Israpundit Daily Digest


Recent Comments



Please send checks payable to Ted Belman, Hagdud Haivri #1, Jerusalem, 92344, ISRAEL

Or go to Israel Institute for Strategic Studies and use your credit card. Mention "Israpundit".

Donators to IISS will get a US tax deductible receipt.

  • February 21, 2013

    David Solway: The Birth Certificate and the Conspiracy of Suppression

    Below is an original essay by David Solway, but first an introduction.

    by:Diana West

    There are at least two basic ways to approach the signal, neutralizing event of American history.

    Before I present examples of both by a singular guest-author, I realize I first have to specify what that signal event is. Our non-recognition is testament to many things, not least of which is the event’s almost anti-climactic nature. We might think of the event as only the most visible manifestation, like a sore or lesion, of an underlying sickness in American society that more intangibly has rejected morality, bankrupted the law, and devalued the Constitution. Maybe the shame of it all is why we pretend this manifestation isn’t there.

    I refer to the president’s all-but-certainly forged online birth certificate. How could a healthy society with a free press and functioning political system permit this quite apparent fraud to go officially unaddressed and forensically unassessed by any responsible federal authority? It could not. It would be impossible for a healthy democratic society to behave so irresponsiblly, so undutifully, so cravenly. Thus, we are not a healthy, democratic society; nor have we been for some time leading up to this signal presidential fraud. (The new book, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character, is a history of that transformation.)

    So, returning to the two approaches to this signal event: First, there is the personal approach, which grapples with (and sputters over) the realization that there is — even in this age in which the frequent need for identity documents is universal — one law for the mighty and another for the rest; second, there is the scientific approach, which rationally (but not necessarily dispassionately) assesses evidence and probability to conclude We, the People have been sold a nasty bill goods.

    David Solway, the erudite and elegant Canadian essayist and poet, takes both approaches, posted here in two parts for the first time. It is no rap on this blog or Solway himself to point out that noted outlets of the “watchdog media,” conservative wing, declined both pieces first. Nothing new, they say — as though pure novelty were a requirement for news and analysis when we know from wall-to-wall coverage of everything from sequestration to Michelle Obama’s bangs that’s never the case. Meanwhile, they have hardly (if in any way at all) exhausted the novelty of the subject in the first place! Call it the Obama Nativity Paradox — old news before it’s covered. At least David Solway will never fall for that.

    The Conspiracy of Suppression, Pt. 1

    Let’s Get Real about the Famous Birth Certificate

    By David Solway

    Preparing for a trip that might involve crossing into the U.S., I happened to look at my passport and was alarmed to discover it was shortly to expire. So began the frantic search for my birth certificate, without which I would be unable to renew the passport. Presentation of an original certificate or a duly vetted and certified copy reproduced in accordance with the Register of Civil Status is mandatory procedure in Canada. If I could not find the precious document among the jumble of papers in the multitude of desk drawers, cupboards, armoires, file cabinets, closet shelves and looseleaf stacks that clutter my study, my only recourse would be to visit the Palais de Justice in Montreal, spend a small fortune on fees, and sacrifice much of the day procuring an official, stamped transcript from the bureaucratic mill.

    While searching for the indispensable document, my mind turned to the digital photographic image that the White House released on April 27, 2011—almost two and half years after the president’s inauguration—to corroborate his compliance with Article 2, Section 1, paragraph 5 of the American Constitution, confirming him as a “a natural born Citizen.” It struck me that the passport office in my country would regard such a digital copy as inadmissible and reject it outright. It would not constitute proof of citizenship.

    Could the American law be so different from the Canadian that what is manifestly unacceptable here could be treated as completely valid there? Such a discrepancy seemed to me implausible. And yet there was no doubt that the relevant authorities, almost the entire academic and intellectual elite, the media empire as a political bloc and the majority of the electorate had no trouble accepting a mere digital replica of a presumably original document that no one, apart from a sparse handful of government officials, apparently, had ever seen. (Indeed, the original was smothered by Obama’s first Executive Order on January 21, 2009.) Were President Obama a Canadian citizen applying for a passport with an attestation of this nature, he would be summarily turned away.

