The art of telling lies is absolutely essential if you want to get on in our cold, hard world. Today, the only people who tell the truth are optimistic clergymen, children under six, hermits when they talk at all, and raving lunatics. If you do not master the art here described, you will be a mediocrity all your life and it is assured that you will not amass wealth. Look at politicians…
“We will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period.” (Barack Obama, June 15, 2009, with variants repeated many times since).
Today, any American who isn’t willfully blind knows this “promise” is a very big lie. A lie which was deliberately told by fundamentally-dishonest pushers of Obamacare, because if the truth were widely known at that time the Affordable Care Act would never have become law.
It’s a lie that is so egregious, even the dinosaur media can’t ignore it or cover it up. In fact, the dinosaurs are increasingly upset that they’re being continually abused be “the most transparent administration in history” and they now seem to be more willing to shed light not just on this lie, but also on some of Obama’s other lies.
Do you suppose we could get them to take another look at the big lie of April 27, 2011? The lie that is central to Barack Obama’s identity? The lie the dinosaurs not only glossed over, but for which they excommunicated from the human race anybody who dared to point out it was a lie?
I refer, of course, to the long-form “birth certificate” forgery for Barack Obama released by the White House to the world as a digital image on April 27, 2011.
Before you say, “Oh no, here we go again — the guys with the tinfoil hats are on the loose”, let’s dispense with the easy part. Here is the irrefutable proof that the Obama long-form “birth certificate” is a forgery. Please Read On…
Shown in Figure OFS (below), side by side, are two images, each measuring 8.5 inches wide by 11 inches high (in their life size), against a black background. On the right is the digital scan of Obama’s genuine short-form birth certificate, as released by the Obama presidential campaign in 2008. On the left is the long-form “birth certificate” forgery released in April 2011. I call it the “green thing”.
Genuine Hawaii birth certificates are printed on borderless green basketweave security paper, as you can see on the genuine short-form certificate image. They do not have the white border that you see in the “green thing” on the left. That white border is like a picture frame for a (borderless) photograph that you hang on the wall. It masks (covers) part of the security-paper pattern at its outer edges.
So it is immediately obvious to the naked eye that the “green thing” is not a simple scan of a genuine, borderless paper birth certificate. It is a computer-generated fake — a forgery.
Figure OFS. Obama PDF forgery (with white border) and genuine short-form birth certificate, side by side, each measuring 8.5 by 11 inches.
The White House released two versions of this fake: The “green thing”, and a much clearer (higher-resolution) black-and-white paper copy with no security-paper background, which was passed out to reporters on the morning of April 27, 2011. This paper copy was digitized (photographed) by The Associated Press, and that image is shown in Figure MP1, which follows.
The second irrefutable proof of forgery was developed by Christopher Monckton (Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, an Englishman), who has done a thorough analysis of the forgery’s pitch — that is, the spacing of the supposedly-typed monospace text — by drawing a uniform grid on the AP-digitized image of the forgery (red lines in Figure MP1).
Figure MP1. Monckton’s “typewriter pitch” grid superimposed on the high-resolution Associated Press photo.
Enlarged, look at the “typed” line of text on Lord Monckton’s grid, as shown in Figure MP2. We see that “August 4” is actually shifted slightly left of true pitch, and “, 1961 7:24 P.” is shifted about a third of a character to the right of true pitch.
Figure MP2. The column containing the comma is where there is a right-shift of about a third of a character in pitch for the rightmost third of the forgery.
If you look back at Figure MP1, you will see that the column containing the comma is where the forger “lost” horizontal pitch. While the leftmost two-thirds of the forgery (mostly) has one typewriter pitch, the right one-third (mostly) has a different pitch, with the column containing the comma being (about) an extra third of a character too wide. This pitch-shift is very abrupt and cannot be accounted for by lens distortion in the AP photographer’s camera, nor by any conceivable behavior by a real typist at a real typewriter. A true, and obvious, forger’s mistake.
