TexasDarlin’s reader KG claims to have independently verified the remnants of Maya Kassandra Soetoro’s name in the Obama image. Israelinsider just ran a story on this today saying “…at least two analysts have been able to independently discern the name ‘Maya Kassandra Soetoro’ from artifacts left behind in the process of forging a new fake document for Barack from an image of Maya’s original document.”

Have they?

Let’s find out.

Using Techdude’s overlay map as a guide, we can determine where Maya’s name should appear according to Techdude’s claim. Techdude removed “Michele” and the construction paper blockouts when he made the overlay, so I used the regular Michele image and lined it up with the overlay to see exactly where the first name would start.

Here’s the composite image with “MAYA” placed over “MICHELE” with both M’s being laid directly over each other (rather nice that both names start with M).


As you can see, the bottom of the “Y” comes just at the end of the “S” in “CHILD’S NAME” horizontally and about midway through it vertically.

But here’s what KG says:

So Techdude can check me, the “Y” in Maya comes down into the “D” of “Child’s Name” right into the middle of the top straight line part of the “D”, and penetrates the “D” by four pixels.

Not even close.

What explains this? Well, KG later says, after reader RichterScale points out to KG that that’s not where the bottom of the “Y” should be according to Techdude:

I have things lined up a little differently than Techdude. I’ve got the “security border” lined up exactly (or very close to it) on the overlays and the field names on both line up extremely well vertically.

KG has the borders of the Michele and Obama images overlaid directly on each other. Whereas Techdude claims the “remnants” show that the Michele border should be placed significantly to the right, and slightly lower than the Obama border. Obviously KG didn’t pay attention to Techdude’s post.

Taking all of the other clutter out of the way, this is how KG’s and Techdude’s Mayas compare:


Techdude’s Maya is in red, KG’s in blue. They effectively represent the difference between KG’s lining up the borders exactly, and Techdude’s shift to the right and down.

Well, certainly they both can’t be right.

And yet, TexasDarlin says this:

Techdude has reviewed KG’s analysis, and verified the result.


KG overlays the Michele image in a different location than Techdude has claimed it is, and consequently has found “MAYA” also in a very different place than it would be if Techdude’s claims as to placement are to be believed, yet Techdude VERIFIES THE RESULT!?

By verifying KG’s result, Techdude is directly contradicting his own claims.

How can anyone believe anything coming from these people?