The ‘As-Yet-Unmentioned’ Third Close-Up from WND
5 Jan obamasgarden.wordpress.com
[UPDATE: Dear WorldNewsDaily – Instead of speculating about whether Gov. Abercrombie has defrauded donors of Kapi'olani Hospital, why not just produce the high resolution original photo of the full view of the letter that the EXIF data indicates exists, and just answer the following simple question:
Did Kapi’olani Hospital present WND the photo of the raised White House seal on cream paper with the false claim that it is a close-up of the incised seal seen on the full letter appearing on white paper?]
___________________
There is a third, previously unmentioned close-up image included with the other photographs of the ‘Kapi’olani Letter’ that were published by WorldNetDaily –but first…
…A Recap
On December 30, 2010, I wrote an article detailing my observations of some visible discrepancies between an image of a letter allegedly sent by President Obama to Kapi’olani Hospital, in January 2009, and two alleged close-ups of that letter which accompanied an article on the WorldNetDaily (WND) website. I noted differences in paper color, paper texture and also the visible characteristics of the embossed Presidential seal purported to have been applied to the top of the letterhead.
Overlay of close-ups illustrating the visible differences in the color of the letterhead papers.
In fact, an image of the Presidential seal on letterhead taken under low light was provided to me by a reader for comparison. (Please note that this seal appears on an off-white sheet. The reader who provided it dug around and using the visible manufacturer’s watermark as a guide, she surmised that this particular writing stock was made by the Whiting Paper Co., specifically it is Whiting’s ‘Woven Linen Writing Paper.’ Her research went further and she was able to find that Harry S. Truman, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan used Whitings ‘Woven Linen’ watermarked embossed letterhead, as well. Let it be known, that I am thrilled to bring you her anonymous research.)
Using the seal image provided by this reader, I cropped and reduced the resolution to match the seal in the full view image of the letter and compared them side-by-side, observing the two seal’s visible highlights and shadows. I observed that the image of the reader’s Presidential seal in the same resolution, has many discernible highlights indicating the raised areas of the seal’s emblem, as well as shadows, despite the low light, low resolution and it having a visibly less pronounced embossment than the seal close-up reported by WND to be found on the ‘Kapi’olani Letter.’ In fact, the amount of visible shadow is fairly comparable in the two images. Yet, raised areas on the reader’s seal are discernible from the highlights visible in the outline of the face, beak and left side of the chest on the eagle, the top outline of the right wing and thighs, on the top of the cloud puffs above the eagle and on most of the stars. However, there are no visible raised, highlighted outlines seen in the WND seal–visible shadows outline nearly the entire emblem. Raised areas are simply not evident:
LEFT: Cropped seal from the Reader's image. RIGHT: Cropped seal from WND's full view image of the 'Kapi'olani Letter.'
Therefore, it was imperative to me that the following question to Mr. Kovacs and WND be answered:
“For your article about the ‘Kapi’olani letter,’ here, did Kapi’olani Hospital provide WND all three of the following images or did WND extract the close-up of President Obama’s signature from a higher resolution image of the full letter?”To date, I have not received an answer to this question or any that I posed to WND. And, as far as I know, WND has still not answered this question for anyone else requesting they answer. Instead, WND has insisted I provide them my real identity despite my request to stay anonymous. After receiving a total of three emails from them insisting that I provide them my real name before they would answer anything, it became clear to me that they were intent on making my identity the focus, rather than answer to the suspicious visible discrepancies seen between the three photos in question.
Despite the lack of response from WND, it has not been evident who is responsible for the bogus presentation of photos. Because WND solicits donations in connection to the ‘birth certificate controversy’ surrounding President Obama, I have given them the benefit of the doubt. But, truth be told, their non-response has raised many red flags for me. Others have indicated they share the same disappointment and concern about WND’s judgment and/or intentions in not answering a few simple questions in the interest of clearing this matter up. Without an explanation, I and other interested people have continued to give our personal time to look for clues to answer these questions in an effort to determine what happened. I consider it a serious breach of public trust that WND was not forthcoming with the information they had about the photos, given the fact that the discrepancies in paper color and texture are evident (even to Obots) and the fact that their immediate attention was requested and needed by their readers. The public needed a timely answer in order to feel confident about the truthfulness of the explanation for the photo discrepancies. That time has passed.
