Why Obama's College Records Matter

Why Obama's College Records Matter

By Monte Kuligowski


In context of the "mounting pressure" for Mitt Romney to provide more tax and employment records, a reporter recently asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney whether President Obama would set an example in transparency and release some of his records that critics have asked for.
That question was fingernails on the chalkboard to Carney. "Is that from Donald Trump?" Carey sneered, and laughed -- this time conspicuously alone.
This time it was Carney's own boss who had recently opened the door by demanding that Romney be an "open book" on personal finances.
Carney responded with the audacious claim that Obama is an "open book" and has a record of "unprecedented transparency." And the sky is green, and the grass is blue. Carney also suggested that the question wasn't specific.
When the reporter got specific and asked if Obama would release his college records, Carney replied: "Right, this is the Donald Trump question. It is preposterous. This is from the guy who insisted he didn't believe the president was born in the United States."
Asking for college records is preposterous?
Writing for the TheBlaze.com, Jason Howerton suggests:

Carney was obviously trying to lump those who are interested to see what types of college courses Obama took in college into the same category as 'birthers.' However, many who want to see the president's college transcripts say wanting to see the president's transcripts has nothing to do with his citizenship. Rather they argue it could help provide insight into the types of courses Obama sought out while in college, which some believe promoted radical ideologies.

Yes, many want to see Obama's college records for grades and courses (as with G.W. Bush and others). But in Obama's case, the primary reason to see his college applications is to learn whether the president applied for college in the U.S. as a foreign student.
Why should the public want to confirm that Obama did not register as a foreigner while not having the same concern for other candidates? Read on.
Most of the basic records of Barack Obama's past -- vital, hospital, medical, education, passport, draft registration, et al. -- are guarded as securely as the gold at Fort Knox. Notably, two documents -- elementary school and Selective Service registrations -- were obtained by independent citizens. And Breitbart.com independently obtained an interesting biographical brochure produced in 1991 by Obama's literary publicist.
The Associated Press (AP) was able to obtain a copy of Obama's elementary school registration from the Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia in 2007.
And Stephen Coffman, a retired Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, obtained a copy of Obama's Selective Service registration form via a FOIA request just days prior to the 2008 election.
From the 2012 Breitbart discovery we learned that Mr. Obama presented himself in 1991 as "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii." From the AP discovery we learned that Barack Obama was registered for school in Jakarta as a citizen of Indonesia named Barry Soetoro. And from the Selective Service registration form we learned that the same form had been forged.
Barack Obama lived in Islamic Indonesia as Barry Soetoro with his mother and stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, and attended school in Jakarta from ages 6 to 10. It's beyond amazing that the general public is not aware of that fact. Last Thanksgiving I was with my in-laws and was surprised to learn that they had never heard that Obama lived in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro. And they are not uneducated people.
The "mainstream" media do not want to touch those facts.
The big question is whether little Barry was adopted by his stepfather, who was a citizen of Indonesia. There is reason to believe that he was and that in order to have been enrolled in public school in Indonesia, Barry had to be a citizen. Aaron Klein of WND.com notes that "[a]fter attending the Assisi Primary School, Obama later was enrolled at SDN Menteng 1, an Indonesian public school."
That Obama might have been a citizen of Indonesia and later presented himself as a foreign student in the U.S. is no "birther" conspiracy theory. It's the gravamen of the college records question.
Let's stop right here and stipulate for the sake of argument that Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.
But even with the stipulation, we nevertheless have a major problem with Obama's records and staunch secrecy.
Of the few records that we have seen relating to Obama's past all are problematic and they point to a potential citizenship problem for Barack Hussein Obama II aka Barry Soetoro.
Mr. Obama's Arizona nemesis, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, is readily dismissed by the establishment press as a man with an ax to grind -- but his control-test findings have not been disproven.
Once again, the general public remains in the dark because the national one-voice media will not touch the story.
Sherriff Joe's law enforcement "posse" confirmed what a multitude of nonpartisan computer graphic experts have already known. The image Mr. Obama "released" on April 27, 2011 is a computer-generated forgery. Irrespective of Mr. Obama's Hawaii birth, for some reason Obama did not upload a certified copy of his birth certificate to the internet; neither is he allowing Hawaii to send certified paper copies to interested state election officials.
Since Obama was born in Hawaii, the question is: why the forgery? And why the continued secrecy?
Something is not right. I have speculated that Obama's secrecy over the birth certificate may have been a calculated diversion from the important constitutional requirement for presidential candidates to have been born with a natural, sole allegiance to the United States.
That could be partially correct. Additionally, Obama might be hiding an amendment to his birth certificate, reflecting his adoption by Lolo Soetoro.
Others have suggested that the reason for the forgery could be over a petty issue, such as his mother having signed the certificate with her maiden name. In other words, but for the secrecy and forgery, the birth certificate may be completely irrelevant.
Nevertheless, if Obama has a citizenship problem because of Indonesia, the rest of the oddities and secrecies begin to make sense.
Sheriff Joe's team found probable cause to conclude that Obama also forged his Selective Service registration form. The mismatched date stamp "80" instead of "1980" is evidence not only of forgery, but of a crude forgery.
Then there is the question of why is Obama using a Social Security number issued on application from Connecticut, a state in which he never lived.
If that's not a news story, what is? Romney's tax records?
In light of the few biographical documents we have seen so far, coupled with the bizarre secrecy of Obama, it might be a good idea for "pressure to mount" for Obama to produce his college records.
And while we're at it, what passport did Obama use for his college break to Islamic Pakistan in 1981?
Since Obama is an "open book," producing informative records shouldn't be a problem for him.