In Figure MP1 Lord Monckton also drew baselines for the “typewritten” text. (The baselines are for double-spaced lines on a typewriter, when the typist pulls the carriage-return lever twice after typing a line.) You can see that some lines of “typewritten” text are on the baseline, some are close, and others are off, with no consistency from line to line. While the forger tried to maintain consistent pitch horizontally, vertical pitch was lost.
Courtesy of Lord Monckton, shown in Figure MP3 is a very-beaten-up genuine Hawaiian birth certificate for the summer of Obama’s birth, on which Monckton has superimposed a pitch-grid (blue lines) showing that a genuine typewritten Hawaiian birth certificate of that era maintains horizontal and vertical pitch on a form designed to accommodate double-spaced typewritten lines (as one would expect.) (The items “Waihee”, “Negro”, “Porter Service” and “6-13-61” are later modifications made with a different typewriter.)
Figure MP3. A genuine Hawaiian birth certificate from 1961 which maintains perfect horizontal and vertical typewriter pitch.
If Obama’s long-form “birth certificate” were genuine, then the White House would have released a simple, borderless digital image resulting from the scan of a genuine paper document, in a widely-used graphical format. (The 2008 certificate image was released as a JPEG.)
But because the “birth certificate” is a forgery, what we wound up with is a mess. Paper black-and-white copies of the forgery, with the basketweave security pattern digitally “turned off” before printing, were passed out to the White House press corps. Then a much-poorer-quality color image, inexplicably masked with a white border, was deliberately digitally damaged by the forger to confuse Internet sleuths before it was released to the public in PDF format (generally used for documents, not stand-alone pictures) as the “green thing”.
If you would like more detailed evidence of forgery than is contained in this brief summary, I urge you to download and read my complete research report, Barry Soetoro’s Birth Secret, available at:
This is a “public domain” document (uncopyrighted, except for “fair use” of certain graphics), so feel free to pass it around among your friends.
For the two years that I have been analyzing and writing about Obama’s long-form “birth certificate”, I have not done any of this research to score political points. (I think Obama is a terrible president, but that is irrelevant to my research efforts.) I have only been trying for my own satisfaction to solve the maddening, real-life mystery of Obama’s origins and of what’s being hidden that’s on his real birth certificate.
In “Secrets Revealed” (American Thinker, June 15, 2012) I compared the short-form birth certificate, the forgery, and the “Verification of Birth” sent by the Hawaii Department of Health to Arizona secretary of state Ken Bennett — line by line — and concluded that all of the information on the short-form birth certificate and on the long-form forgery that was released to the public is true, but the genuine long-form image cannot be shown because the certificate in Hawaii’s possession “looks different” or contains more information than what was released to the public.
At this point we progress from known fact — the “birth certificate” is fake — to theory: If all the information shown is true, why was the fake, instead of the genuine birth certificate, released?
For me, there is only one likely possibility: Adoption. Specifically, Barry was legally adopted by Obama’s mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in a way that caused the Hawaii birth record to be visually altered.
Is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro legally adopted Obama after he and Ann Dunham (Obama) were married in Hawaii on March 24, 1965?
Yes, there is, though it is sketchy. (Adopted children don’t usually go around telling people they were adopted, nor do parents typically advertise that their children are adopted, though it may be obvious where the child’s race differs from the parents’.)
There is a Facebook posting made in 2011 by Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama’s half-sister, in response to a critic where she wrote in part, “You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother’s legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law and what you were saying didn’t make any sense to me but that the law that mattered was the law of this country [that is, U.S. law] and the fact that he was born in the United States.” (Italics are mine.) It would seem that Maya thinks that Barry was adopted, believing it to be an Indonesian adoption.
Figure SFA. 1968 Indonesian school registration for Barry Soetoro. (Associated Press photo by Tatan Syuflana.)
Also relevant is young Barry’s registration for the school term beginning in 1968 at Santo Fransiskus Asisi (St. Francis of Assisi Catholic) school in Indonesia, as shown in Figure SFA.
