonder if it is because she's figured it out.

I believe that the Larry Sinclair story smacks of truth. I also find it odd that Obama's people would offer up a forged birth certificate. Why is that?

You of all people should know that the mainstream press does not do the job they should.

Does a gal without a journalism background need to spell it out? Cause I'd be happy to do so, starting with the lies the press printed about me.

The press can be very biased indeed. I hate to say it, but really they are out for ratings. I never count on them to get it right and certainly don't count on MSM to dig for the real story.