Maybe you should do a thread about why Mitt Romney's tax history matter as well. I would think we should be alot more concerned about someone who has so little faith in the American banking system that he has to take his money overseas.

Maybe you should do a thread about why Mitt Romney's tax history matter as well. I would think we should be alot more concerned about someone who has so little faith in the American banking system that he has to take his money overseas. Originally Posted by SkylarCruzWantsYou

Those evil bankers?! The bankers who destroyed our economy and steal from the poor and middle class?! Seems to me the liberal scum should applaud Romney.

What is it that you think you are going to find. Alwyas trying to delegitimize the first black president. I'm sick of this. I'm gonna call it for what it is...RACISM

What is it that you think you are going to find. Alwyas trying to delegitimize the first black president. I'm sick of this. I'm gonna call it for what it is...RACISM Originally Posted by markroxny

I agree with you....affirmative action is racism........

liberals are very racist people.....liberals believe that black people are inferior to white people, and because of that, need the help that affirmative action provides......

conservatives don't believe blacks are inferior to whites.....we believe that if you stop interfering in the lives of black people and get out of their way, they will flourish, thrive and succeed......

You wouldn't know real racism if it bit your ass. Answer this question; who (according to the US Constitution) is responsible for determining the eligibility of a presidential (or for that matter the Senate or House) to hold that office? Simple question. Can you give me a simple answer?

Was it racism when the Senate had a special vote to affirm that John McCain was a natural born American? They did and he is. I think your argument just melted down.

I agree with you....affirmative action is racism........

liberals are very racist people.....liberals believe that black people are inferior to white people, and because of that, need the help that affirmative action provides......

conservatives don't believe blacks are inferior to whites.....we believe that if you stop interfering in the lives of black people and get out of their way, they will flourish, thrive and succeed...... Originally Posted by ChoomCzar

What makes me laugh is that AS A BLACK MAN. I know racism right away when i see it...and you have NO CLUE how racist and insulting that rant just was.

Good work

Was it racism when the Senate had a special vote to affirm that John McCain was a natural born American? They did and he is. I think your argument just melted down. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

No, but you can bet your sweet ass that it is racism to keep implying that Obama was not born in this country even after he released his birth certificate.

I didn't see anyone claim that Obama was not born in this country so why do you keep bringing it up? Very defensive. What is claimed is that the third version of the birth certificate is a forgery as was Obama's Selective Service registration. So why the fakes?

Totally ignored that they looked into Mr. Whitey John McCain's origins. So are the democrats all racists? Look up Chester A. Arthur.

What is claimed is that the third version of the birth certificate is a forgery as was Obama's Selective Service registration. So why the fakes? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

PLEASE PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS A FORGERY.

I'll wait.

PLEASE PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS A FORGERY.