More of the Same
As usual, any person with concerns about Barrack Obama’s honesty in all matters concerning his ‘birth certificate,’ have been left in the dark. Here we are again being ignored by the media. However, this time, we are being ignored by a ‘news’ organization which actively collects money from folks who donate to them specifically for their dedication to this and related issues. We are being ignored by a ‘news’ organization that garners high-profile ‘condescension’ by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs for even asking about this issue. This type of condescension has unfortunately lent itself to the ‘media spin’ that all people concerned about the ‘birth certificate controversy’ (a.k.a. ‘Birthers’) are ‘crazy,’ ‘racist,’ ‘stupid’ or ‘conspiracy theorists,’ and are to be discounted and ignored entirely.But this time the evidence is blatant. This isn’t some obscure analysis of pixels and jpeg artifacts. The discrepancies in paper color and texture are visible – they are easily observed – and they inexplicable given what we’ve been told.
Why would WND contribute to this media shut out? Why would they become a part of the media who ignores reasonable concerns regarding Obama’s questionable birth narrative?
The ‘As-Yet-Unmentioned’ Third Close-Up Image from WND
As I stated, I had suspended resolving my own personal judgment…until yesterday, that is. Yes, I let my suspicions build over the last six days, but now, I have had enough. I do not accept WorldNetDaily’s decision to ignore my questions – which they may insist is proof of nothing. But, their non-answer is indicative of something. It indicates that WND takes the same stance as MSNBC when it comes to questions about Barrack Obama’s birth: ignore probing questions. Ignore human beings. The MSM is a bully in the schoolyard, but WND has gone further in requesting three times that I divulge my identity despite my request to stay anonymous. They used this inconsequential point as an excuse to avoid answering simple questions. Personally, I feel they were stalling or avoiding telling the People the truth.So today, I am giving my readers my opinion on WND’s involvement in this matter absent their response. At this point, I believe it possible that WND cropped the close-up photo of President Obama’s signature from a larger photo of the full letter. I believe that it’s possible WND has a higher resolution photo than the full view photo featured on their website or that they could easily obtain one. Why do I feel this way? Because of the stalling. Because of the EXIF time/date data associated with the photos. And, because I have a very hard time believing that anyone at Kapi’olani Hospital actively took a high resolution photo of the letter in question, and from it, cropped this third, previously unmentioned close-up and provided it to WND for their article:
The 'As-Yet-Unmentioned' Third Close-Up from WND. In addition to the close-up of Obama's signature and the close-up of the Presidential raised seal, this close-up of a line of body copy accompanied WND's article on the 'Kapi'olani Letter.'
“This excerpt from the alleged Obama letter is perhaps the first formal declaration from the president about his exact birthplace. The White House has still not confirmed if the letter or its contents are authentic.”It probably goes without saying that this close-up of the text in the body of the letter confirms the discrepancy observed in ‘paper characteristics’ – however, it is also further confirmation that a high resolution original version of this letter exists from which this close-up and the close-up of Obama’s signature were extracted. In fact, the close-up of the signature AND this third close-up, of the ‘place of my birth…’ line of copy, both originated from the same original digital photo taken of the full view of the letter published by WND. All three images were created from an original digital photo taken at 1:16 p.m. on July 15, 2009.
It should also be noted that the close-up image of the seal, on a different colored and textured paper, was created from a different photo taken two minutes later, at 1:18 p.m:
This cropped image on CREAM paper came from a DIFFERENT ORIGINAL PHOTO than the other three images of WHITE paper that were also featured by WND.