The translations for some of the line items are:
1. Name of the student – Barry Soetoro
2. Place and date of birth – Honolulu 4-8-61 [August 4, 1961, date in European format]
3. Nation: a, citizenship – Indonesia
b, foreign descent – (left blank)
c, race – (left blank)
4. Religion – Islam
5. Student’s address – Ment[eng] Dalam R007/R1003
7a. School term beginning date – 1-1-1968
7b. Placed in class – 2
8a. Parents’ names: Father – L. Soetoro M. A.
Mother – (left blank)
Indonesian citizenship (which comes through the father under Indonesian law) would be conferred to Barry by legal adoption.
Chapter 2 of ghostwriter Bill Ayers’ eloquent composite biography of Obama, Dreams From My Father, covers Obama’s time spent in Indonesia.
On Page 38 we read,
“So it was to Lolo that I turned for guidance and instructions. He didn’t talk much, but he was easy to be with. With his family and friends he introduced me as his son, but he never pressed things beyond matter-of-fact advice or pretended that our relationship was more than it was. I appreciated this distance; it implied a manly trust.” (Italics are mine.)
And on Page 41 we find,
“My mother watched us from inside the house… She really was grateful for Lolo’s solicitude toward me. He wouldn’t have treated his own son very differently. She knew that she was lucky for Lolo’s basic kindness.” (Again, italics are mine.)
Dreams From My Father is revealing not just in what it says, but in what it omits. Nowhere in Chapter 2 is there a reference to Lolo Soetoro as “father”, “stepfather”, “adopted father” or any reference at all to his formal/legal relationship to young Barry. He appears as just “Lolo”, with an apparent unwillingness on Barry’s part to shed the Kenyan figment of a father in favor of a man who clearly was reaching out to be a real father to him.
Finally, we have Stanley Ann Soetoro’s 1968 application to extend her 1965 passport (now destroyed) for an additional two years, as shown in Figure PPA.
On the second page of the application, Ann moved to exclude her son Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah) from her passport, but the item has been crossed out — perhaps on the advice of the consulate in Jakarta, as this would have left seven-year-old Barry passportless — so it didn’t happen.
The appendage “(Soebarkah)” has never been satisfactorily explained by anyone, and I certainly don’t know what “Soebarkah” means, but it does seem to indicate a name change or change in citizenship status for the boy.
Figure PPA. Ann Soetoro’s 1968 application to extend her 1965 passport.
If, as I think is likely, Barry was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, was the adoption in Indonesia or Hawaii? Most observers (like half-sister Maya) have assumed that it would have been in Indonesia, but if we look at the timelines and circumstances of the Soetoro family’s piecemeal return/emigration to Indonesia, we see that a timely Indonesian adoption would be very unlikely, while there was ample time for the parents to put in place a Hawaiian adoption before settling in Indonesia.
Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama and Lolo Soetoro were married in Molokai on March 24, 1965, while they were both still graduate students at the University of Hawaii. Lolo was in the U.S. on a student visa scheduled to expire in June 1965. But because Indonesia was in turmoil following a failed military coup in September 1965 which resulted in the purging and killing of communists in 1965-66, Lolo stayed in Hawaii for as long as he could, until the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service forced his return to Indonesia in July 1966. On his return to Indonesia Lolo worked for the government, mapping western New Guinea.
Finally, in 1967 it was safe for Americans to go to Indonesia, so Ann Soetoro emigrated there in October 1967, with Barry in tow, to join her husband Lolo, where they lived in a district of south Jakarta. Barry was enrolled as an Indonesian citizen for school beginning in 1968, as we have seen; Indonesian citizenship was a requirement for students attending Indonesian state-supported schools.
Under Indonesian law of the time, if Lolo adopted Barry before he turned age 5 (that is, before August 4, 1966), Barry would automatically become an Indonesian citizen, subject to the approval of the Pengadilan Negeri (district court) for the district of the father’s residence. A Hawaiian adoption of a U.S.-citizen child by a foreign-nationality father would pose no U.S. legal problems, and it would be recognized in Indonesia under international treaty. (Under U.S. law, Barry would hold triple citizenship — U.S., Indonesian, and Kenyan.) And since the parents knew they would eventually be living in Indonesia, it would make sense for Lolo to adopt Barry in Hawaii, and take advantage of the automatic Indonesian citizenship for the child, as part of the preparations for emigration and Barry’s schooling there.