I'll wait. Originally Posted by markroxny

Do-It-Yourself Proof of the Obama Birth Certificate Fraud

By Giuseppe Gori


I think the work of Nick Chase, simplifying "for the masses" the analysis of the forged copy of the Obama long-form birth certificate circulated a year ago by the White House, is absolutely brilliant. I suggest that you read his articles in the American Thinker.
In his first article, "Oblivious to the Obvious," Nick explains pitch in typewriters.
In his second article, "How I Learned to Love Savannah Guthrie," Nick explains how he obtained an original picture and how he used "cut and paste" to move things around.
I do not mind "getting my hands dirty," and so I decided to try it out myself.
Proving that there is a serious problem of authenticity with this document was easier than I expected.
You can do the same, using the same source picture, but using an even a simpler procedure than what Nick Chase described. You can do it on a PC, without having to rotate or touch the images at all. Here is how:
First, I went to the original site showing the copy from Savannah Guthrie: http://lockerz.com/s/96540721.
The following is the original picture of the paper certificate that Savannah Guthrie took on April 27, 2011, as you can find in the above-mentioned site:
I right-clicked on the picture and chose "Copy Image."
Then I opened Microsoft Image Composer and pasted the picture in a new file:
Then I used the "cut out" function to select and cut out the word "Highway".
Then I placed the word "Highway," as cut, above the word "Hospital," precisely aligning vertically the two as. The aim here is to look for differences in alignment, as Nick Chase says:

[A]ll of the typed characters in a row of text would, if placed over another typed row of text, be in perfect vertical alignment (including typed spaces), because each typed character occupies exactly the same horizontal space in its row. That's what "monospace" means[.]

Looking at the above pictures, you can then see that the pitch of the two words is different, as the H of "Highway" is well to the right of the o of "Hospital." You can clearly see that the two words were typed by different typewriters (In addition to having a degree in computer science, I was a typist in the Italian Army). Even the size of the letters is visibly smaller in the word "Highway" than in the word "Hospital."
The above proves that at least two different typewriters were used to type the same certificate.
Is this a conclusive proof? As Nick Chase says:

If you think that the reason why there are two different typewriter typefaces in the document is because two typewriters were used in its preparation, the second typewriter being used because the first broke down -- forget it. ...

First, three different typewriter typefaces (and likely more) appear in the document.
Second, remember that the proof of forgery in Figure F is not a uniqueproof [of forgery.] ... Researchers have conclusively demonstrated that the "birth certificate" is fake in many different ways, and that it was digitally constructed. [The above proof] is simply an additional proof of forgery that more people are able to understand because it requires very little technical expertise to comprehend it.

Of course, none of the above has anything to do with where Mr. Obama was born, but it all has everything to do with a forged document released by the White House. I think this is pretty relevant, when such a document is required during the nomination process for the election of the president of the United States, to verify that the qualifications of the candidates comply with the requirements of the law.
If I have a doubt, it is the following: will the non-technical people in the media understand, or accept, this simple demonstration?

