This document obtained exclusively by from Lord Christopher Monckton.

Read the full Hereditary Peers’ Briefing Paper .pdf.

BY ARTICLE II, section 1, of the United States Constitution, “no person except a natural born Citizen … shall be eligible for the Office of President”. On 27 April 2011, two days after an opinion poll had found that 62% of voters doubted whether Mr. Barack Obama had been born on U.S. soil, Mr. Obama posted a purported image of his long-form Hawaiian birth certificate at Yet the results of a six-month criminal investigation made public by Sheriff Joseph Arpaio of Maricopa County, AZ, on 1 March 2012 found the document to be a manifest forgery. Further results are expected in mid-June.

A senior judge of the Alabama Supreme Court has held obiter that documentation presented

“if presented to the appropriate forum, … would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short-form’ and the ‘long-form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public” (ex p. McInnish, Alabama S.C., March 27, 2012).

Unlike petitioners in other states, Mr. McInnish was not denied standing and may recommence his petition in the state District Court. In the light of the judge’s obiter dictum, and of the forensic and other evidence outlined here, Hawaii cannot rely upon the “full faith and credit” provision (Art. IV, s. 1) to require other States to accept the birth certificate as genuine. If it is the forgery it appears to be, at least one person at the Hawaii Health Department knows it is a forgery. But it is not clear whether the White House knows.

Attorneys for anyone accused of a criminal offence signed into statute by President Obama under Art. I, s. 7, have the right to request access by their forensic investigators to the Hawaii Health Department’s original birth record for Mr. Obama to satisfy them that the President is the President, the statute the statute and the alleged offence an offence. By the precedent set in Brady v. Maryland (373 US 83, 1963), “The suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process [14th Amdt.] where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment”. Therefore, the courts will be obliged to grant any such defence request. By the supremacy clause (Art. 6), Hawaii must comply.

Does the issue matter? Advice from an eminent constitutional lawyer is that it does: “The Constitution is the supreme law of the US. We amend it, or we abide by it.” He expects a credible court challenge to the authenticity of Mr. Obama’s birth certificate soon. If it occurs,
and if the certificate is a forgery, the constitutional consequences will be grave.

Page 6
Forensic questions about the authenticity of the long-form birth certificate

Upper panel: for comparison, forensic experts created a birth certificate form, into which they entered text in a single pass using a manual typewriter . The blue grid shows letters, words and lines regularly spaced and neatly aligned. Lower panel: for clarity, a blue grid of 6 x 6 pt. (1/12 x 1/12 in.) is superimposed on Mr. Obama’s copy birth certificate. Numerous irregularities in the spacing of letters, words and lines demonstrate that it could not have been typed on a single machine in a single pass.

Based upon the two diagrams on page 6 above, and upon other considerations identified by forensic experts, many doubts as to the authenticity of Mr. Obama’s long-form birth certificate are evident:

Multiple image-data layers in the long-form birth certificate

1. The data file downloadable from the White House website, when opened in Adobe Illustrator, can be separated into nine separate, superimposed layers and one clipping-mask path that groups the layers. Sheriff Arpaio’s cold-case posse in Maricopa County, Arizona, established that these layers were not an artefact either of optimization or of optical character recognition. In any event, the statements from the Governor of Hawaii and from the White House Press Office establish a chain of custody whereby no alteration or processing of the photocopied images was performed at any point. If a forger other than one acting with the knowledge of the Hawaii Health Department had fabricated or altered the original image, the forger would have anticipated that the Department would notice the forgery.

2. The website copy was posted in the form of a PDF file at 12.09 pm on 27 April 2011 using Macintosh Preview. However, forensic experts say that Photoshop was used to fabricate or alter the document; then Adobe Illustrator was used to compile the layers and export them as a Portable Document Format (PDF); then, immediately before posting on the internet, Macintosh Preview was used to erase the digital traces of previous use of Photoshop and Illustrator, and to reduce the file size.

3. The Portable Document Format file for the website copy of the birth certificate was optimized in Preview, a Macintosh-based program that will not produce layers in the optimization process, but will maintain any pre-existing layers produced by the user. For this reason, the attributes of the layers in the website copy of the birth certificate were unquestionably fabricated before the file was optimized in Preview.

4. The date when the copy was certified by the registrar, and the registrar’s stamp adjacent to it, each appear independently on separate layers of the website copy of birth certificate that contain no other surrounding background data. No scan of an original photocopy from Hawaii could possibly produce such separation of discrete items into separate layers. This is definitive evidence that – contrary to the chain-of-custody account from official sources – the document was not photocopied, but fabricated piecemeal. No legitimate document process would result in this separation of information into independent layers. It would have been simple to place the photocopy from Hawaii into a scanner, capture the electronic image, and then print the reporters’ copies and upload the website copy. The foregoing evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the simpler route was not followed, and that instead the image was pieced together from several sources.

5. The copy birth certificate contains eight separate layers each of 1-bit quality (none displaying black), and a single layer of 8-bit quality. Yet no document that had been directly photocopied, scanned or photographed from a paper birth certificate in a bound volume would contain more than one layer. But if the document had multiple layers as a result of optimization, it would contain only one 1-bit layer and all remaining layers would be 8-bit.

6. Most photocopied, scanned or photographed documents consist of a single layer.

7. No optimization software produces multiple layers of 1-bit quality.

8. Multiple layers of 1-bit quality each representing a different colour other than black can only be created by an operator deliberately.

9. Any document that had multiple layers would have a single 1-bit layer that was black. Not one of the 1-bit layers in the website copy of the birth certificate displays as black.

10. Any document that displayed multiple layers after automated optimization would contain one layer of 1-bit quality with a black colour value, and the remaining layers will be of 8-bit quality
to represent the remaining colours within the image at various locations within the document, not just the one 8-bit colour layer that is present in the website copy of the birth certificate.

11. Different green colours are present in the two date-stamps at the foot of the form and part of the word “none” where “non” has a green value. These items are on separate layers and were also rotated 90 degrees clockwise and then imported into the form.

12. The website copy of the birth certificate has all of the green basket-weave safety paper on a single layer of its own. A document that has layers from an automated optimization process would not have the background isolated on one layer: it would be broken up among many layers. This is evidence that the document was fabricated, layer by layer.

13. The existence of layers and the object-code attributes for those layers imply that Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator were major contributors to the compiling of this electronic file image, which was not derived from a photocopy.


Implications for Her Majesty’s Government

The implications of this affair for Her Majesty’s Government are considerable. The apparent forgeries, with the failure of Mr. Obama and of the State of Hawaii to ensure access to the original long-form birth certificate of which the document on the White House website is said to be a copy, have cast legitimate and growing doubt upon Mr. Obama’s fitness to hold office. His hostility to the United Kingdom, evidenced by his removal of the bust of Churchill from the White House, may have been somewhat assuaged by his relationship with the present UK Prime Minister: however, almost any other foreseeable candidate for his office would be less inimical to the United Kingdom.

If any successful moves are made against Mr. Obama or his key supporters, whether via ballot challenges in the civil courts, or via the exercise of Brady rights by a defendant accused of a crime
signed into law by Mr. Obama, or via a disqualification from office under the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, a dislocation considerably more severe than the fall of Nixon may be anticipated, leaving the free world leaderless at a time of great financial uncertainty. Therefore the issue, peripheral though it may at first seem, is not only of central importance to the United States, whose Constitution may have been flouted and circumvented in a material respect, but is also potentially of great consequence to Britain and to the West.