Apparently at 11:33 p.m., on July 15, 2009, the process to prep the photos as published by WND began and it ended fifteen minutes past midnight on July 16, 2009. Personally, I have a hard time accepting that Kapi’olani Hospital would have in-house design staff on hand at that hour to edit and prepare photos for WND. Instead, I am of the opinion that it’s more likely that they were sent to WND sometime between the time they were taken and modified during normal working hours. It seems more likely that WND might have a freelance writer or designer that would be working at that late hour to edit and prepare the photos for publishing online. Furthermore, the order the edits took place based on the EXIF data, and the time spent on each, makes it clear that there exists a much higher resolution original image of the full view of the letter:
STEP 1. Full View Image (‘obamaletter750x910.jpg‘)
First, the full view image of the letter was opened and modified during a ten minute time span. In that time, we know for certain that the image was reduced in resolution to it’s current size (750 pixels x 910 pixels) and apparently some slight color changes were made. This color modification added some subtle overall warmth (yellows) to the look of the paper. In other words, the paper originally appeared slightly cooler and therefore it was probably more obvious, originally, that this image of the letterhead paper is not a match to the cream colored sheet seen in the seal close-up. I will explain how I determined this color change took place in ‘Step 3.’ The modified file was then saved. Please note that the file name also seems to indicate that this image was taken from a higher resolution image, in that the ‘new’ resolution was actually included in the file name: ‘obamaletter750x910.jpg.’ It stands to reason that this would have been done to make it convenient to distinguish between the ‘new’ smaller file and the original similar image file at a higher resolution.
STEP 2. Close-up of Seal (‘obamalettertopseal.jpg‘)
Eleven minutes after the first image was modified, the original image from which the close-up of the seal on cream paper was extracted, was opened and apparently it was cropped close around the seal and type treatment and saved. The EXIF data shows a single time stamp for modification rather than a span of time.
STEP 3. Close-up of Signature (‘obamalettersignature.jpg‘)
Three minutes after that, the close-up of Obama’s signature was apparently created. This close-up could not have been extracted from the previously modified image of the full letter – that image was already reduced in size for web viewing and saved. The quality of the close-up indicates it was taken from a high resolution version, not a reduced quality version. Instead, according to the EXIF data, the original unmodified digital photograph file was reopened and like the close-up of the seal, the signature was isolated and the photo cropped and saved. Again, the EXIF data shows a single time stamp for modification rather than a span of time for multiple modifications. Realizing the close-up came from the unmodified original prompted me to place this close-up directly over the modified full view image from WND, in its original spot, in order to check for any visible differences. I had remembered from my earlier observations that the color did not appear to be an exact match between the two images. After placing it in it’s original position on the letter, I noted that there are, indeed, some subtle color differences. I now surmise this happened during the ten minute modification period from ‘Step 1.’ These subtle differences had originally led me to believe that the close up may have come from a different photo that was also taken earlier that day. In other words, the close-up is consistent in color, although not exact and that is how I had presented my observations to you. Now I can confirm that the close-up and the full view photo are taken from the same higher resolution original. A color change was applied to one but not the other.
STEP 4. Close-up of the Line of Copy (‘placeofmybirth.jpg‘)
Finally, the last close-up to be generated appears to be ‘Close-up #3,’ “the place of my birth…” image of text. Eighteen minutes after the signature close-up was cropped, the original unmodified, high resolution image of the full view of the letter was again reopened and the single modification of cropping the line of type was made. The close-up was saved. Again, the EXIF data shows a single time stamp for modification rather than a span of time for multiple modifications. And again, I placed this close-up over the full view image of the letter that was modified during a ten minute time span and I observed the same subtle color difference displayed in the overlaid close-up of the signature.
Based on this analysis, it appears that the full view image of the letter as presented by WND was originally even more visibly inconsistent in color with the close-up image of the seal on cream paper. This subtle difference in color between the modified file, ‘obamaletter750x910.jpg,’ and the two close-ups is seen in the image of the overlays that I created:
Overlay of the two 'close-ups' on the 'full view' image from WND.
Below are the EXIF date/time stamps for ‘creation & modification’ in chronological order:
Who Did What?
Because Mr. Kovacs’ article at WND was published on July 16, 2009, it’s plausible that WorldNetDaily may have edited the photos in preparation of the article in which they were featured. It is certain that a high resolution version of the image of the full view of the letter does exist and it’s possible that WND has this photo on hand already, and if so, they have had it on hand since July 2009. And, yet, they have answered to nothing concerning the discrepancies that were brought to their attention last week. It’s disgusting, in my opinion.On the other hand, if Kapi’olani Hospital provided WND the images and close-ups as published, certainly they would have no problem providing WND the originals–IF all of the close-ups are images of the same document, that is. What other possible reason could they have to object?
Instead, We, the People, got the MSM treatment from WND. Instead, their delay and insistence that my real name is some kind of ‘issue’ has given the people behind this fraud ample time for covering up this sham and for invention of excuses. Instead of reporting truthfully, and working transparently FOR the benefit of their readers and donors, WND has stalled to the benefit of those behind this fraud. Like Factcheck.org, WND has protected the criminals who apparently believe We, the People, deserve lies and that we deserve to be victims to this crime. The stench is overwhelming and apparently the cover-up behind this issue in it’s entirety has spread far. It is possible that WND is an active, willing participant in this sham.
I do not accept that WND refused to answer my questions and retract the false claim published on their website. I will not accept ‘new’ photos to explain this away. The original high-resolution photo already exists. WND either has it or could easily obtain it. The EXIF data indicates it exists. The evidence indicates it exists. It is possible that WND already knows it exists. And because it exists, why was a close-up from another photo used to produce the image of the raised Presidential seal? Why didn’t ‘whoever’ just crop it from the same photo from which the other three images originated? Why was the color ‘warmed?’ This original, high-resolution photo would show the seal clearly on the full view of the letter. This original photo will tell us what OTHER modifications took place in that ten minutes time span. This photo will tell us if it’s obvious that the Presidential seal is not raised, but incised, and if any tell-tale signs of that fact were masked by modifications. And, if WND does have the original photo of the letter, as I suspect they might, they should not destroy it. Because according to their own article–it may be evidence of a ‘fund-raising scheme‘ and therefore a crime.
In conclusion, I won’t be busting my butt with any further analysis. I am not making any more observations about the photos featured by WND, in the absence of having answers. ’They’ want us to spend our time doing that–that’s why we have no more information, no original photo, no answers. The proof is already evident. And, WND is just not credible on this issue. Because WND won’t be forthcoming with the people who support and believe in their organization, who have asked the same questions I asked and received no answer – I have formed my opinion. In my mind, WND is supporting the deceit that has taken place and has taken sides – and they are not on the side of the People.
Absent an explanation from WND, this is my conclusion. If they don’t like my opinion, they need to cough up the original photo and the truth. Anything less will be sniffed out and rejected entirely.
P.S. Why didn’t WorldNetDaily answer my questions? Because doing so, truthfully, would implicate them or Kapi’olani Hospital in this lie. But, guess who conveniently never admitted to having anything to do with writing and sending the letter?
President Obama is a user. Everyone else does the dirty work and gets the blame. So who’s going under the Obama bus this time? WorldNetDaily AND Kapi’olani Hospital…
….And apparently, now Neil Abercrombie is going under the bus, too.
An election for President and Commander in Chief of the Military must strive to be above reproach. Our public institutions must give the public confidence that a presidential candidate has complied with the election process that is prescribed by our Constitution and laws. It is only after a presidential candidate satisfies the rules of such a process that he/she can expect members of the public, regardless of their party affiliations, to give him/her the respect that the Office of President so much deserves.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.