If Lolo had adopted Barry in Indonesia, he would then be adopting a six-year-old foreign-born child under Indonesian law, in less than four months’ time, so Barry could go to school at the beginning of January 1968. Unlikely.
In 1965 and 1966 the only kind of Hawaiian adoption available for young children was a sealed adoption, where the pre-adoption birth certificate of the adopted child is sealed under court order, and a new birth certificate is issued showing the adopting parent(s) as the birth parent(s). When a Hawaiian birth certificate is thus amended, a document file containing the sealed record of the original document and supporting documentation that authorized a change to the information contained in the original document is created. The amended certificate is “distinctly marked” alerting to the fact it was altered. (Today, most adoptions can be “unsealed” and the pre-adoptive birth information restored to the vital records, but this does not “undo” an adoption — nor a change of surname, if there was one.)
Do we have any concrete evidence that Lolo adopted Barry in Hawaii?
Yes, we do.
First is the forgery itself — it was released in lieu of a genuine long-form birth certificate so the public would not know that Lolo Soetoro had adopted Obama (as would be evidenced by the amending of his hospital-generated birth information).
Second, we have a myriad collection of official statements by various Hawaii officials.
In the English language there are (at least) two different meanings of the word “original” when referring to documents. It can mean “master”, rather than a copy or facsimile; or it can mean “first version,” rather than revised or subsequent versions.
The section of Hawaiian state law (578-14) which covers birth certificates being issued as part of the adoption process refers to the pre-adoption birth certificate as “original” and the post-adoption birth certificate as “new.” So when bureaucrats who are following the law refer to an “original” birth certificate, they most certainly mean the master, but they could also be using the legal meaning, the certificate generated at time of birth, before it was amended by adoption of the child.
In this light let’s take another look at some of those carefully-worded statements by Hawaii state officials:
Former Hawaii Department of Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino on October 31, 2008:
“I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai’i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai’i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
Again, on July 27, 2009: Fukino indicated she had “seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai’i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai’i and is a natural-born American.” (One can disagree on legal grounds with the additional qualifier of natural-born, but her statement does identify Obama as native-born.)
On April 11, 2011, following a telephone interview with Dr. Fukino, NBC News reporter Michael Isikoff wrote, “the original so-called ‘long form’ birth certificate — described by Hawaiian officials as a ‘record of live birth’ — absolutely exists, located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health. Fukino said she has personally inspected it — twice. The first time was in late October 2008 — taking with her the state official in charge of vital records. She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files. She then put out a public statement asserting to the document’s validity. She later put out another public statement in July 2009 – after reviewing the original birth record a second time.”
On April 22, 2011, President Obama wrote to then-Director of the Hawaii Department of Health Loretta J. Fuddy, “I am writing to request two certified copies of my original certificate of live birth.”
On April 25, 2011, Fuddy wrote to the president, “Enclosed, please find two copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth. I have witnessed the copying of the certificate and attest to the authenticity of these copies.”
Finally, we have State Registrar Alvin T. Onaka’s (rubber-stamped) Verification of Birth letter to Ken Bennett of May 22, 2012 in which Onaka writes, “Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request [that is, a printout of the “green thing”] matches the original record in our files.”
(Italicized emphasis of the word “original” in all of these statements is mine.)
So you see, these folks have been telling the truth all along. Moreover, they are adhering to state law by not indicating that an adoption had taken place, because they are not authorized to release that information.
