The image you see is a digital scan of an authentic Oklahoma COLB altered to contain false information about myself for purposes of demonstrating the ease with which someone, virtually anyone can change information on such documents by the use of a cheap scanner, free software, through copy and paste techniques, and very little image enhancement. All else that is needed is the will and a couple of hours of time to achieve this level of quality. A much higher level may be achieved given more time and more desire.
Click on the image above (note the embossed seal on the image, which is genuine and unenhanced) to see the full document. If you're somewhat computer savvy and have an eye for detail you can enlarge the image to discover the places where the document has been intentionally forged, as well as intentionally left discoverable as a forgery in certain places. Others are not so easily discoverable, but Dr. Polarik would have no trouble whatsoever taking our forged document apart piece by meticulous piece.
Update: I've included some additional information, as well as a helpful link, concerning the COLB in the comments section of this article.
"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it." -Daniel Webster
Friday, December 5, 2008
Definitive Proof that I was born in Oklahoma...
...even though I've stated otherwise.
Very interesting Terry.
ReplyDeleteIs your middle name really Dale?
I've seen a few articles "covering" this issue in the MSM and they all, without exception, are spinning like crazy to make anyone who thinks the Constitution should be applied in this case are kooks and weirdos.
I think I'm appalled at the lack of logic and reasoning skills demonstrated by most of the commenters.
The reason I'm appalled is that most of them seem to think the issue is about race or republican sour grapes over "losing" the election.
ReplyDeleteThe majority seem to think that "it wouldn't be fair" is a valid argument for letting Mr. Obama sit as president whether he meets the Constitutional requirements or not.
Mom,
ReplyDeleteThank you. FYI, we're working up a better forgery of the same document. I'll probably post it once we get it finished. We want a product that would even test the skill of Dr. Polarik. And we're pretty sure we can achieve it.
The forgery as it now exists not only consists of flaws we created during the forgery process purposely left in it for relatively easy detection, but genuine Oklahoma COLBs such as this one are printed on security paper which have certain identifying characteristics which are made visible by scanning the document. In other words, you can't see certain features on the original document with the naked eye, not even when you hold it up to a light source. How did we learn of these features? By scanning the document and comparing the scanned image with the original document. And yes, they are visible on the image we've posted. Look very closely. We can remove them by simply reducing the pixel size of the page. But we wanted them to remain on this document. Try your hand at finding them, it might be a fun exercise.
If you've read Polarik's report you are well equipped to find the flaws we've purposely left on the document. But as I said, we've also made certain flaws harder to detect.
Yes, my middle name is Dale. But that might change on the better forgery. :-)
I agree, of course, on the "fairness" issue. But that's leftism for you. As long as it applies to leftism and what leftists consider to be "fair", then fairness trumps everything else, including the U.S. Constitution ... and all laws made in pursuance thereof.
...also, speaking of the stupidity (not to mention the subversiveness) of the fairness-trumps-everything crowd, check out this argument in favor of "fairness."
ReplyDeleteFor anyone interested:
ReplyDeleteHere's another item that is helpful to understanding why certain features on the scanned COLB come forth, and why they're invisible under normal conditions.
One assumes you mean features like the word "void" that appears all over it if one is paying attention. lol.
ReplyDeleteIt's been a busy weekend and we're due to get more snow on Tuesday, I think.
I skimmed the first link and ...hmmm. The argument seems to be, that whomever does not support removing the clause is reacting to the idea emotionally, but all those who want it gone are acting with logic and reason.
So far, I am not impressed.
One assumes you mean features like the word "void" that appears all over it if one is paying attention.
ReplyDeleteYes, well, the bit of color enhancement we did on the image makes the "VOID"s easier to see. The color enhancement also makes it easier to find our alterations.
When you get the time read the article in full. Herlihy complains of the "unfairness" of the provision throughout. But you won't be any more impressed having read the entire article than you are from having skimmed it. Her assumptions about the benefits of globalism are ... laughable.
Here's the relevant passage from the other article linked:
ReplyDelete[0006]U.S. Pat. No. 5,636,874 to Singer teaches a feature that can be used for authentication and validation. Temperature-sensitive ink is printed over a temperature-insensitive message, both inks being of the same color. When the document is rubbed or heated, the temperature sensitive ink turns colorless and this reveals a message such as "VALID" underneath. Upon cooling, the color returns once again, masking the message.
Interesting stuff that Thermochromic Ink.
Interesting stuff that Thermochromic Ink.
ReplyDeleteTerry, did you never use lemon juice as "thermochromic ink" as a child to write "secret messages"?
Maybe I am just stupid or have, as a Hun, not the correct attitude towards "fairness", a word that is conspiciously absent in my native language, but what has fairness to do with it all? Either he IS eligible, or he is NOT. Full stop.
(It's me, Nora! I was again too lazy to switch IDS.)
Nora,
ReplyDeleteI don't have the foggiest what "fairness" has to do with it. You'd have to ask a liberal that one. Interesting the way you put it though; I said basically the same thing here:
If Obama is a natural born citizen of the U.S. then he is eligible to serve as president, if he is not a natural born citizen then he is not, end of story. The burden of proof is on him to establish his eligibility. If he continues to refuse to prove his eligibility (whether documentary proof exists or not) then he has effectively declared himself ineligible, not to mention unfit, for the presidency.
I did not know that thermochromic ink and lemon juice are the same things, but yes, we used to do that when I was a child.
And I always recognize you as the "Evil Style Queen", you can't get that by me. ;-)
Terry, I am sure modern "thermochromic ink" is far more sophisticated than our lemon juice. I just wanted to point out that the concept isn't new.
ReplyDeleteI think you've said it before. Obama's behaviour shows, apart from the legal aspect, insufferable contempt for the American people and the high office he is about to take. Maybe he thinks if he only delays the case long enough, the "it-isn't-fair" faction will have taken over public opinion.
I have written my state's election board asking about certification procedures. This was their reply(edited for my personal info):
ReplyDelete"Wisconsin requires all candidates for President (or any other office) to file sworn Declarations of Candidacy (DOC) indicating they meet the applicable age, residency and citizenship requirements. We have DOCs for all candidates, including Senator Obama.
Any issues concerning the qualifications of the winning candidate for Office of President of the United States will be resolved by Congress as part of its certification of the results of the Electoral College. If there are further questions with respect to this issue, please contact the Federal Election Commission at www.fec.gov or 800-424‑9530.
Diane M. Lowe
Lead Elections Specialist, CERA
Government Accountability Board, Elections Division "
Mom,
ReplyDeleteThat's very interesting. You've taken a step that I myself have not even taken.
I applaud your efforts.
It didn't take much effort, just an e-mail. The hard part was figuring out the address to which the information request should be sent. But, thank you for the compliment.
ReplyDelete