Birth Certificate Whac-A-Mole

By Nick Chase


Would you like to play a neat parlor game with your friends? Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate forgery contains so many forger's errors which are visible to the naked eye or which can be seen on your computer under slight magnification that you can play a fun game finding them, either alone or in a contest with your friends. It's similar to the arcade game Whac-A-Mole, where you pound a mechanical mole back into its hole before it disappears on its own and randomly reappears in another one of the five holes in the game. You can score by time per defect -- five points for each one found within two minutes, for example -- or by total score -- five points for each defect for the length of the game. (Note: Conservatives will generally spot these defects more quickly than liberals do.)
To see these defects, we need to use the digital PDF of the forgery released at whitehouse.gov. (You can download your copy from here.) The reason for using the digital PDF is that it is the original forgery -- rather than the Savannah Guthrie photo or the T-shirt I used in my article "Oblivious to the Obvious," published in American Thinker on April 10, which are a generation removed and can introduce distortion -- camera-lens distortion or twisted T-shirt fabric. Also, you need to view the PDF on your computer screen, because some of the defects are not visible if you print the PDF on a computer printer and then look at the printout.
So let the game begin!
Mole Hole #3: Is the mole black and white or gray? The forgery has several instances of bitmap -- that is, all-black -- information, and grayscale -- shades of gray -- adjoining. In a true scan of a paper document, all information would be either full-color or shades of gray, so this is an indication of the forger's sloppiness. The most obvious is the certificate number "61 10641" in the upper right-hand corner -- the digits "61 1064" are stark black, and the last digit "1" is grayscale, not dense black. Even if you're not computer-literate and you can't tell grayscale from tree scale, you can still see that there is something "funny" about that last, blurry digit.
Two other obvious examples are in Line 11, Birthplace, where the "K" of "Kenya" is blurry grayscale and the rest of the information is solid black -- and in Line 13, Full Maiden Name, where the "S" of "STANLEY" is pale grayscale and the rest of the word is stark black. All three defects are shown below in Figure GS. You score 5 points for each additional occurrence you find in the forgery (and there are quite a few of them).
Mole Hole #5: Who lost the comma? The (grayscale) comma following (bitmap) "August 4" in the forgery is way too far to the right of the digit "4" to have been typed as the next character on a typewriter.
Actually, the forger did a pretty good job of maintaining typewriter pitch throughout the document. There are only a few places where the pitch goes noticeably awry. That wayward comma is in pitch; the day "August 4" is a half-character out of pitch, as you can see in Figure FD after I vertically moved up a copy of the word "None" from Line 17a. The test I showed in Figure F in "Oblivious to the Obvious" also works for the digital PDF, and, additionally, you can see that some of the letters in "Kalanianaole" are in vertical alignment with "Gynecological" and some are not. The pitch discrepancy is especially noticeable with the characters "8" and "&," and with the last "l" in "Kalanianaole" compared with the final "l" in "Gynecological." I have vertically lowered the word "HUSSEIN" in Line 1b to show that the space between "Gynecological" and "Hospital" is more than a single character wide. Of course, none of these discrepancies would exist if a real typewriter had been used.
Mole Hole #2: Kern you top this? "Kerning" describes where one character intrudes into another character's space. It's done by computers all the time for displaying and printing text which has letters of varying widths, to close up extra space between certain combinations of letters, such as "ay." But monospace typewriters can't kern.
Figure K shows one instance of impossible kerning in the forgery -- the letter "t" intruding into the subsequent "u" in the word "Student" in line 12a. There are at least two more clearly identifiable character overlaps in the forgery, and a number of "maybes." See if you can find them, for 5 points each.
Mole Hole #1: "T" for two? There are at least two different typewriter typefaces used in the forgery, and likely three or more.
In Figure TT you can see that the two letters "t" in "Student" (from Line 12a) are differently shaped at the base and in the crossbar, and the "t" in "Hospital" (from Line 6) is different from the other two, as it has the shape of the first "t" in "Student" but a shorter crossbar. By computer I measured the widths of the two "t"s in "Student"; the first "t" is 5% wider than the second.
Also in Figure TT you can see the differences in the letters "H" and "i" in "Highway" (Line 7d) and "Hospital" (Line 6c). You score 5 points for each additional typeface discrepancy you find.
Mole Hole #3 (again): Elastic letters? Look at the word "HUSSEIN" in Line 8.
Does it seem to you that the letters "U," "I," and "N" are a bit taller than the other letters in the word? No, it's not your imagination -- computer measurement shows that they are 5.5% taller, by virtue of their bottoms being lower than the other letters. (All of the tops of the letters are at the same level horizontally.) Score yourself 5 points for each oversized (or undersized) letter you find in a word.
Mole Holes #1 and #4: Forgeries are not angelic; why the white halos? All throughout the forgery you can see that the text has halos of white around each letter (or image). Figure WS is a typical example (as is also Figure H):
This halo effect is proof positive that the "birth certificate" is a digitally created forgery. In a genuine scan of a document of black text copied onto real security paper, the scan into the computer would not produce any halo effect whatsoever. These halos exist because the forger extracted the typewriter-character images from who-knows-where, then attempted with software to render the green security-paper image white in the areas where text was to be applied. We can only speculate as to the exact method the forger used; we know only that the process used was imprecise, because white halos were created.
This halo effect appears throughout the forgery, so you don't get points for each instance you find. Rather, it's worth two whacked moles; give yourself 10 points for each additional whole-document defect you find. (I know of at least three.)
Nobody knows what a perfect score is for our little game of Birth Certificate Whac-A-Mole. A winning score is 100 points; when you reach it, take your chit to the arcade redemption center for your prize of a matched set of four shot glasses, each bearing a different etched view of the White House on a dark and stormy D.C. night.
Note: Except for the pitch tests, none of this information is original with me, and I am indebted to the many other researchers who first noticed defects and published their findings on the internet.
Nick Chase is a retired but still very active technical writer, technical editor, computer programmer, and stock market newsletter writer. During his career he has produced documentation on computers, typewriters, typesetters, headline-makers, and other pieces of equipment most people never heard of, and he has programmed typesetting equipment. You can read more of his work at contrariansview.org.

You see that as EVIDENCE?????

Ok, i'm done with you. You are so blinded by your hate you can't even think.

You see that as EVIDENCE?????

Ok, i'm done with you. You are so blinded by your hate you can't even think. Originally Posted by markroxny

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

You didn't read any of this because liberals don't read. You don't know if this is evidence but you FEEL this is not evidence. Liberals don't think, they only feel......

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

You didn't read any of this because liberals don't read. You don't know if this is evidence but you FEEL this is not evidence. Liberals don't think, they only feel......

Originally Posted by ChoomCzar

I read it...it's stupid. If you think THAT is evidence.....take it to court. File a case.

Oh and GOOD LUCK!