Was there anybody else telling the truth? Oh, yes — President Obama on the morning of April 27, 2011, before the release of the “green thing: “As many of you have been briefed, we provided additional information today about the site of my birth. Now, this issue has been going on for two, two and a half years now. I think it started during the campaign. And I have to say that over the last two and a half years I have watched with bemusement, I’ve been puzzled at the degree to which this thing just kept on going. We’ve had every official in Hawaii, Democrat and Republican, every news outlet that has investigated this, confirm that, yes, in fact, I was born in Hawaii, August 4, 1961, in Kapiolani Hospital. We’ve posted the certification [short-form birth certificate] that is given by the state of Hawaii on the Internet for everybody to see. People have provided affidavits that they, in fact, have seen this birth certificate. And yet this thing just keeps on going.” (The rest of his comments were political talking points.)
“We provided additional information today about the site of my birth” — yes, he did. The information is truthful — though incomplete — but it was revealed via a forged document.
Just when Barry reverted from using the surname Soetoro back to the surname Obama is not clear. It was sometime after his return to Hawaii in the summer or fall of 1971, alone as a ten-year-old boy with his own U.S. passport. And we know that he graduated from Punahou School in 1979 as “Barry Obama.”
Does Barack Obama still legally carry the surname Soetoro? Perhaps somebody should ask him that question.
We can now say beyond all doubt that Barack Obama (Soetoro) was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, and is a native-born U.S. citizen. All “official” evidence prior to the release of the long-form “birth certificate” forgery told us this — his short-form birth certificate, statements by Hawaii officials, the contemporaneous birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers, his (birth) father’s correspondence and dealings with the Immigration and Naturalization service, Obama/Soetoro’s registration form for Fransiskus Asisi school. Now we have the “birth certificate” forgery itself to seal the deal, because by knowing what was being hidden with the release of the forgery — his legal adoption — we know what was not being hidden — his place and date of birth.
About the author: 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 on the American Thinker website and at contrariansview.org.
The theory that Barry was adopted in Hawaii is not a new idea, nor is it original with me. In Suborned in the USA (National Review Online, July 30, 2009) NRO editor Andrew C. McCarthy wrote:
“Obama and the media worked in tireless harmony to refute any indication that he had ever been a Muslim. It’s now apparent, however, not only that he was raised as a Muslim while living for four years in the world’s most populous Islamic country, but that he very likely became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
“Shortly after divorcing Barack Obama Sr., Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married an Indonesian Muslim, Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo, whom she met – just as she had met Barack Sr. – when both were students at the University of Hawaii. At some point, Soetoro almost certainly adopted the youngster, who became known as “Barry Soetoro.” Obama’s lengthy, deeply introspective autobiographies do not address whether he was adopted by the stepfather whose surname he shared for many years, but in all likelihood that did happen in Hawaii, before the family moved to Jakarta.
“Under Indonesian law, adoption before the age of six [Correct age is five – Nick] by an Indonesian male qualified a child for citizenship. According to Dreams from My Father, Obama was four when he met Lolo Soetoro; his mother married Soetoro shortly thereafter; and Obama was already registered for school when he and his mother relocated to Jakarta, where Soetoro was an oil-company executive and liaison to the Suharto government.
“That was in 1966 [Correct year is 1967 – Nick], when Obama was five [Six – Nick]. Obama attended Indonesian elementary schools, which, in Suharto’s police state, were generally reserved for citizens (and students were required to carry identity cards that matched student registration information). The records of the Catholic school Obama/Soetoro attended for three years identify him as a citizen of Indonesia. Thus Obama probably obtained Indonesian citizenship through his adoption by Soetoro in Hawaii. That inference is bolstered by the 1980 divorce submission of Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro, filed in Hawaii state court. It said “the parties” (Ann and Lolo) had a child (name not given) who was no longer a minor (Obama was 19 at the time). If Soetoro had not adopted Obama, there would have been no basis for the couple to refer to Obama as their child – he’d have been only Ann Dunham’s child.”
When McCarthy wrote this, Obama was not under intense political pressure to release his (genuine) long-form birth certificate, and at that time it probably did not occur to anybody that he would be unable to do so without also revealing that Lolo Soetoro had adopted him in Hawaii.
By Nick Chase
Feel Free To Comment Below: