John Woodman book "Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?", Citizen Wells analysis and review, Another messenger shooter, Woodman's motivation

John Woodman book “Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?”, Citizen Wells analysis and review, Another messenger shooter, Woodman’s motivation

“There is an epidemic of messenger shooting in this country.”.”…Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

***  UPDATE BELOW  ***

Preface:

I had pretty well formulated most of what I was about to write up until a few minutes ago. I was leaning toward giving John Woodman more benefit of the doubt. However, after mulling this over for a few more minutes a disturbing trend or puzzle picture emerged. A number of things Mr. Woodman has stated, used as evidence or omitted concern me. Whether this occurred at the subsconscious level or intentional level I do not know. John Woodman has stated and the premise of his book is debunking the debunkers. He seems more concerned about doing this than arriving at the truth about Obama’s eligibility and whether or not the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov proves a Hawaiian birth for Obama. More on this at the conclusion.

My analysis:

Bold face type used below to emphasize important points.

John Woodman has written and published a book titled “Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?”. I contacted Mr. Woodman several days ago to find out more about the book and his motives for writing it. We have similar work and education backgrounds and we had a pleasant series of email exchanges. I explained my motivation to Mr. Woodman and that I would notify him when I respond. Mr. Woodman has done a good job of analyzing the PDF file and explaining his methodology.

I have well over 30 years experience in Information Technology beginning in 1968 over a broad base of software, hardware and application areas. I have extensively researched and written about Barack Obama. My only motivation is love of and concern for this country. Perhaps my knowledge of Obama, his documented  pattern of lies and deception, has better prepared me to evaluate the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov with a clearer lens. With my decoder ring on Orwellian language interpret settings. Mr. Woodman stayed true to his objective of debunking the debunkers. There is no reason thus far for me to believe he had a hidden agenda. However, before I continue, my biggest overall criticism of Mr. Woodman is this. The burden of proof is on Obama. Even Little League participants are required to submit a photostatic copy of an original birth certificate. Mr. Woodman is guilty of shooting the messengers.
“Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?

I understand that John Woodman probably used that title for publishing purposes, to catch the attention of the public. However, from an objective analysis standpoint, that begins the process with an unproved assumption. And furthermore, Mr. Woodman continues with that nomenclature throughout the book. To his credit, he does mention a few times that the image may be a fraud, but the trend was already established and per Orwell, Hitler and Goebbels, the “lie” was repeated and therefore to be believed.

The correct description and one that I have adhered to when writing about it is:

Is the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov a photostatic copy of a legitimate long form birth certificate for Obama proving birth in Hawaii?

The difference between these 2 statements is crucial in determining the truth.

Why is this important?

1. An image was placed on WhiteHouse.gov with absolutely no proof of chain of document, one that with a cursory examination is highly suspect. Even if proven to have come from the Hawaii Department of Health, it may simply be an abstract.

2. The Hawaii statutes in 1961 and today allow for a birth certificate for a non Hawaiian birth.

Mr. Woodman makes the following “hasty conclusion” or over generalization on Page 205 of his book:

“How Do The Experts Score?”

“So why do the “for’s” at this point, outnumber the against’s?”
Part of the answer is that a few of the individuals in the “for” group have experience and points of view that may not be adequate for, or not quite applicable to, the task. One is a teenager; one is mostly a business owner; another is mostly a financial specialist; one is a writer of non-technical books.

Another is a typographer working with distorted fonts.”

So business owners are incapable of analysis and drawing proper conclusions? This reminds me of the classic attitude of the left and so called intellectuals.

Mr. Woodman, I am uniquely qualified to offer my analysis.

Some of Mr. Woodman’s assertions are wrong or misleading.

From Page 207:

“Dr. Corsi has publicly promoted, either in writing or on the radio, at least twenty-three evidence-of-fraud theories that we cover in this book.
In writing and speaking about his own theories as well as those of others, he has publicly identified the following as potential indicators of fraud:

the nature of the layers
alleged editing of items on the certificate
the white halo
the duplicated characters
the date stamps
the “scanner with x-ray vision
the altered PDF posted at archiveindex.com by Doug Vogt
the supposed kerning
comparison with the “African birth” forgery
the supposed lack of text curvature
the apparent lack of a seal
the alignment of Ann Dunham Obama’s signature
the supposed existence of “hidden text”
the idea that a different document exists
the out-of-sequence birth certificate number
Paul Irey’s theory of different typefaces
the supposed misspelling of the word “THE”
the supposed “smiley face” in the signature stamp
the supposed record of the forger’s initials
the supposed lack of hospital records for Mrs. Obama
the discrepancy in Barack Obama, Sr,’s age
the allegations by Tim Adams
and the idea that Governor Abercrombie had stated that no birth certificate existed.

As we have seen, not a single one of these twenty-three alleged indicators or “proofs” that the document is a fraud or invalid really holds up under close examination..
Not one.”

Semantics! If we strictly look at only the image on WhiteHouse.gov as being tampered with, then perhaps Mr. Woodman can get away with this, although it makes me question his motives. Some of the items above are certainly open to inspection and questioning. However, if our objective is to ascertain whether or not the image represents a legitimate birth certificate, then Tim Adams affidavit and Governor Abercrombie’s statements are highly relevant. And has Mr. Woodman viewed any hospital records for Stanley and little Obama?

On page 217 Mr. Woodman states:

“Also weighing against the idea of a forgery is the fact that any conspiracy  would need to involve:

high officials in Hawaii state government (most likely, stretching across two gubernatorial administrations of both parties)

lower-level Department of Health staff.

probably at least one official from the White House

most likely some intelligence agency personnel

and Barack Obama himself.

As the number of people required for the conspiracy to work goes up, the likelihood of a successful conspiracy goes down.
Nonetheless, I will admit that it’s possible to believe that a fraud has been committed.”

Tim Adams, documented as having worked in the Honolulu elections office in 2008, has signed an affidavit stating that there was no birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii than and that it was common knowledge. Governor Abercrombie stated that he could find no birth certifcate for Obama. Only a notation.

Tim Adams and Governor Abercrombie may not relate to the image being a fraud, but they certainly do to Obama being one.

Mr. Woodman spends much of his efforts trying to debunk the layers and anomalies pointed out by others. He may be correct about some of his assertions. His explanation for most of this is a software program. By doing so, he is in fact proving that the image is not a photostatic copy.

He further compares the image to that of certified copies for the Nordyke twins. He states that they are from the same type of forms. However, the biggest difference between the 2 images is that the Nordyke twins certificates have a stamped seal and verbage that states:

“This certifies that the above is a true and correct copy of the original record on file.”

The WhiteHouse.com image has the following:

“I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of health.”  Alvin T. Onaki, Ph.D.

Abstract: “The term abstract is subject to different meanings, but in a legal sense, it refers to an abbreviated history of an official record.”

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxQ7ggc7_0w]

I am not certain what Mr. Woodman is trying to prove on Page 182:

“Did Barack Obama pay $2 Million on lawyers in order to avoid releasing his long-form Birth Certificate?”

“No figure is publicly available on what part of the $2.8 million spent by Obama campaign on legal assistance has gone specifically to pay attorneys in Obama’s eligibility lawsuits.”

“Whatever the amount paid by Mr. Obama to his lawyers for his defense, then, it doesn’t appear to be anywhere approaching the amounts that have sometimes been claimed.”

The sums paid in money are enormous and debatable. However, numerous Justice Dept. attorneys at taxpayer expense have been used since early 2009. Mr. Woodman does not mention Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, who represented Obama in lawsuits and was hired as White House Counsel by Obama in 2009.

Page 217

“In other words, if the document is a forgery, then – far from being a sloppy one – it must have been done by an absolute professional with almost flawless attention to subtle detail.
Approaching the subject from a bit different angle, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama was a rather different and remarkable young woman. Even so, upon reflection, I find it very unlikely that a white young woman of 18 years would travel by herself, in 1961, literally halfway around the world in order to have her first baby alone in East Africa.
For this reason, the circumstances of the mother weigh against the likelihood of a forgery as well.”

Stanley Ann Dunham Obama was certainly different. I am not sure how he applied logic and onjectivity to arrive at that conclusion. We still have no proof of the location of Obama’s birth. It could have been in Canada for all we know.

Page 221

“I am all for declaring Barack Obama ineligible to be President – if he really is ineligible.
But if nobody can produce hard, credible evidence that that’s the case, then Mr. Obama must be understood to legitimately be occupying the Office of President, and be recognized as the choice – for now, at least – of the American people.”
“For too long, politicians and others in our society have gotten away with bending, even twisting the truth. Some have freely profited from doing so, and often at the people’s expense.”

Mr. Woodman, the burden of proof is on Obama just as it is on the young person going out for a little league team. Only, far more important. Obama’s pattern of lies and deceit and keeping his records hidden has heightened the need for scrutiny. We have plenty of proof that Obama is ineligible and none that he is.

John Woodman gets to the bottom line.

Page 206

“I have heard people ask, “Well, if the birth certificate isn’t a fake, then why is it that not one single expert has come forward to state that it’s authentic?”

“In my personal view, a good expert should not attempt to state authoritively that a document “is authentic” without – at a minimum – full access to the original document; and in this case, the record-keeping systems.
This is something we do not have.
Since we don’t have such access, then, we are limited to forming an opinion, based on the evidence we do have.
This includes our detailed, point-by-point analysis, and it includes the relevant statements from the Hawaii Department of Health testifying as to the documents authenticity. On these things we must base our conclusions.”

Access to an original birth certificate proving Hawaiian birth has not been provided. “Relevant” statements from Hawaii officials have been hard to come by. Most of this has been manipulated by the media.

Page 216

“On the other hand, disproving the various claims of fraud cannot prove that the birth certificate is genuine.
You may recall that at the beginning of this book, I stated that a birth certificate might pass every single test we could throw at it, and still be a forgery.”

Aside from any “expert opinion” we have these facts to rely on:

Tim Adams, who is documented to have worked in the Honolulu elections office in 2008 and who signed an affidavit stating that there was no birth certificate for Obama in 2008 and that it was common knowledge. Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

Governor Neil Abercrombie stated that he could find no birth certificate for Obama, only a record of birth.

The WhiteHouse.gov image has the following certification:

“I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of health.”

The image could easily be an abstract, a collection of data permitted by Hawaii law in 1961 and today.

Conclusion:

Regardless of whether or not the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov is a fraud from the standpoint of being altered is irrelevant. The practices of Obama and his cohorts are fraudulent. He has provided absolutely no proof of Hawaiian birth. This does not supercede or diminish the other aspect of his non eligibility. He is still not eligible as a Natural Born Citizen simply because both parents were not US Citizens.

Mr. Woodman, I welcome your response and if I have misrepresented you or erred factually, please inform. But I challenge you to get out of messenger shooting mode and direct your energies toward holding Obama accountable. Your talents are welcome in that endeavor.

Wells

*** Update September 2, 2011, 7:30 PM   ***

This comment was so well written it is worthy of being an addendum.

From commenter Pete:

“Citizen Wells,
No expert can verify an internet document as legitimate, but you can declare it a fraud. Hawaiian law states that public display of private records removes the Hawaiian obligation to protect them. Simply put, if Obama displays his Birth Certificate copy on the internet or on a Federal Government website, he has no right to privacy.

Here are undisputed facts:
1. The Federal Government, via the Executive Branch, has published a Document they claim is Obama’s Hawaiian BC. Not disputed.
2. There is no legal chain of Custody for the document published by the White House.
3. The DoH (Department of Health) in Hawaii REFUSED a legal subpeona to review the Document by experts in person after pre-arrangements had been made.

Obviously the Hawaian DoH has acted appropriately in this case because the information on the White House site does not match DoH records. Specifically, they are obligated to continue to protect the privacy of Obama since his actual records have not been released and seen by the public, or contain information confirming late birth registration.

Further, Judge Lambert’s recent ruling, in contrary to other national judges and Obama senate campaign (the Ryan Divorce documents) has declared that a politician has the right to privacy. That privacy must be given for certain vital records per national law, but that privacy is null and void if the individual make them public (puts on internet).

I don’t think it could be more clear that Obama has privacy laws protecting him as he has NOT released a legitimate copy of his COLB or long form Birth Certificate. What the public has seen is not what is in the record, or he wouldn’t be protected.

As Sherlock Holmes once said “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”.”






Related News

  • Rosemary Jenks testimony April 30, 1997 before the Immigration and Claims Subcommittee, Judiciary committee of the US House of Representatives
  • Judicial Watch Interim Report to congress, Commercegate Chinagate, Nolanda Hill testimony, Clinton Commerce Dept illegally selling seats for political contributions, Hillary conceived idea, Panetta Podesta Brown Ickes Herman Rosen McAuliffe, September 28, 1998
  • Judicial Watch sends Interim Report to Congress, Details impeachable Filegate/Chinagate offenses uncovered in Judicial Watch cases, Cover letter to Chairman Hyde, September 28, 1998, Supported with over 2000 pages of hard evidence
  • Schippers’ book to reveal secret evidence against Clinton, Not a single US Senator reviewed secret impeachment evidence, Congressional leaders refused to consider key evidence beyond the public record about Monica Lewinsky, Newsmax August 7, 2000
  • Hillary and Clintons immigration agenda exposed by David Schippers, Bill Clinton impeachment investigation, Schippers’ book “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment”, Hillary covers tracks of Clinton Administration
  • Key Rapegate facts first reported by NewsMax.com, Juanita Broaddrick NBC interview by Lisa Myers, Myers told Broaddrick on Jan. 26: The good news is you’re credible, NBC Rapegate cover-up exposed by Wall Street Journal, Newsmax February 19, 1999
  • Reporter who snagged Broaddrick rape account wins Pulitzer, Dorothy Rabinowitz writer for the Wall Street Journal, Bill Clinton rape of Juanita Broaddrick, After Rabinowitz’s report NBC finally broadcast 23 minutes of the five-hour account, Newsmax April 18, 2001
  • News Reports on Jane Doe #5 a.k.a. Juanita Broaddrick, Newsmax rapegate index of articles January 29, 1999, Leaked ABC News Memo, Transcript of NBC’s Interview with Juanita Broaddrick, White House Spin on Juanita, The Clinton Rape-Charge Cover-Up
  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked as *

    *