    Luckily, I managed to disinter from the debris of my working life the necessary document—smooth-surfaced, clearly printed on good-stock paper, and displaying the requisite seals, signatures and properly sequenced numbers. I then compared it to the facsimile of the president’s certificate that I keep in my Obama folder and was amazed not only by the enormous difference in professional quality but, as many credible observers have pointed out, by the innumerable errors, flaws and maculae in a document far more significant than mine. People who believe this mimeo to be veridical in its present form are either suppressing the critical part of their minds for reasons best known to themselves, or engaging in a kind of conspiracy to advance a political agenda or ideological commitment.

    For the first four years of Obama’s presidential term, even the most skeptical conservatives did not want to touch this issue. Prior to the release of the so-called “long form,” the president’s detractors were wary of being lured into a trap to be sprung by its publication and subsequently made to look like fools. After the fact, conservatives feared that an honest examination of the matter would expose them to ridicule and contempt as a pack of Neanderthal “birthers,” thus damaging their careers, or that a critical discussion could conceivably cost them the election. Well, they lost anyway.

    It is no longer necessary or appropriate to act like wilting mimosas and avoid one of the most pressing questions in the land today. Skirting this question out of complacency or indifference, or for dubious reasons such as protecting one’s reputation by quashing scrupulous analysis, by refusing to confront certain indisputable facts, or from fear of association with ostensible disreputables like “birthers” and Tea Partiers, is a species of moral ignominy and abject cowardice. Americans owe it to themselves and to their country to follow the laws and procedures they have put in place to ensure the legitimacy of their electoral process. To wink at those, for whatever reasons, is surely to betray one’s duty to the country. It is a species of omerta, or what the Germans during the Nazi era called Gleichschaltung, coordination of the message, bringing into line.

    Admittedly, the courts, many of them staffed with Democratic appointees and complicit judges, are reluctant to deal with the issue; and the authorities in Hawaii, where the famous birth certificate is securely locked away, are diligently stonewalling. These factors alone should alert the public to the likelihood that something untoward is going on. Pressure must be brought to bear. It is high time we show some integrity and courage, look a problem that won’t go away squarely in the face and compel this president to unseal his sequestered records. There is no other way to settle the issue once and for all. We may hope that all would be well. But of course, we must also assume that the evidence that might come to light could be distinctly unpalatable to some and disruptive to all.

    The backstory, however, should be more than enough to induce acute suspicion. The entire controversy could be resolved on the instant with a single executive phone call arranging for the immediate release of the original birth certificate, which would be made available for observation and reproduction via the media. Why this has not been done defies comprehension. As Tom Ballantyne Jr. writes in The Western Center for Journalism, “Think of the absurdity of all of the endless debating and legal maneuvering (on the part of the judges and the Obama defense team) when all that is needed, and all that has been needed from the beginning of this insulting charade, is for a judge to simply require the obvious—that his “original” birth certificate be examined. Is there a sentient being on the planet who would not admit that this would end the so-called “side show” once and for all?” The fact cannot be circumvented. A digital facsimile so flawed issued by the president of the United States cannot be allowed to pass without challenge. The conspiracy of suppression is all on the side of those who insist on tarring the reputations and bona fides of those who seek reasonable and satisfactory closure of the question.

    A Man of Science Examines the President’s Birth Certificate

    by David Solway

    A near-complete silence has attended the recent deposition by Lord Christopher Monckton regarding the numerous errors and discrepancies to be found in Barack Obama’s digital copy of his birth certificate. Exactly why a credible report by a trustworthy figure such as Monckton should be so studiously ignored presents an interesting case study in media self-censorship, liberal evasion and conservative pusillanimity. After all, Monckton’s international standing is impeccable. Specializing in investigating scientific frauds at the government level, he was for several years an advisor to British prime minister Margaret Thatcher in the appraisal of forged documents. Relying on his impressive mathematical expertise and his knowledge of probability theory, he has published an affidavit, sworn under oath and penalty of perjury, to the effect that the president’s duplicate certification is surely inauthentic. In his words, “the probability that the White House document is genuine is vanishingly different from zero.”

    The mathematical discipline of probability theory, Monckton explains, assists in evaluating the likelihood that irregularities are either inadvertent or deliberate, accidental or intentional. “The technique is particularly suitable,” he continues, “for the testing of those documents in which the irregularities are so varied that unless they arose by design—as in the fabrication of a forgery—they cannot be dependent on one another,” that is, the probability of each succeeding irregularity occurring by mere inadvertence is proportionately small. Put simply, the greater the number of irregularities not generated by a single egregious error but part of a cascading miscellany, the greater the probability that the document is a forgery. Studying the forensic data supplied him by Arizona Sheriff Joseph Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse investigators, Monckton concludes that the document under the loupe cannot be regarded as valid.

    Arpaio, who was vindicated on fraud charges lodged by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, has been virulently slandered by such Left institutions as Britain’s Independent (for whom Arpaio’s team consists of “a group of elderly, white, right-wing men” advancing a “racially-motivated conspiracy theory”) and by diverse anti-conspiracy theory sites, but defamation is not an argument. More to the point, perhaps, Lord Moncton cannot be dismissed as a “birther” or a conspiracy-monger or an ignoramus or an elderly white racist. Like any responsible scientist, Monckton is confronting data rather than inventing models. His thesis and his results must be taken into consideration if we are to remain in good conscience.

    The affidavit runs to sixteen pages and furnishes a veritable “chain of custody” ranging from the distribution of nine separate “data layers” uncharacteristic of a scanned paper document, to many software abnormalities, to unnaturally irregular letter, word, line spacing and alignment blemishes inconsistent with the manual typewriter on which the original would have been typed, to the problematic “halo effect,” (a sign of manipulation), to the absence of “chromatic aberration” that should appear on documents that have come into contact with a camera lens, to the suspiciously out-of-sequence certificate number, to the curious fact that the birth date of Obama senior is discrepant by two years, to the appearance of the word “African” as a race designator twenty eight years before it came into official use, to various anomalous coding practices, among many other irregularities to which Monckton did not even bother to assign probability values. “The White House document,” he writes, “appears to have been fabricated piecemeal on a computer, inferentially by drawing together digitized data from several genuine birth certificates.”

    Monckton has listed thirteen major and distinct irregularities in the digital copy of the birth certificate, many with their own minor subsets, as well as three additional idiosyncrasies pertaining to the president’s identification records, namely: “numerous irregularities in the short-form abstract of his birth record”; his selective-service record which features a two-digit year stamp “contrary to written rules issued by the Department of Defense specifying a four-digit stamp”; and his social security number which “carries a three digit Connecticut prefix even though he had never lived there.” Monckton’s conclusions have been substantially reinforced by Israel Science and Technology, the Jewish State’s prestigious science and technology portal, founded by Israel Hanukoglu, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The analysis carried out by the institute, which includes details additional to Monckton’s study, reveals that the document “has been altered by graphics software.”

    Monckton is scrupulously fair and overly cautious in his methodology, assigning probabilities with exceedingly favorable values based on possibilities, however unlikely, to give the benefit of the doubt to inadvertence and normal discrepancy. Nonetheless, the odds that the digital copy of Obama’s birth certificate reflects an extant original are vanishingly small. “I have never found a document,” Monckton avers, “which, when this probabilistic technique is applied, is determined to be so very nearly a forgery as the White House document.” The fact “that there are so many independent irregularities…would be sufficient to demonstrate that the White House document is a forgery.” Taking everything into consideration, Monckton’s verdict is chilling. The mathematical probability that Obama’s identity documentation is true is on the order of 1 in 75 sextillion.

    There is no credible way around the issue. It may be claimed that the contentious document has undergone several standard retouching operations in order to repair and clarify a tattered original, thus collapsing the probability ratio to 1 or near 1. But a number of ancillary factors render this argument, for all intents and purposes, effectively null. The problem here is that there are just too many such “retouchings” to inspire confidence in the restorative process; a source document so defective would have needed to be officially reissued in certifiably consistent format, as in my own country of Canada. As well, some of the imperfections, such as the errant number sequence, the lack of chromatic aberration and other comparable items, are not “retouchings” at all, but glaring errors. Finally, if a massive retouching procedure were indeed the case, it would surely have been mentioned by the White House, if only to avoid the eruption of the kind of suspicion that clouds the political atmosphere, despite the virtual agreement on the part of the media, the political authorities, the liberal intelligentsia and much of the public to dismiss the issue as of no account. For the suspicion continues to linger.

    Speaking scientifically, we would begin with what is called a null hypothesis, that is, the assumption in this case that the digital copy is authentic. If the data we acquire is not consistent with the null hypothesis, and the deviation is alarmingly large, we start asking questions. The greater the quantity of evidence we accumulate that deviates from an original expectation adopted as part of an experimental procedure, the more plausible it becomes that the errors we detect are not accidental or a statistical fluke and that the null hypothesis is consequently unacceptable. Which it manifestly is with respect to the document under consideration.

    Obviously, we must be as careful in our interpretation of the larger meaning of these findings, probabilistic and contextual, as Monckton is in his assessment of the document itself. I am not interested in speculating on the biographical implications of the issue; in other words, a fraudulent document does not indubitably mean that the president was not born in the U.S. But it does portend that something is grievously amiss. What that may be I cannot say. I am concerned only with the nature of the embattled document and am content to let readers draw their own conclusions.


    Note: Shortly after this article was written, the Canadian government fast-tracked the application procedure, eliminating the need for a birth certificate but requiring both ancillary documentation and, in the case of renewals, an extant valid passport—which could have originally been issued only if accompanied by an error-free, indisputably authentic birth certificate. The argument remains in force.

  • Posted by Ted Belman @ 6:48 pm | 13 Comments »

    13 Comments to David Solway: The Birth Certificate and the Conspiracy of Suppression

    1. mikeh420 says:

      People have become so afraid of being called Racist, that they’ll ignore just about anything, including a foreign candidate for U.S. President. It’s the very reason the Dems picked a black man.

    2. jew says:

      so Oabama has to ensure EITHER that the GOP will NEVER win in the future OR that the original certificate disappears without any trace OR that Obama be the LAST PRESIDENT OF THE US…. :-)

    3. Dean says:

      What is disturbing beyond the fact that Obama was not born in the USA and the short shrift given to this topic is the treatment of this story by media and the electorate.

      Nothing can be done if the society is being driven by a leftist media or the media is being driven by the demands of a leftist public. Furthermore, the conservatives are willing to uphold the lie which makes it a unanimous coverup. They are cowards.

      We see this same unanimity in the way Islamism is given the green light despite the fact that two towers came down in the name of Islamism on American soil.

      It reminds me of the pathology of the handful of Holocaust victims (Finkelstein, Chomsky and a few other notables) and/or their children who blame their own Jewishness for what happened to them or their parents – instead of blaming the perpetrators, they blame their own beliefs or their coreligionists.

      In the case of Obama’s background, the “birthers,” as they are referred to, are the devils because there is no way that Obama, their great hero, can do any wrong and so even truth and factual data is trumped by their groupie behavior and their belief in the cult of Obama’s personality. The blame, as with those who blame their own roots for what happened to them and their loved ones in the Holocaust, is misappropriated and projected onto others and onto false targets who they attack with a vengence.

      One day, long after Obama is gone, this information will re-emerge as if were brand new and the likelihood of this happening sooner will increase if the USA under Obama falls further into depression or he makes some more grievous mistakes that even the media cannot ignore.

    4. David Legrem says:

      If the media weren’t so wildly pro-Obama, he would be in prison rather than the White House. Could you imagine the media behavior if a Republican attempted such a provable outrageous fraud?

    5. Sam Goldblatt says:

      Solway, the original crap his pants basement slacker living on Canadian arts grant money for his pseudo-Yeatsian doggerel is, per usual, as persuasive as moldy gefilte fish. Talk about jerking his chain, beating a dead cockroach – birthirism? Oy gevalt. The man was born in Hawaii. If you want to stop his agenda – leave Solway to his thorazine and Captain Crunch, and find another way.

    6. Dean says:

      @ Sam Goldblatt:

      What part(s) of this article are untrue? Solway has stated the facts as he knows them and they are quite convincing (I have seen the computer-generated fraud online and it is an amateur job that looks like it was done by pre-teens). Now put your facts on the table.

    7. C.R. says:

      @ David Legrem:

      Very true! Barack Obama as presented by his media whores–is a fraud.

    8. C.R. says:

      @ Sam Goldblatt:

      The reality is–we don’t know where he was born for sure–the media and the White House has covered up most of everything from his past.

      I wasn’t fooled–I knew in the summer of 2007 Barack Obama was a Marxist and an anti-Semite–I knew his agenda would be very bad for America and Israel.

    9. C.R. says:

      if the USA under Obama falls further into depression or he makes some more grievous mistakes

      Barack Obama is a communist–he hates the USA along with Israel–he is working to completely destroy the economy along with the rest of the USA; that said Barack Obama is not intelligent enough, or skilled enough to do much of anything his administration is doing–its others in his administration who have the intelligence and skills who are pulling the strings.

    10. Arthur says:

      @ Sam Goldblatt:Without a doubt your comment is off the wall so as to be worthless.

    11. Dear Diana,

      You wrote your introduction very well: Very well yet still quite incomplete. Dare I to say that even your own presentation sins with a dose of suppression?..

      You wrote:

      I refer to the president’s all-but-certainly forged online birth certificate. How could a healthy society with a free press and functioning political system permit this quite apparent fraud to go officially unaddressed and forensically unassessed by any responsible federal authority? It could not.


      It would be impossible for a healthy democratic society to behave so irresponsibly, so undutifully, so cravenly. Thus, we are not a healthy, democratic society;


      Nor have we been for some time leading up to this signal presidential fraud. (The new book, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character, is a history of that transformation.)

      I have not seen yet your book, so I do not know to what aspects of secrecy you refer. The Skousen’s text book “Naked Communist” of the end of the 1950s (including the chapter Agenda) reveals it all already then. And my brief history paralleling the demise of Russia vs. that of America (just a few pages long) tells it all too:

      However let us return to what you wrote.

      Speaking about plain fraudulence only, you surely know that it was not limited just to displaying a course kiddish forgery on the official White House web page. It is near year already on judicial records, that the social security number and military registration of the impostor are all bogus too. Isn’t it worth mentioning in the context of the fraudulence?.. It had been reported in two press conferences of Sheriff Arpaio already!…

      How can you not mention the great name of Dr. Orly Taitz in this topic?..

      How can you not mention the grotesque fraudulence of court offices in the entire nation, including the office of the Supreme Court the most recently? The office of the Supreme Court turned into a house of disrepute, a cardsharper’s office!

      And again: Why do you limit this disaster to its purely criminal aspects such as forgery (still missing identity theft). Since day one, since 2008 it was an obvious violation of the Constitution into the face, in full light of the day! The definition of US natural born applied in the 2008 Sen. Resolution 511 on McCain is inapplicable to the impostor! Since day one it was an insult to intelligence of the people!

      But wait, J.B. Williams had figured out that there were at least 8 attempts to rid of the natural born requirement since 2002!

      And disregarding all these tons of absolutely shocking facts, on the fifth year of the disaster of the planetary proportion you and David Solway finally dared to utter a word about just a single (albeit grotesque) forgery…

      And how could a healthy society with a free press and functioning political system…

      – Not to have any opposition party at all: Not one, even small and insignificant?

      – Tolerate an open double 2008/2012 betrayal of the “designated” opposition “repooooblican” party?

      – Tolerate the double 2008/2012 treason of the entire US Congress, every last of them up to this very moment?..

      – Tolerate the double 2008/2012 treason of the US Supreme court and uncounted lower courts, FBI and other law enforcement agencies?

      You see the reasons of my dissatisfaction with your Introduction and the following
      Solway’s coverage. You both trivialized this disaster by reducing it merely to one forgery displayed in March of 2011 while missing the big picture behind it, and the most reprehensibly, missing the most important personality struggling with this mess near alone during these ugly shameful five years: Dr. Orly Taitz.

      Please forward this also to Mr. Solway.

    12. BethesdaDog says:

      @ Sam Goldblatt:

      Rather than attacking Solway personally, perhaps you can provide refutation of the specific points he makes in his essay. That would be more helpful. What you say about Solway adds nothing to my understanding of either his contentions or your opposition to them. It’s no different from some of the comments attacking Obama, e.g., “Barack Obama’s a communist who is destroying the economy….” blah-blah-blah. I sometimes fall victim to that but I recognize that the best argument is facts and logic, not name-calling and ridicule.

    13. smrstrauss says:

      Obama’s birth certificate is not fake. Only birther “experts” have called it fake, and they have not shown that they are even experts, much less fair and impartial. Those are two reasons why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review (or by Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Gingrich or Santorum or Huckabee).

      One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.

      Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.

      And birther sites have not shown you these real experts.

      Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

      Nathan Goulding with The National Review:“We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

      John Woodman, independent computer professional, said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

      Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

      Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

      Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.

    Site Membership


    Blog Traffic


    Pages|Hits |Unique

    • Last 24 hours: 18,151
    • Last 7 days: 69,802
    • Last 30 days: 231,419
    • Online now: 60
    garcinia cambogia effets secondaires

    Miscellaneous Info

      All Politic Sites